Drones on farms

[jetjr]

Ag Pilots going to love this

 

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-01/new-drone-regulations-to-benefit-farmers/7293392

 

Is it CASA avoiding actual management or responsibility by exemption?

 

 

[Robbo]

Can go spraying to http://rmax.yamaha-motor.com.au

 

 

[Jim McDowall]

Ag Pilots going to love thishttp://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-01/new-drone-regulations-to-benefit-farmers/7293392

Is it CASA avoiding actual management or responsibility by exemption?

CASA should permit farmers to blast drones from the sky if they are caught tresspassing. I have already found one parked in a tree on our farm. Drones just provide another arrow in the green activist quiver.

 

 

[jetjr]

They would cause problems for AT802's transporting around the place, 25 kg is a big drone.

 

Only exemption for farmers, not others and non commercial too.

 

I think once the gate is open going to be hard to regulate.

 

Was with a farmer last week using new toy, retail drone with camera, had no idea of existing restrictions re height and aerodromes. Key point raised in training was to stay above 30m. Have to watch screen closely so no awareness of other aircraft that might be around.

 

 

[M61A1]

Can go spraying to http://rmax.yamaha-motor.com.au

Have you read the specs on this or seen one? I saw one a few years ago at an Ag Show. They aren't small, with a rotor diameter around 3M, but they are designed for spraying, so should never really be more than a few metres above the ground, so I can't see why they would be a problem unless misused. They aren't cheap either, so very unlikely someone will have one just for the fun of it.

In regard to the regs, maybe retailers should be ensuring that purchasers are aware of the regs.

 

 

[Robbo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqM46LO20Q4

 

 

 

[jetjr]

They arent going to be the problem,

 

the regs seem to say UP TO 25kg

 

So free for all at all weights below that inc cheap 5kg models, piloted by the boys looking for pigs.

 

max flight height is well above 500ft. Easy to set a ceiling in software if they wanted to.

 

 

[Nobody]

The rules are here:

 

https://www.casa.gov.au/aircraft/standard-page/part-101-amendments-cutting-red-tape-remotely-piloted-aircraft

 

As I understand it they have categorized them by MTOW. Anything less than 2kg is now "very small" and can be flown commercially under certain conditions* without an AOC or pilot certificate.

 

A small UAV is 2kg to 25kg and can be flown commercial like activities over land owned or controlled by the owner of the UAV with the same as the other limitations.

 

*The conditions are:

 

1. You must only fly during the day and keep your RPA within visual line-of sight.
    
    
   
2. You must not fly your RPA higher than 400ft (120 metres) AGL.
    
    
   
3. You must keep your RPA at least 30 metres away from other people
    
    
   
4. You must keep your RPA at least 5.5km away from controlled aerodromes
    
    
   
5. You must not fly your RPA over any populous areas. These can include: beaches, parks and sporting ovals.
    
    
   
6. You must not fly your RPA over or near an area affecting public safety or where emergency operations are underway (without prior approval).
    
    
    
    
   
7. This could include situations such as a car crash, police operations, fire and associated firefighting efforts and search and rescue.
    
    
   

 

 

 

[*]You can only fly one RPA at a time.

 

EDIT: The major beneficiaries will be the news reporters.

[Guest Howard Hughes]

Ag Pilots going to love thishttp://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-01/new-drone-regulations-to-benefit-farmers/7293392

Is it CASA avoiding actual management or responsibility by exemption?

The risk is minimal, otherwise it wouldn't have been signed off!

As for the practical uses, what sort of an area do you think it will be able to spray with a MTOW of 25kg? It'd be lucky to spray my vegie patch! The more probable uses are for mapping, checking of fences and dams. But with the VLOS restriction it'd be pretty useless even for that!

 

EDIT: The major beneficiaries will be the news reporters.

Apart from the fact that most news stories occur in cities, where these exemptions are virtually useless. I think you'll find most news agencies already have their own UOC's (or access to one).

 

CASA should permit farmers to blast drones from the sky if they are caught tresspassing. I have already found one parked in a tree on our farm. Drones just provide another arrow in the green activist quiver.

And finally WOW, I thought this sort of hysteria was limited to our American brethren! For the record, it is not trespassing to fly over someone's property, otherwise Qantas and Virgin are going to have to watch out for a massive class action!

