Welcome to PhantomPilots.com

Sign up for a weekly email of the latest drone news & information

Beginning of the end in New Zealand

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by cshaw, Jul 24, 2015.

  1. cshaw

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2014
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    New Plymouth, New Zealand
    So the CAA in New Zealand has come up with new rules that apply after August 1 2015

    Basically we will be unable to fly above any property without the owners permission. Including public property maintained by local Councils or government.

    We will need to get permission from the council or government agency to fly over all parks, roads buildings etc.

    We will also need consent from every individual who happens to be in the flight path or owners of all properties in the flight path.

    Apart from empty remote beaches, I am not sure where we will be able to fly.

    Basically, we are [moderator edit: foul language removed]. And I thought the USA was overregulated

    For sale: DJI Phantom Vision 2+ and accessories

    NEW RULES

    101.207 Airspace
    (a) A person operating a remotely piloted aircraft must—
    (1) Unless operating in a danger area under Part 71, avoid
    operating –
    (i) in airspace above persons who have not given consent
    for the aircraft to operate in that airspace; and
    (ii) above property unless prior consent has been obtained
    from any persons occupying that property or the
    property owner; and
    (2) maintain observation of the surrounding airspace in which
    the aircraft is operating for other aircraft; and
    (3) not operate the aircraft at any height above 400 feet above
    ground level except in accordance with paragraph (c).
     
    #1 cshaw, Jul 24, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 24, 2015
  2. ScottyT

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    403
    Likes Received:
    134
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Ouch. I can kind of see why they would do that, but it sure cuts down on the fun for responsible fliers. Asking people to simply fly over farm property will be an absolute PITA.
    I'd tell them to stick the bit about flying in public parks (as opposed to national parks) and just go ahead and do it. Absurd
     
  3. cshaw

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2014
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    New Plymouth, New Zealand
    Yep. I will start by ignoring the new rules and see how things go.
     
    Ti22 likes this.
  4. ScottyT

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    403
    Likes Received:
    134
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    I'm from Hawkes Bay and had a great time when I was back with the new P3. This changes everything.
    from:
    http://www.caa.govt.nz/public_and_media_info/caa_releases/med-rel_Part_102_launch.pdf

    A key update to Rule Part 101, which was designed to regulate traditional model aircraft, is the requirement for operators who want to fly over people or property to gain consent from the affected individuals or property owners before they fly. “Having a conversation with a property owner beforehand is an effective means of risk management because they are likely to have the best knowledge of the risks.” Operators who intend to fly over public spaces will also need to get permission from the land owner. For example, if an operator wants to fly over a park, they will need to get permission from the local council. “We are encouraging public land owners to be proactive. This could involve erecting signs indicating if unmanned aircraft flights are allowed or not at the park entrance.” Those who cannot get consent from a landowner or individuals can still operate if they get an operating certificate from the CAA under Rule Part 102.

    Hopefully a lot of places do get sign posted in the near future. Otherwise, as you say, it will be a lot of beach and open water flying. Major bummer.

    How does one get an operating certificate from the CAA I wonder...
     
  5. JKDSensei

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,511
    Likes Received:
    658
    Location:
    USA
    Yeah, kinda ends the whole drone hobby in NewZealand it seems.
    Never fear, folks like Julius717 and his buds are working overtime to ensure we get similar regs here in the USA just as soon as humanly possible.
     
    BlackHawk388 likes this.
  6. BlackHawk388

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2015
    Messages:
    507
    Likes Received:
    202
    Location:
    Point Washington, FL.
    The rapid rise of incidents involving UAV use prompted this quick regulation change in NZ. NZ has seen drone incidents go from 1 in 2011 to 27 last year and 53 already this year.

    Those irresponsible owners have screwed over what are likely hundreds of responsible pilots.

    The thing is, so many people argue about the FAA guidelines being guidelines and not regulations. So they push and push and they post video after video of out of LOS and high altitude operation. They don't give a rats *** if their bragging affects others in the future because it's all about THEM and RIGHT NOW.

