Recreational drone now illegal in most of Canada...

[sum guy]

When are you people going to get it?

All this talk about the real impact that drones have on people, property, etc, and how the gov't doesn't need to regulate them to this degree. You can talk till you're blue in the fact and come up with explanations and arguments to the gov't as to what they should and shouldn't do, how they can tweak these regs, etc. That's not the point at all.

Go and read my post a couple pages back. All the gov't sees when it comes to hobby drones is a new way to enable different sorts of terrorist acts. That's it. End of story.

Why do you think so many are being flown near airports? The deliberate act of trying to get your drone to hit a cockpit window or get sucked into an engine is a very enticing thing to do for a larger segment of our population that anyone cares to admit. I suspect that's also why lasers are being pointed at planes. And that's only for starters.

Planning some sort of act, getting good footage, being able to see things you don't normally see (or aren't allowed to see) from the road. And of course being able to drop things. This is why the gov't doesn't want hobby drones to become "a thing".

Being a welcoming, "inclusive" society has a price. And killing hobby drones is another payment.

 

[Static8]

When are you people going to get it?

All this talk about the real impact that drones have on people, property, etc, and how the gov't doesn't need to regulate them to this degree. You can talk till you're blue in the fact and come up with explanations and arguments to the gov't as to what they should and shouldn't do, how they can tweak these regs, etc. That's not the point at all.

Go and read my post a couple pages back. All the gov't sees when it comes to hobby drones is a new way to enable different sorts of terrorist acts. That's it. End of story.

Why do you think so many are being flown near airports? The deliberate act of trying to get your drone to hit a cockpit window or get sucked into an engine is a very enticing thing to do for a larger segment of our population that anyone cares to admit. I suspect that's also why lasers are being pointed at planes. And that's only for starters.

Planning some sort of act, getting good footage, being able to see things you don't normally see (or aren't allowed to see) from the road. And of course being able to drop things. This is why the gov't doesn't want hobby drones to become "a thing".

Being a welcoming, "inclusive" society has a price. And killing hobby drones is another payment.

Sorry its too late a long time ago, Drones is a thing , they let it in countries many years ago, can't stop it and you can't stop crazy people from doing crazy things. But we do have a voice as responsible RC enthusiasts to work on a regulations that make sense and we will succeed.

 

[Niagara Flyer]

So what your saying is we should just take this lying down! We all have hundreds if not thousands of dollars invested in our hobby and with the passing of these adhock rules they have totally made drones worthless even if you want to get out and sell them who will buy them? I for one would have appreciated some real warning I would never have purchased the ones I have to begin with I would have spent the money on a new telescope. This whole situation is extremely frustrating and venting this is what I think we are all doing.

 

[Static8]

So what your saying is we should just take this lying down! We all have hundreds if not thousands of dollars invested in our hobby and with the passing of these adhock rules they have totally made drones worthless even if you want to get out and sell them who will buy them? I for one would have appreciated some real warning I would never have purchased the ones I have to begin with I would have spent the money on a new telescope. This whole situation is extremely frustrating and venting this is what I think we are all doing.

Are you speaking to me or sum young guy?..I started a petition so hope its not me...

 

[jwmcgrath]

When are you people going to get it?


Why do you think so many are being flown near airports? The deliberate act of trying to get your drone to hit a cockpit window or get sucked into an engine is a very enticing thing to do for a larger segment of our population that anyone cares to admit. I suspect that's also why lasers are being pointed at planes. And that's only for starters.

Planning some sort of act, getting good footage, being able to see things you don't normally see (or aren't allowed to see) from the road. And of course being able to drop things. This is why the gov't doesn't want hobby drones to become "a thing".

Being a welcoming, "inclusive" society has a price. And killing hobby drones is another payment.

"Restriction" of the drones is completely inconsequential to your entire diatribe if they simply continue to exist at all.

Those that will "plan an act, get good footage, see things you don't normally see, and drop things" will continue to do exactly that, regardless of restriction, legislation, or law.

The only way to begin to entirely curtail what you suggest is to ban them completely and everyone knows even that wouldn't work against a committed individual.

Anything less simply makes it more difficult for enthusiasts to enjoy a hobby.

 

[Static8]

"Restriction" of the drones is completely inconsequential to your entire diatribe if they simply continue to exist at all.

Those that will "plan an act, get good footage, see things you don't normally see, and drop things" will continue to do exactly that, regardless of restriction, legislation, or law.

The only way to begin to entirely curtail what you suggest is to ban them completely and everyone knows even that wouldn't work against a committed individual.

Anything less simply makes it more difficult for enthusiasts to enjoy a hobby.

