lily camera (drone) who's getting one?

Forums › Gadgets, robotics, home automation, electronics (including wearables) › lily camera (drone) who's getting one?

KennyM

221 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 10

#173376 20-May-2015 21:25

Anyone else seen these?
Www.lily.camera

There is a YouTube video with the guy and the prototype in which he controls it from his phone, I can see this being a quick and good way of getting wedding and building shots. Give them or place the tracker on the ground, control lily while being out of the shot. Easy way of getting a house shot for real estate etc. Plus the sports aspects.

This appeals to me because of the simplicity of flying. I don't have to learn controls etc etc. And for the sport side of it.

I've already ordered one, not sure that was a smart idea yet. I'd say gen 2 will be heaps better but twice the price, I think I'll be happy with this for the price

toneytang

11 posts

Geek

#1310198 22-May-2015 22:01

That looks really cool.

linw

2865 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1169

#1310216 22-May-2015 23:52

Very interesting but it may pay to read the new pending CAA rules for such craft (Part 101). http://www.caa.govt.nz/rules/pending_rules.htm

One of those rules says:-

(c) A person who operates an aircraft to which this rule applies must at all times— (1) maintain visual line of sight with the aircraft;

The video shows this rule being breached in a big way.

Part 101 refers to RPA's and says “Remotely piloted aircraft means an unmanned aircraft that is piloted from a remote station and— "

Interesting that this definition hardly applies to the Lily as it is not piloted in the accepted sense of the word and there is no "remote station" that enables a pilot to control the Lily to avoid dangerous situations. That being so, logically it only leaves Part 102 certification. And you don't want to have to get OK'ed in Part 102! Have a read.

KennyM

221 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 10

#1310302 23-May-2015 08:52

Until someone gets hurt, they are unlikely to complain about the line of sight issue for these. IE, snowboarding example, your facing forward, it hits someone while following you.

But I did hear or read a while ago they are thinking of changing some laws regarding drones due to how popular they are becoming. One of the mentioned was 'you need to have permission from the land owner to fly over there land' to stop people flying drones over residential houses. This was a mention, hasnt been changed yet. I did wonder if law would be changed by the time it actually shows up next year tho : )

There is a video online from the Tauranga tornado a couple of weeks ago. Looking at how someone flew a drone over and around the damage at bay park, there was no where they could have been standing to have retained eye contact at all times.
If he had of hit someone tho, that would be the clause that gets mentioned in court. They lost eye contact

linw

2865 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1169

#1310311 23-May-2015 09:24

They are more than thinking of making reg changes. The revised ones are signed off and come into effect 1 Aug this year. See link above.

A big problem with contravening these regs is you wouldn't have a leg to stand on if faced with damage claims.

I fly RC planes and over half of my club sub goes to Model Flying NZ but I am covered by their insurance policy. But, notwithstanding, if I transgress the CAA regs I've no doubt the insurance company would use that as an out to refuse cover.

There is also the case of farmers using these devices to monitor stock and water troughs etc. They, also, would run foul of the "maintain visual line of sight" requirements. To be kosher, it would seem that they would have to apply for a licence under Part 102. Ouch.

Anyway, hope your Lily is all that you are hoping for.

Cheers.

BinaryLimited

796 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 80

Trusted

#1310320 23-May-2015 09:57

KennyM: Anyone else seen these?

Www.lily.camera

There is a YouTube video with the guy and the prototype in which he controls it from his phone, I can see this being a quick and good way of getting wedding and building shots. Give them or place the tracker on the ground, control lily while being out of the shot. Easy way of getting a house shot for real estate etc. Plus the sports aspects.

This appeals to me because of the simplicity of flying. I don't have to learn controls etc etc. And for the sport side of it.

I've already ordered one, not sure that was a smart idea yet. I'd say gen 2 will be heaps better but twice the price, I think I'll be happy with this for the price

Wants!!!

Binary Limited - Safe. Secure. Simple. ™
www.binarylimited.co.nz

frankv

5690 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3649

Lifetime subscriber

#1310387 23-May-2015 13:35

(1) maintain visual line of sight with the aircraft;

It doesn't actually say that you must be looking at it though. So, so long as you could look at it if you wanted to (and could twist your head round far enough) , I think it meets this requirement.