    I even had one owner tell me that since the FAA has to go through Congress, any changes would take years to implement. So basically, he said screw it, he will fly as he wishes until forced not to.

    Those same irresponsible operators will be among the first to complain about this hobby being over-regulated once those changes hit the books. Never admitting their own habits led to those changes.

    Does anyone know if a central database is kept either by the government or, by another entity, that tracks actual drone incidents here in the U.S.? I think it would be interesting, also, if NZ has a database which gives a brief description of each of the 53 drone incidents mentioned in the above link.
     
    sergekouper and JKDSensei like this.
  7. JKDSensei

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,511
    Likes Received:
    658
    Location:
    USA
    Blackhawk,
    It really is sad. imo, there are just people who do not deserve freedom because they abuse it and that small reckless irresponsible minority ruins it for the vast majority who DO consider others and consequences.

    When I read the thread that Juius717 [moderator edit: name calling removed] wrote on high altitude flying it makes me hope they become victims of their own stupidity. Then you have people claiming to be pilots themselves defending the [moderator edit: name calling removed] saying that guidelines are not rules (as you state). How ignorant is that?!? So these people are basically saying ignore guidelines until they become enforceable, mandatory law. Do they just love being subjects or something?
    Most thinking people don't need laws at all. They would operate reasonably and safely for all naturally.

    It's not just the fact that a plane COULD hit a drone in flight that is the issue. it's the public PERCEPTION.

    The fact is, no matter how slim the chance may be for an incident, it is as much the public's perception and the fact than a large percentage of the population already thinks drones are invasions in their privacy that will drive regulations. Ignoring guidelines simply adds a solid case to the argument for mandatory regulations.

    I sincerely wish forums such as this one moderated such posts for the good of us all.

    I also think some of the "Look at me fly a mile high" posts appearing (especially by brand new members) are troll posts by people who actually despise drones and are trying to hurt the hobby.
    And of course the morons fall for it and post their videos, waving the one finger salute at anyone who tries to reason with them and point out the potential issues.
     
    #7 JKDSensei, Jul 24, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 24, 2015
    BlackHawk388 likes this.
  8. RoyVa

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2015
    Messages:
    2,246
    Likes Received:
    449
    Location:
    Virginia
    This is kind of forcing us to join model clubs and fly with groups at specific places at specific times. Not really good for aerial photography. Just model air craft flying. Bummer.
     
  9. ianwood

    ianwood Taco Wrangler
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2014
    Messages:
    4,910
    Likes Received:
    1,788
    Location:
    Lost Angeles
    Let's watch the language and name calling as well as the general tone. If you incite arguments, you will get a warning. I get that this topic gets most of us riled up but we have to maintain a constructive environment otherwise there is no point in even bringing it up.
     
    dirkclod likes this.
  10. Suwaneeguy

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2014
    Messages:
    701
    Likes Received:
    22
    Now that, I would fight in a heartbeat.
    As this clearly says, NO MORE RC aircraft!
    If the law is specifying quad/drones, then all other types of RC aircraft are permitted.
    Which, to me, should be totally illegal.

    Get off your lazy butt and start screaming!
     
    JKDSensei likes this.
  11. JKDSensei

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,511
    Likes Received:
    658
    Location:
    USA
    I apologize if I offended anyone. I have little patience for those who brazenly disregard others or guidelines designed to make a safe environment for all to enjoy.
    The news of what just happened to our hobby in NZ didn't help.

    That said, I will be a bit more careful with my posts.
    Ianwood is right. Constructive debate has to be maintained.
     
  12. RedHotPoker

    Joined:
    May 3, 2015
    Messages:
    3,972
    Likes Received:
    1,364
    Location:
    Edmonton Alberta
    Thankfully, I live in a city with huge green spaces through out. Not to mention the large parks and school grounds that often have two schools, one on each side. So the sports fields are very large indeed.
    I can always find a quiet place to unload my Phantom 3 and take off.
    It's a sad day indeed, when restrictions are enforced and we are confined to limited specific areas alone.