I compare the "drone" industry like gun proliferation in society both US and Canada, they are millions now found in our continent and anyone can get one. Now Canada is looking at trying to do a drone registry,, you watch this is next step...Need to avoid this at all possible because look what happened to gun registry in Canada, huge failure. The US gun control, well we all know what's going on there...So it's a "Thing" already and its about working with Transport Canada to realistic rules/law/guidelines and education so not to ban drones from the cities..

 

[jwmcgrath]

I too plan on writing a letter to Mr. Garneau, who to me incidentally, has dropped a few pegs as a national hero.

It may take a few days as I'm busy, but I plan to include things like (in no particular order):
- wrt to the threat to planes; planes take off with the continuing and active threat of birds which can have significantly more mass and be greater in number and be less predictable
- wrt to range from people; cars always have and always will continue to be a bigger threat and share roadways and adjacent sidewalks and do not maintain 75m buffers
- motorcycles and tractor trailers share lanes and roads; risk is inherent and we accept it as normal and routine
- wrt to crashing over crowds, thousands of planes fly over cities 24/7 and it takes just as much a mechanical failure or pilot error to bring them down as a drone but the effect is far more catastrophic with one over the other
- wrt flying over sparse people, if a drone fails or pilot errs over few individuals, in order for there to be any injury it would need to be nearly a pinpoint impact with a person on the ground. We routinely accept far greater risk, as did Mr. Garneau when he went to space.

Had restrictions stifled space exploration the way this restriction will stifle UAS development, he never would have gone.

I make these point here, now, to help anyone else who may wish to contact Mr. Garneau, before and while I compose my letter.

 

[jwmcgrath]

To clarify, yes I support avoiding flying over crowds and near airports, and most of the current guidelines.

Yes I support some measure of control; I've suggested earlier that licensing may have the beneficial effect of discouraging irresponsible pilots from taking up the hobby.

Yes, some of my comments require qualification. I simply make them in this manner, here, to stimulate discussion and because working in extremes helps make a point.

 

[Juno]

I too plan to write a letter to Mr. Garneau later this week once time allows. I hope everyone reading this will also take the time to send a letter to him. The more letters we collectively send, the more likely we will succeed in our cause.

 

[GMack]

I'm coming around to the point of seeing why the FAA and Canada do not want people flying these things over uncovered people's heads or within a set radius. There are videos in the new Inspire forum of the I2's falling out of the sky due to some parts failing or shaking apart from some odd vibration. Few bad power failures causing drops too. Shades of Go-Pro Karma!

Another I saw today is in the Better Business Bureaus "View Customer Complaints (226)" on DJI (They got a lot of 'em!). One dated 05/23/2016: "This company has sold via a retailer a stream of defective items and has now caused me injury, as its product caught on fire in mid flight" So the things catch on fire in mid-flight now too? Yay Li-Po.

On topic, Canada's 250 foot (75 meter) distance from people may be too far. Maybe 30 feet from people not associated with the flight?

Seems all rules are based on worst case scenarios and no substantiating data for the distances given. They could do as the Roads Dept. does and lower the speed limit if too many are injured. Apply the same to the drones perhaps, but not so far away to make it impractical to start with. If no one is injured and reported at 30 feet in 5,000 flights known to the FAA, then that could be established as a safety zone for people.

 

[lb650]

We couldn't find that Web page (Error 404)

Try the one gmack posted below the one I did It works. Not sure why mine didn't.

 

[lb650]

Your link wasn't working.

Try this one: Interim Order Respecting the Use of Model Aircraft - Transport Canada

Tks gmack

 

[lb650]

Can anyone help me with this part of the Interim Orders?

(b) at a lateral distance of less than 250 feet (75m) from buildings, structures, vehicles, vessels, animals and the public including spectators, bystanders or any person not associated with the operation of the aircraft;

Does this mean I am allowed to have someone with me to help me get my wheelchair out of the back of my SUV and stand beside me while I fly?

Thanks for any help.

Bud

Yep the way it reads is any one who is involved with the flying of the drone is allowed to be present,call him a spotter if nothing else

 

[lb650]

There is one reason and one reason alone why Freedom hating governments and park authorities and others are acting like this: camera on the drone, and, money. If people do their own videos and images, it will probably be seen as a threat to income streams (books, post cards, photographs, etc.), and, it is one rule for some (i.e. Military, police, etc. free to use image and video drones), but loss of freedoms for others. I went to a meeting with a local council concerning drone use in an SSSI area (Site of Special Scientific Interest) and there was a blanket ban, and you wanted to hear the excuses for it: "we are responsible for the public and any wildlife". I said: "why do you allow helicopters to fly low, and jet aircraft at the annual airbourne show then? What you are doing is akin to: 'oh.no, there COULD be a car accident so lets ban driving!' "

Exactly. It's the camera that allows you fly beyond VLOS thus prompting more privacy paranoia amongst the general public, public safety is just the tool government is using. IMHO Granted there are some legitimate safety concerns which some common sense can solve. But not to the extent of the new regs

 

[Nowelly]

When are you people going to get it?

