As with all laws and regulations it's not a matter of what is best for society it is about who is bribing the politicians today. In the US we call them lobbyists. Guns are OK as the NRA is the strongest bribery group in the US so drone manufactures now need to buy some politicians in order to save their own skin.
Recreational drone now illegal in most of Canada...
- Thread starter isopro
- Start date
Timmins, I guess we are almost neighbours'! isopro, with the strange weather we have been getting, check out the weird and cool frozen ice formations in the rivers, I have a some picture taken around here that look like art work, most people I show can't tell if it's a abstract painting or a picture. And oh I took those last week!
- Joined
- May 29, 2014
- Messages
- 408
- Reaction score
- 137
I've read this entire thread and don't think I've seen one constructive suggestion for how drones should be regulated in Canada or elsewhere. How many new drone operators do you think there are in Canada every month or year? It's got to be thousands of new users every month, the vast majority of whom probably have never flown or owned a drone before. And how many of those users are under 18? Just look at all the videos and Facebook posts of people who have lost or crashed their drones. It is inevitable that there will be fly-aways, loss of signal or low-battery crashes, or just general stupidity crashes, and it is inevitable some of these will land and cause damage to homes, cars, people. If a drone were to crash on a highway or a car in motion, a fatality is easily possible. At a minimum, requiring a drone operator to have contact info on the drone itself seems sensible, though almost impossible to monitor or enforce. Online registration might make sense too.
Don't get me wrong, the regulation issued this week is absurdly overbroad by not offering exceptions and creating restrictions that can easily be interpreted as outlawing any recreational drone flight in any habitable part of the country. I get that. But let's just take it as a given that the government can and will regulate recreational drones -- what would you accept or suggest as a sensible approach to balance the interests of drone enthusiasts and the interests of ensuring public safety?
Don't get me wrong, the regulation issued this week is absurdly overbroad by not offering exceptions and creating restrictions that can easily be interpreted as outlawing any recreational drone flight in any habitable part of the country. I get that. But let's just take it as a given that the government can and will regulate recreational drones -- what would you accept or suggest as a sensible approach to balance the interests of drone enthusiasts and the interests of ensuring public safety?
Same old argument...the "honest" people will register and/or abide by the current laws, the people who cause the trouble won't. Laws are designed to keep honest people honest.
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2017
- Messages
- 14
- Reaction score
- 1
- Age
- 64
If by here you mean the US, it's 5 miles not 5km from airports. 5 miles translates to roughly 9km so that's the same.
There are ski planes. Best friend has one. In the winter he puts skis on it, in the summer he has floats with wheels. Flies off the lake 12 months of the year.
Last edited:
**** it's impossible to fly my phantom on my property anymore because I live in Toronto. Wish I had known they'd be outlawed before I bought one....in Toronto. How can they do this? Why is there sale still allowed in Canada? Is there a lawsuit being filed to recoup our money?
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't disagree, but have two points to reiterate:
1- Pilots need to digest this information before formulating a suitable response/suggestion. It's by this open conversation that spawns the best ideas.
2- To the letter of the restriction, you are not permitted to be within 75m of people. Well, this is a free country (pun intended). That means ANYWHERE you can go with your drone, ANYONE ELSE can go too. That effectively means flying ANYWHERE can be illegal.
Just that alone REQUIRES clarification, otherwise the title of the thread is correct. Drones are effectively illegal in Canada.
Last edited:
I totally agree the 9 km rule to airports is over kill I think 5km would be more than sufficient. Together with the 90 m height rule this would keep drone traffic well out of the way of an aircraft within the 2 mile glide slope altitude. Also I seen a video about potentially integrating software into drones that would notify the RC pilot of approaching commercial aircraft. But this would take some considerable cooperation from the federal aviation ind and who knows how that would go, were already a bunch of wanna be hacks in their eyes
In America, the new FAA rules require all Drones to have a Registration number on them. Since all must be registered, the name and location of the owner is always available in the records of registration. That should furnish all information needed to address any situation. America's new FAA Drone Regulations are sensible, in my view, and well balanced between privacy and the need for behavioral guidance, and safety of the public. There are always a few bad actors of course. But by far most Drone owners understand the need for sensible regulation and want to fly with thoughtful consideration of our neighbors.
There are two reasons for these absurd hobby-drone regulations:
1) Since 9/11, the cost if insurance has gone up for anything related to aviation. Crazy screening at airports, the end to a lot of municipal air shows, hot air ballooning, etc. Regardless how remote the threat to aircraft, the insurance industry is demanding that these drones be removed from the skys or they will add new requirements for commercial aviation to take on additional "drone-strike" insurance.
2) Law enforcement and domestic security agencies see hobby drones as an emerging threat in terms of dropping dangerous things onto people or property (buildings, etc). Drones with increased lift capability, the ability to fly a certain path, all figure into this. This is the domestic terrorism angle. Even aerial reconnaissance to aid in the planning of a terrorist act is being considered.
The powers that be will not publicly acknowledge that these are the two primary drivers for this legislation.
1) Since 9/11, the cost if insurance has gone up for anything related to aviation. Crazy screening at airports, the end to a lot of municipal air shows, hot air ballooning, etc. Regardless how remote the threat to aircraft, the insurance industry is demanding that these drones be removed from the skys or they will add new requirements for commercial aviation to take on additional "drone-strike" insurance.
2) Law enforcement and domestic security agencies see hobby drones as an emerging threat in terms of dropping dangerous things onto people or property (buildings, etc). Drones with increased lift capability, the ability to fly a certain path, all figure into this. This is the domestic terrorism angle. Even aerial reconnaissance to aid in the planning of a terrorist act is being considered.
The powers that be will not publicly acknowledge that these are the two primary drivers for this legislation.
Seems to me there's little value offering our own alternative limits on drone use without dealing directly with the concerns giving rise to the new rules.
There's no doubt Transport Canada is getting more reports of "drone incidents": wwwapps.tc.gc.ca. I put that in quotes because reports don't necessarily represent reality, and I have some doubt the pilot at 5,000' saw a drone and not a gull, but the reports are coming in. And it's hard to argue with crashed drones discovered on airport properties.
Recreational drones are exactly that, so comparing them to cars or planes is a false equivalency. Can't regulate recreational devices like you do key transportation infrastructure. As public necessities planes beat drones every day.
If we're going to come up with a rational response we need to take account of the reality. The inconsiderate and irresponsible yahoos are going to drive public sentiment and legislation. How do we target the idiots while maintaining enough room for us to enjoy our (essentially unnecessary) hobby?
There's no doubt Transport Canada is getting more reports of "drone incidents": wwwapps.tc.gc.ca. I put that in quotes because reports don't necessarily represent reality, and I have some doubt the pilot at 5,000' saw a drone and not a gull, but the reports are coming in. And it's hard to argue with crashed drones discovered on airport properties.
Recreational drones are exactly that, so comparing them to cars or planes is a false equivalency. Can't regulate recreational devices like you do key transportation infrastructure. As public necessities planes beat drones every day.
If we're going to come up with a rational response we need to take account of the reality. The inconsiderate and irresponsible yahoos are going to drive public sentiment and legislation. How do we target the idiots while maintaining enough room for us to enjoy our (essentially unnecessary) hobby?
haha! I was thinking the same thing.
Hollywood (LA in general.) went so rule, permit, and dollar crazy (Okay, inordinate amount of time to get a permit too.) that most of Hollywood production moved to Vancouver. Now if they want aerials, they'll have to come back to the USA somewhere.
Canada may legislate themselves into drone obscurity, which may cost them too.
Similar threads