    Hope things can improve and not degenerate further, for us all.

    RedHotPoker
     
  13. Bean

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2015
    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    Derbyshire UK
    Sadly if the lawmakers make it impossible to fly legally more people will fly illegally some who are flying safely atm when forced to fly illegally will go that extra step as they are already breaking the law.
    Seems some of the law makers and naysayers don't get the idea of an aerial photography platform and treat it just as another rc device so want to stick us in a club on a field week after week.

    I am still holding off on a purchase of a P3A because I don't want to end up with a bird that cant fly, Still it gives me plenty of time to practice with my X5C as at my age I have patience, My 16 year old son however badgers me daily lol.
     
  14. steveeds

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2014
    Messages:
    351
    Likes Received:
    74
    We have 4 million people in NZ in a country roughly the size of the UK, we have lots of open areas.

    All is not lost and even less will be noticed.
    Our culture is very relaxed and this matters, they are very tight and seemingly mind bending regs but as long as we don't flaunt our flying it will all soon move quietly onto the shelves.

    Nothing going on here so move along (smile)
     
    dirkclod likes this.
  15. LUISMARTINEZ

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    759
    Likes Received:
    272
    Those irresponsible owners have screwed over what are likely hundreds of responsible pilots.
    Amen, brother, Hooah!
     
    BlackHawk388 likes this.
  16. ScottyT

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    403
    Likes Received:
    134
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    I don't believe it's that relaxed. With the large increase in reported incidents this year, if they continue to increase I doubt the CAA will just sit back and say "Oh well, we tried"

    They'll likely get many calls to say a drone flew over their yard without permission from disgruntled neighbours. The only thing in our favour at this stage is that most people won't be aware of these new restrictions.

    It's not good. I think they've made a bad call with regards to the ability to not being able to fly in open public places without permission. What a nightmare asking for permission from a council; and unless they proactively sign-post areas as suggested, each person will need to do so for every area they wish to fly in. Ludicrous.
     
  17. steveeds

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2014
    Messages:
    351
    Likes Received:
    74
    I agree, I'm trying to look on the positive side a bit more than the reality of the situation. "Ludicrous" is about right and draconian would be more the way I would put it.

    It is also "imposed forced responsibilities" for the individual with some harsh accountability for actions that would seem normal with a we quad that causes hardly any offence, If I was to do a one by one account of these rules it would make for a bad day.

    They have set these rules for a perceived future that just isn't here yet I feel (more like someone is trying to make a name for himself) . A bit norty really.
     
    ScottyT likes this.
  18. RedHotPoker

    Joined:
    May 3, 2015
    Messages:
    3,972
    Likes Received:
    1,364
    Location:
    Edmonton Alberta
    I believe that when you folks are doing the application process you should bring along and include a DVD of awesome Phantom 3 videos. Those, demonstrating the unique perspectives, and incredible footage we can record and acquire from these wonderful Phantom 3 cameras...
    If you show us, in good light, then others may also soon realize and understand what we are all about. We are decent people mostly, with only a few bad apple characters in the very large barrel.

    Who else will stand up for us, but we the pilots?
    Wishing you all only much Good Luck, each and every one of you.

    RedHotPoker
     
  19. ScottyT

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    403
    Likes Received:
    134
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    Think it's pretty much done and dusted and set to be brought in Aug 1.

    Sure, there are positive videos out there, but when you are thinking public safety and that these are flying machines that are noisy, with bugs, susceptibility to unseen interference and no redundancies, it's not difficult to see why bodies err on the side of caution. Even "good" videos can look dangerous when viewing with those factors in the back of your mind.

    The plonkers on youtube gloating about distance 'records' wont have helped our cause. Inevitable but sad.
     
    #19 ScottyT, Jul 24, 2015
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2015
  20. ScottyT

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    403
    Likes Received:
    134
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    At this stage I'd happily sit some kind of formal certification to be exempt from some of these rules. Much easier to do than tracking down and asking people for permission each time, and I think the technology warrants it.