All this talk about the real impact that drones have on people, property, etc, and how the gov't doesn't need to regulate them to this degree. You can talk till you're blue in the fact and come up with explanations and arguments to the gov't as to what they should and shouldn't do, how they can tweak these regs, etc. That's not the point at all.

Go and read my post a couple pages back. All the gov't sees when it comes to hobby drones is a new way to enable different sorts of terrorist acts. That's it. End of story.

Why do you think so many are being flown near airports? The deliberate act of trying to get your drone to hit a cockpit window or get sucked into an engine is a very enticing thing to do for a larger segment of our population that anyone cares to admit. I suspect that's also why lasers are being pointed at planes. And that's only for starters.

Planning some sort of act, getting good footage, being able to see things you don't normally see (or aren't allowed to see) from the road. And of course being able to drop things. This is why the gov't doesn't want hobby drones to become "a thing".

Being a welcoming, "inclusive" society has a price. And killing hobby drones is another payment.

When are you people going to get it?

All this talk about the real impact that drones have on people, property, etc, and how the gov't doesn't need to regulate them to this degree. You can talk till you're blue in the fact and come up with explanations and arguments to the gov't as to what they should and shouldn't do, how they can tweak these regs, etc. That's not the point at all.

Go and read my post a couple pages back. All the gov't sees when it comes to hobby drones is a new way to enable different sorts of terrorist acts. That's it. End of story.

Why do you think so many are being flown near airports? The deliberate act of trying to get your drone to hit a cockpit window or get sucked into an engine is a very enticing thing to do for a larger segment of our population that anyone cares to admit. I suspect that's also why lasers are being pointed at planes. And that's only for starters.

Planning some sort of act, getting good footage, being able to see things you don't normally see (or aren't allowed to see) from the road. And of course being able to drop things. This is why the gov't doesn't want hobby drones to become "a thing".

Being a welcoming, "inclusive" society has a price. And killing hobby drones is another payment.

I've already given a full and comprehensive contribution to the UK consultation entitled: "the benefits of the drone industry to the UK economy" (as it is called here). So I have chipped in with my bit where I can. We do not have as strict a regime here, although - of course - there is sometimes a minefield of regulation to negotiate to get up in the air (depending on where you are trying). Screaming "terrorism!" for everything is pretty lame to say the least, and smacks of paranoia. I at least hope for common sense here, we'll see. In the meantime I have obtained full UK and EU public liability insurance, registered my drone (even though, at present, we are not - strictly speaking - under any obligation currently) and I follow the rules to the letter UNTIL some rationality gets restored to this whole thing.

 

[Nowelly]

I'm coming around to the point of seeing why the FAA and Canada do not want people flying these things over uncovered people's heads or within a set radius. There are videos in the new Inspire forum of the I2's falling out of the sky due to some parts failing or shaking apart from some odd vibration. Few bad power failures causing drops too. Shades of Go-Pro Karma!

Another I saw today is in the Better Business Bureaus "View Customer Complaints (226)" on DJI (They got a lot of 'em!). One dated 05/23/2016: "This company has sold via a retailer a stream of defective items and has now caused me injury, as its product caught on fire in mid flight" So the things catch on fire in mid-flight now too? Yay Li-Po.

On topic, Canada's 250 foot (75 meter) distance from people may be too far. Maybe 30 feet from people not associated with the flight?

Seems all rules are based on worst case scenarios and no substantiating data for the distances given. They could do as the Roads Dept. does and lower the speed limit if too many are injured. Apply the same to the drones perhaps, but not so far away to make it impractical to start with. If no one is injured and reported at 30 feet in 5,000 flights known to the FAA, then that could be established as a safety zone for people.

I don't know why you folks are complaining about the 75m distance! Try finding ANYWHERE in a country as densely populated as a Western European nation where you can actually get that far from people. You live in the second most vast country on Earth... You have plenty of places you can go at least

 

[Nowelly]

I too plan on writing a letter to Mr. Garneau, who to me incidentally, has dropped a few pegs as a national hero.

