Drone dangers: Should unlicensed operators be allowed to fly their drones in New Zealand Skies?

Forums › Off topic › Drone dangers: Should unlicensed operators be allowed to fly their drones in New Zealand Skies?

1 | 2

frednz

1467 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1585292 3-Jul-2016 21:19

frednz:

driller2000:

I fly UAV's - incl toy grade quads around the house - and aerial video quads and racing quads at local parks.

I am completely OK with the rules as they stand both via the CAA (Part 101) and Auckland Council:

https://www.airshare.co.nz/rules

http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/en/parksfacilities/sportrecreation/pages/drones.aspx

They are imo fair and reasonable and provide for the enjoyment of a hobby AND provide for the safety and privacy of others.

Council rules are quite demanding and sometimes it could be difficult to fly a drone without breaching one of the rules!

For example, take a look at this video and consider how difficult it might be to get the approval of all the property owners in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-gVXTK0AAk

But at least this operator says she has "...asked the owners permission to film on these locations." I suppose that, if you are flying high enough over hundreds of properties, owners wouldn't mind you publishing a video of their properties etc and such videos surely wouldn't require the specific approval of hundreds of property owners??

p.s. It's interesting to see that the drone in the above video came quite close to several birds in flight, yet another hazard of flying a drone!

Fred

I mentioned in the above post that Council rules are quite demanding. Below I have pasted in, as an example, the Hutt City Council's rules on flying drones over council parks and reserves. Note that a “UAV” is an "unmanned aerial vehicle".

Persons flying drones for recreational purposes are permitted to use council parks and reserves but must abide by the following conditions;

Comply with the Civil Aviation Authorities (CAA) rules relating to the mode of operating UAVs, including keeping under at all times the maximum flying height restriction of 120 metres.
Comply with the Hutt City Council Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2007
Comply with the Hutt City Council Public Places Bylaw 2006
Comply with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner guidance on preserving peoples’ personal privacy by not flying over other people using the park or over adjoining private property.
Be courteous of other park users, who often have visited the park for the quiet enjoyment of the park
Not operate over a sports field if in use by others
Not fly over any parked vehicles or roads.
Not operate within 20 metres of or be flown over other users of the park or livestock
Not operate within 20 metres of sensitive wildlife habitats.
Not operate within 20 metres of nesting or roosting birds, such as the NZ dotterel.
Not operate within 20 metres of or be flown over a park building.
Not operate during a prohibited fire season.
Not overfly adjoining private property.
Be in full view of the operator at all times (e.g. not visible through binoculars, or operated via monitor, or smartphone only)
Be flown in daylight hours only, and
Cease operation if requested by a member of the public or Council staff.

Any person proposing to use a UAV for commercial purposes, such as filming, must obtain specific permission from Council.

Any breach of the above conditions could result in termination of the individual’s permission to use Council land for the above purposes.

https://www.airshare.co.nz/sites/default/files/Hutt%20City%20Council%20RPAS%20Policy.pdf

What do you think of these rules, are they too demanding and will they simply discourage people from buying drones altogether? Could you fly a drone over a council park and not break any of the above rules? You can't even fly over people using the park!

Regards

Fred

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1585556 4-Jul-2016 12:48

frednz:

frednz:

driller2000:

I fly UAV's - incl toy grade quads around the house - and aerial video quads and racing quads at local parks.

I am completely OK with the rules as they stand both via the CAA (Part 101) and Auckland Council:

https://www.airshare.co.nz/rules

http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/en/parksfacilities/sportrecreation/pages/drones.aspx

They are imo fair and reasonable and provide for the enjoyment of a hobby AND provide for the safety and privacy of others.

Council rules are quite demanding and sometimes it could be difficult to fly a drone without breaching one of the rules!

For example, take a look at this video and consider how difficult it might be to get the approval of all the property owners in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-gVXTK0AAk

But at least this operator says she has "...asked the owners permission to film on these locations." I suppose that, if you are flying high enough over hundreds of properties, owners wouldn't mind you publishing a video of their properties etc and such videos surely wouldn't require the specific approval of hundreds of property owners??

p.s. It's interesting to see that the drone in the above video came quite close to several birds in flight, yet another hazard of flying a drone!

Fred

I mentioned in the above post that Council rules are quite demanding. Below I have pasted in, as an example, the Hutt City Council's rules on flying drones over council parks and reserves. Note that a “UAV” is an "unmanned aerial vehicle".

