Beginning of the end in New Zealand
- Thread starter cshaw
- Start date
Then I must apologize.
There is so much lost in comprehension of intent with text based communication. I completely understood your ire with the NZ governments over regulation of this hobby, so assumed your other comments were displaying that same frustration. That's what I get for assuming. I should have asked if you were attacking the staff instead of assuming it.
Sigh. I have my days, that's for sure. Again, I apologize.
Hope you aren't pissed off at me. But will understand if you are.
First, I agree completely with the OP's outrage.
The FAA in the US is not allowed to create rules out of thin air (and drone reports are very thin air). But the FAA can create a temporary rule in the case of an emergency:
The Emergency Notam normally expires when the emergency that created it no longer exists.
Federal law is that a federal rule or regulation is not binding unless the public is given fair notice of it. The FAA publishes its rules in the Federal Register at least 30 days before the date the rule is to become effective. Even before that, the FAA is required to give pilots and other interested parties notice and opportunity to comment on the proposals for new rules before they are adopted.
When changes occur so quickly that time does not permit updates to or appropriate rulemaking, the changes are publicized as emergency notams. Notams are normally advisory, but a notam that disseminates flight information that is regulatory in nature is designated as an FDC (Flight Data Center) notam.
Second, as some on this forum who should wear tin-foil hats when they post on forums seem to think, I have NEVER encouraged or endorsed someone not following the guidelines. I push back when you make up nonexistent rules and expect everyone to follow them as if they were enforceable. This only gives lurkers only more ammunition and the impression that personal drone pilots are all a menace. If you scream "you're breaking the rules" often enough and loud enough, then people will start assuming that there really is a rule, and most operators are violating it. **** them all.
Yes, Blackhawk, because of the Section 336 exception for hobby aircraft in the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, the FAA cannot make rules regarding hobby aircraft without Congress amending that section. The sky is not falling.
If you think the FAA is out to ruin your hobby, then move to NZ where apparently the CAA is not constrained and then tell me that you are "overregulated" in the US.
Again, I am in complete agreement with Cshaw about his outrage. But, I don't think it means the "end of the hobby" in NZ, but that the drone operator will always be guilty until proven innocent every time they fly. In other words, if anyone doesn't like you flying, you're automatically guilty.
In November, 2014, the FAA released a list of almost 200 "drone sightings", but a cursory read of the list makes it laughable [Forbes article]. Unfortunately the general public and the tin-foil crowd use it as evidence of how dangerous these flying lawnmowers are. That's the theater we are in. Please stop shouting "Fire" by screaming that we're breaking rules that don't exist.
Not at all pissed off. In fact in a funny way you cheered me up a bit yesterday with that disagreement. A Welcome distraction I guess. No offense meant and I am pleased that you can see that now. Certainly none taken at this end.
I really would have thought that both our governments would have more important things to worry about. Perhaps they have already solved unemployment, poverty, crime etc and are looking for something else to occupy their time until the next election
I have requested a list of incidents from the CAA and will put that up when I get it. I imagine it will be similar to the FAA list quoted above.
I also agree that we are not really grounded. Stevemann put it very well by saying we will now just be guilty be default. However few people will know about the rules anyhow. We should be good for a while, at least until some moron does something stupid near an airport or a crowd of people.
Saw on Youtube major conflict between various factions in the aero modelling fraternity in NZ, including government sanctioned banning of certain individuals out of favour with the faction aligned with the government authority from flying models. I wonder if this is just an extension of that?
Found the link. Here:
Found the link. Here:
Last edited:
I went through a few of his videos and very interesting they are. This man is a true and proper victim and he will tell you in his quiet but firm way just that.
The CAA and MFNZ are out to get him, it seems so unfair and unreasonable it's a vendetta to and against him from authorities he has no hopes ever to redress.
But he can't see why, not even a little bit and that's really interesting. I think he's slightly outstanding with his knowledge in his field and a pretty neat sort of guy.
The CAA and MFNZ are out to get him, it seems so unfair and unreasonable it's a vendetta to and against him from authorities he has no hopes ever to redress.
But he can't see why, not even a little bit and that's really interesting. I think he's slightly outstanding with his knowledge in his field and a pretty neat sort of guy.
I don't think this would happen in the UK. The CAA fixed the rules and prosecuted successfully a few offenders so far. So I guess the things are more clearer for everyone over here.