After all, the purpose of the thing is to take photos of you, so *it* wants to maintain visual line of sight too.

JaseNZ

2576 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1489

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1310391 23-May-2015 13:39

Started a thread here a little while back.

http://www.geekzone.co.nz/forums.asp?forumid=122&topicid=173253

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding : Ice cream man , Ice cream man

Wise

Send money globally for less with Wise - one free transfer up to NZ$900 (affiliate link).

KennyM

221 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 10

#1310411 23-May-2015 14:33

I didnt even see that tread and I normally look in digital imaging!

Im sure laws will change to keep up with them. At the moment they arnt really that mainstream, but if you wanted to go snowboarding or to watch a rugby game etc and there was 20+ drones there flying around, then they would become stricter on rules.

groynk

234 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 19

#1310459 23-May-2015 16:33

KennyM: I didnt even see that tread and I normally look in digital imaging!

Im sure laws will change to keep up with them. At the moment they arnt really that mainstream, but if you wanted to go snowboarding or to watch a rugby game etc and there was 20+ drones there flying around, then they would become stricter on rules.

Obstacle avoidance is a planned feature in future developments, but not current. Instructions are to use it in wide open spaces.
Very cool, and great promotional video, on my gadget list.

linw

2865 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1169

#1310480 23-May-2015 17:37

frankv:
(1) maintain visual line of sight with the aircraft;

It doesn't actually say that you must be looking at it though. So, so long as you could look at it if you wanted to (and could twist your head round far enough) , I think it meets this requirement.

After all, the purpose of the thing is to take photos of you, so *it* wants to maintain visual line of sight too.

Good luck with that defence! I think you will find their definition of "maintain" is slightly different from yours, especially when they say that the clause is in there to ensure that the pilot can take avoidance action instantly.

But, of course, the Lily isn't directly controlled by a pilot so that makes it another beast as noted earlier.

As I said, interesting.

frankv

5690 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3649

Lifetime subscriber

#1310492 23-May-2015 18:19

KennyM: watch a rugby game etc

This would be way cool! Imagine a quadcopter following Richie McCaw or Maa Nonu or the ball around the field. :)

frankv

5690 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3649

Lifetime subscriber

#1310520 23-May-2015 18:37

linw:
frankv:
(1) maintain visual line of sight with the aircraft;

It doesn't actually say that you must be looking at it though. So, so long as you could look at it if you wanted to (and could twist your head round far enough) , I think it meets this requirement.

After all, the purpose of the thing is to take photos of you, so *it* wants to maintain visual line of sight too.

Good luck with that defence! I think you will find their definition of "maintain" is slightly different from yours, especially when they say that the clause is in there to ensure that the pilot can take avoidance action instantly.

But, of course, the Lily isn't directly controlled by a pilot so that makes it another beast as noted earlier.

As I said, interesting.

Well, IANAL, but if the purpose was to ensure that the pilot can take avoidance action instantly, why don't they say that? Seems like typical CAA rut thinking... they use the old RC rules and require visual line of sight, rather than say what they really want.

Similarly, if they want you to keep in sight, why not say that rather than "maintain visual line of sight"? My difference from your POV is not so much about "maintain" as about "line of sight". It doesn't mean you are looking in that direction, it means that there is nothing between you and the aircraft to prevent you seeing it.

I think that the, um, target? subject? does have some control over the Lily... the wrist thing has 4 buttons on it, and he must have some way to command it to "land". Does that make him the "pilot"? Dunno. Certainly no-one controls it in the sense of taking avoidance action instantly. That perhaps puts it in the bracket of 'free-flight' model aircraft (do people still fly those, or is it all RC nowadays?)

linw

2865 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1169

#1310715 24-May-2015 11:27

Part 101 of the regs includes free flight! To me that contradicts the spirit or aim of the regs.

tdgeek

29819 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9155

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1310721 24-May-2015 11:36

An avoidance sensor as they have on some cars would take care of 99% of the issue?