Persons flying drones for recreational purposes are permitted to use council parks and reserves but must abide by the following conditions;

Comply with the Civil Aviation Authorities (CAA) rules relating to the mode of operating UAVs, including keeping under at all times the maximum flying height restriction of 120 metres.
Comply with the Hutt City Council Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2007
Comply with the Hutt City Council Public Places Bylaw 2006
Comply with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner guidance on preserving peoples’ personal privacy by not flying over other people using the park or over adjoining private property.
Be courteous of other park users, who often have visited the park for the quiet enjoyment of the park
Not operate over a sports field if in use by others
Not fly over any parked vehicles or roads.
Not operate within 20 metres of or be flown over other users of the park or livestock
Not operate within 20 metres of sensitive wildlife habitats.
Not operate within 20 metres of nesting or roosting birds, such as the NZ dotterel.
Not operate within 20 metres of or be flown over a park building.
Not operate during a prohibited fire season.
Not overfly adjoining private property.
Be in full view of the operator at all times (e.g. not visible through binoculars, or operated via monitor, or smartphone only)
Be flown in daylight hours only, and
Cease operation if requested by a member of the public or Council staff.
Any person proposing to use a UAV for commercial purposes, such as filming, must obtain specific permission from Council.

Any breach of the above conditions could result in termination of the individual’s permission to use Council land for the above purposes.

https://www.airshare.co.nz/sites/default/files/Hutt%20City%20Council%20RPAS%20Policy.pdf

What do you think of these rules, are they too demanding and will they simply discourage people from buying drones altogether? Could you fly a drone over a council park and not break any of the above rules? You can't even fly over people using the park!

Regards

Fred

In other words don't let your hobby disturb others enjoyment of the park, not at all too demanding, just really respecting others.

mattwnz

20164 posts

Uber Geek

#1585569 4-Jul-2016 13:10

The problem is that these rules have not kept up with technology. The better drones now have return to base and object avoidance systems, which makes them almost full proof. Similar technologies are being used in autonomous cars. The problem is that these rules are like a mallet trying to crack open a peanut. Based on YouTube videos of tourists, they aren't abiding by our rules, but they will have left the country before they would have been discovered. Amazing that we have these rules for drones, which to date have never caused any injury, but allow fireworks, and firearms, which have done a lot of damage and costs the country a significant amount when things go wrong. Birds are a far bigger risk to aircraft than a small drone of 1.5 kg or less.I believe NZ rules are some of the worst in the world and even apply to tiny 20 miniature drone toys.

frednz

1467 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1585857 4-Jul-2016 20:14

mattwnz: The problem is that these rules have not kept up with technology. The better drones now have return to base and object avoidance systems, which makes them almost full proof. Similar technologies are being used in autonomous cars. The problem is that these rules are like a mallet trying to crack open a peanut. Based on YouTube videos of tourists, they aren't abiding by our rules, but they will have left the country before they would have been discovered. Amazing that we have these rules for drones, which to date have never caused any injury, but allow fireworks, and firearms, which have done a lot of damage and costs the country a significant amount when things go wrong. Birds are a far bigger risk to aircraft than a small drone of 1.5 kg or less.I believe NZ rules are some of the worst in the world and even apply to tiny 20 miniature drone toys.

Thanks for your interesting post.

In one of the articles quoted earlier, it was clear that pilots are more concerned about drones than birds. It was mentioned that a large drone could bring down a plane, either by taking out a motor or a windscreen. Plane windscreens are designed to take a bird strike, but birds are 90 per cent liquid.

I’d like to think that the more expensive drones are “almost fool-proof”, but they are dependent on radio signals that can be upset by natural obstacles and also electrical interference. You often see reports of drones that have lost contact with their operators.

I agree that fireworks and firearms can be a problem, but I tend to agree with the pilots who say that, based on recent events, it’s only a matter of time before a drone hits an aircraft with potentially disastrous results.

I found this fascinating video on YouTube which shows what has actually happened with a NZ drone flight where the operator first lost sight of the drone and then lost contact with the drone altogether and ended up “flying blind” not all that far from a major NZ airport:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K265mGfmMWY

Fortunately, in this case, the “return to base” function brought the drone back safely, but the operator certainly had an anxious wait! There have been lots of reported cases where the "return to base" function hasn't worked as expected, particularly when unexpected winds can blow the drone off course and run down the batteries faster than expected!

Regards

Fred

frednz

1467 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1585867 4-Jul-2016 20:34

dickytim:

In other words don't let your hobby disturb others enjoyment of the park, not at all too demanding, just really respecting others.

I agree that respecting the rights and enjoyment of others is essential, but if the rules just said that, then I think this might be better than producing a long list of rules that could see most drone operators often being in trouble with the authorities! But, it seems that the rules are rather lightly enforced, so perhaps this is also a factor to take into account!

Regards

Fred

1 | 2