Here's his latest on the matter, with another dedicated video on the new rules to come. Rant @5:27
I read the new regs when they were calling for comments last year but I didn't see anything about flying over parks otherwise I would have sent them an email.
The restriction on flying over private property is OK but parks really screws things up.
Normally at a park there are signs indicating what you can do there.
Like no dogs, no bicycles etc. So logically if there was some reason that they didn't want drones to fly there they would put up a sign indicating this. That would be the normal way of doing this.
The restriction on flying over private property is OK but parks really screws things up.
Normally at a park there are signs indicating what you can do there.
Like no dogs, no bicycles etc. So logically if there was some reason that they didn't want drones to fly there they would put up a sign indicating this. That would be the normal way of doing this.
Last edited:
I received an email from the CAA detailing the 53 UAV related events in 2015 that brought about the law change.
The list came with a rider stating that 77% were ARCs. ( Aviation Related concerns). In other word, not really incidents
Most of these related to reports of flying within controlled zones around airports. Or pilots reporting seeing what "May have been a UAV"
5 were basically " Someone flew over my house"
The genuine ones were
1 Flew off a crowded inter-island ferry
2 A helicopter pilot reported an approaching UAV at 7-8000 ft
3 UAV flown over a crowd attending a ANZAC day parade at a war memorial ( War vets)
4 UAV flown over a stadium during a rugby game
5 UAV used to film the Round The Bays fun run. (This is quite close to Wellington International Airport) Bear in mind that pretty much all of Wellington City is within 4km of the Airport.
6 2 reports of UAVs flying at night. 1 crashed into a hotel in Queenstown
None of the reported events resulted in injure, death or property damage
So basically 6 people have screwed up this hobby for the rest of us
Don't laugh, it could easily happen to you
The list came with a rider stating that 77% were ARCs. ( Aviation Related concerns). In other word, not really incidents
Most of these related to reports of flying within controlled zones around airports. Or pilots reporting seeing what "May have been a UAV"
5 were basically " Someone flew over my house"
The genuine ones were
1 Flew off a crowded inter-island ferry
2 A helicopter pilot reported an approaching UAV at 7-8000 ft
3 UAV flown over a crowd attending a ANZAC day parade at a war memorial ( War vets)
4 UAV flown over a stadium during a rugby game
5 UAV used to film the Round The Bays fun run. (This is quite close to Wellington International Airport) Bear in mind that pretty much all of Wellington City is within 4km of the Airport.
6 2 reports of UAVs flying at night. 1 crashed into a hotel in Queenstown
None of the reported events resulted in injure, death or property damage
So basically 6 people have screwed up this hobby for the rest of us
Don't laugh, it could easily happen to you
It's a shame that the powers that be, in whatever country, don't come down extremely hard on the few idiots (Royva says 10%) and get both national and local media to give it top priority in coverage. The word would quickly spread to the morons and hopefully (or am I being too naive?) dissuade them from copying such potentially destructive flying.
Recently, here in the UK, a man was arrested and convicted of contravening the CAA rules by flying over populated stadia - fined £1800 ($2700) and banned from flying/owning a UAV for two years.
IMHO this was not enough to demonstrate that such activity is irresponsible and potentially a lethal action - a bigger fine and a short sharp incarceration with a lifetime ban would have been more appropriate to get the message across.
Recently, here in the UK, a man was arrested and convicted of contravening the CAA rules by flying over populated stadia - fined £1800 ($2700) and banned from flying/owning a UAV for two years.
IMHO this was not enough to demonstrate that such activity is irresponsible and potentially a lethal action - a bigger fine and a short sharp incarceration with a lifetime ban would have been more appropriate to get the message across.
I approached my local council about the new rules but they had not finalised them yet.They seemed to find them a challenge as they said even a kite or a glider would come under the same heading as they are UAVs? They will likely get numerous requests from sensible pilots and probably don't have the staff to cope.
I live in New Plymouth. I think all councils will have the same problem. Over the summer I think I will start putting in requests to fly at various locations and see what happens.
Generally my policy will be to ignore the new rules and carry on as before. If I was going to film over someones property I would have asked their permission anyway. Not necessarily every house I flew over on the way to the site I wanted to film, but a farmers property in the country, certainly. Mostly because I might have to knock on his door and ask if I can retrieved my crashed Phantom.
Similar threads