It may take a few days as I'm busy, but I plan to include things like (in no particular order):
- wrt to the threat to planes; planes take off with the continuing and active threat of birds which can have significantly more mass and be greater in number and be less predictable
- wrt to range from people; cars always have and always will continue to be a bigger threat and share roadways and adjacent sidewalks and do not maintain 75m buffers
- motorcycles and tractor trailers share lanes and roads; risk is inherent and we accept it as normal and routine
- wrt to crashing over crowds, thousands of planes fly over cities 24/7 and it takes just as much a mechanical failure or pilot error to bring them down as a drone but the effect is far more catastrophic with one over the other
- wrt flying over sparse people, if a drone fails or pilot errs over few individuals, in order for there to be any injury it would need to be nearly a pinpoint impact with a person on the ground. We routinely accept far greater risk, as did Mr. Garneau when he went to space.

Had restrictions stifled space exploration the way this restriction will stifle UAS development, he never would have gone.

I make these point here, now, to help anyone else who may wish to contact Mr. Garneau, before and while I compose my letter.

Add to that letter that most modern drones are being programmed now with geo-tagging and ring fencing of no fly zones. I have tested my P4P and it simply will not take off from the ground within a geo-fenced airport area or other area (like a perimeter around a prison, for instance). As technology is fast improving all the time, these innovations need to be taken into consideration. It may be the case that drones built in the man cave at home are high risk, but, I think a vast majority of people are not purposely flying in no go areas, except the occasional token idiots on YouTube who only care about attention amd making money out of YouTube hits. By all means, clamp those idiots in irons and fine the heck out of them too, but do not punish the majority for a minority - that is unfair

 

[lb650]

Add to that letter that most modern drones are being programmed now with geo-tagging and ring fencing of no fly zones. I have tested my P4P and it simply will not take off from the ground within a geo-fenced airport area or other area (like a perimeter around a prison, for instance). As technology is fast improving all the time, these innovations need to be taken into consideration. It may be the case that drones built in the man cave at home are high risk, but, I think a vast majority of people are not purposely flying in no go areas, except the occasional token idiots on YouTube who only care about attention amd making money out of YouTube hits. By all means, clamp those idiots in irons and fine the heck out of them too, but do not punish the majority for a minority - that is unfair

Exactly. There in lies the problem,how do you accomplish this without placing regs that are not warranted for the majority of flyers. Maybe the geofence option has to be taken out permanently and be "on" all the time. As for guys that build them I'm not sure if the components they use even include the geo programming, but going forward they would have to,and not have the ability to override. And as I stated in an earlier post make it so you have to register,and insure,and prove certification before the drone manufacturer will allow you to activate..but it will take more than just one country with unrealistic drone laws to push manufacturers in that direction

 

[Hazen Ducey]

We are no longer allowed to fly 9km from airports, 75m from buildings, and a lot more, since 10am this morning...
And there is no way to get recreational liscence, etc...
Sad for everyone in Canada...

Ottawa toughens rules for operating recreational drones

The only difference now in Canada is they are saying they "are" going to be enforcing what they set out as rules. WAS going to be getting a p4p this spring, but,,that's on hold pending what TC actually does. If the rules are written in stone,,then just about flight I have taken breaks one rule or the other..If I have to drive an hour to fly around a field to take pics of the grass growing,,then it just won't be happening.! DJI will hurt from this ruling. We've come so far in a short time only to be knocked back to the beginning. When I ask specific questions I'm told to read the regs,,,which means i'll never get a straight answer, and that's from TC. One person I was talking to on the ph even accused me of being illiterate. wouldn't give a straight answer. I hold a college diploma, so I think I can read ok..
We shall see what comes of it all in the very never future,,but it doesn't look good..

 

[GMack]

DJI's lawyer recently spoke to some federal board in the USA and he seemed concerned with possible upcoming restrictions. Don't think it will be just Canada who will be targeted with more restrictions. Even AMA magazine had an article saying 2017 was going to be tough on drones.

At some point it may come down to no drones will be allowed to fly at all within any city limits short of having some daily film permit along with some assigned monitor/drone cop to oversee the flight and alleviate anyone who may think the drone operator is invading their privacy or personal space (Although any expectation of privacy outside your door should never be expected today, imho. Surveillance cameras are everywhere, even on my neighbor's roof pointing into my backyard, but nothing I can do about that short of a tree.).

I don't think the drone industry is going to take-off as much either. Drones Plus closed all their USA shops as have others. Yuneec laid off employees. DJI is slow to put in stock in stores and ship. GoPro has financial issues with theirs. Others have given up.

Fly 'em while you still can - if you still can.