 

 

[SDQDI]

HH I agree with your first two points but I tend to be a bit more sceptical as far as the trespassing side of things go.

 

I dont mind people flying around at 500feet agl or greater above my house and below that with permission BUT the idea of someone flying around lower than that with a drone specifically for filming me or my property without my permission I DO NOT like and would class that as trespassing (no idea what the actual law is for that but for me that is my moral idea on the matter).

 

I know a couple of my neighbours have drones with cameras to check their irrigation and I don't have a problem with that. I know that drones have been used to get footage of mines and I think (as much as I dislike mines!) that that is basically trespassing and I am not really comfortable with that, in the same sense if the people against plant cruelty were taking footage of me carving up the veggies at home I wouldn't be impressed.

 

I think we all should have a right to a certain amount of privacy and even if the law says it's ok I think we should ask ourselves "would I be comfortable if someone was doing that to me?"

 

As for shooting drones down, if it is in a rural setting and it's safe (ie the operator is a k or two away and not in line obviously!) why not

 

 

[Robbo]

I remember when I started a new Job checking out powerlines there was a big red circle on the map and I asked is that military?

 

Chief pilot goes, nope someone shot at us when we flew low over them while they were herding cattle.

 

 

[SDQDI]

Yeah shooting at actual planes IMO is a no no, obviously!

 

Having said that having a plane fly low over a mob of cows that I was moving would not put me in a friendly mood! But maybe a cranky phone call would be more suitable than wasting a good bullet:thumb up:

 

 

[Robbo]

I am still unsure (10 years later) if they actually shot at them or threatened to, I think the CFI may have dressed the story up :)

 

 

[Guest Howard Hughes]

I think we all should have a right to a certain amount of privacy and even if the law says it's ok I think we should ask ourselves "would I be comfortable if someone was doing that to me?"

I quite agree with your privacy concerns, but the majority of consumer drones that are on the market don't have much in the way of zoom and are pretty useless for spying on people. Have a look at the myriad of drone video/shots available on the internet, we don't have much to worry about at the moment.

 

 

[skeptic36]

Have to watch screen closely so no awareness of other aircraft that might be around.

Unless the aircraft is a glider, it's probably going to find it difficult to sneak up on someone standing in the paddock.

 

 

[Robbo]

Unless the aircraft is a glider, it's probably going to find it difficult to sneak up on someone standing in the paddock.

 

 

[SDQDI]

Unless the aircraft is a glider, it's probably going to find it difficult to sneak up on someone standing in the paddock.

I would mostly agree with this Skeptic, and hence the reason I am not overly worried about my neighbours and their drones. However when using FPV and flying a k or more away I still think it would be highly possible to miss a rotax idling along at 500feet. Especially if there is some wind or other noise or worse if it is being operated from an office (I have heard whispers of a farm that flys its drone from its office, which sort of worries me)

Overall I think as long as the operators are aware of the height restrictions and the reasons they are in place, I don't see it being too much of a problem.

 

 

[jetjr]

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/drone-regulations-relaxed-for-commercial-drone-pilots-20160331-gnvqrn.html

 

There are serious issues privacy here. Being legal to overfly neighbours at 30 m or less is not ok

 

Plenty going on on farm which isnt free for all to view.

 

 

[Robbo]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/leader/east/banyule-council-set-to-fight-for-better-regulation-of-airborne-drones/news-story/bec115413688601b571842d5e9e11c52

[Robbo]

Let's just hope no bushfires start when one of these drones crash and the lipo is punctured

 

 

 

[Jim McDowall]

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/drone-regulations-relaxed-for-commercial-drone-pilots-20160331-gnvqrn.htmlThere are serious issues privacy here. Being legal to overfly neighbours at 30 m or less is not ok

 

Plenty going on on farm which isnt free for all to view.

Over the past decade we have spent over $600k defending our right to farm. Following a bushfire in the area I found a drone stuck in a tree. (the idiot flying it was flying it backwards). How do I know this? I got a free GoPro wth a SD card. What was on the SD card was a disturbing breach of our privacy and an obvious attempt to discover something.

About the same time a senior police friend told me about the breach of integrity of their undercover operations when a drone was noticed hovering outside (from inside) the building in which the operations were managed.

 

Imagine your response if you looked out your bedroom window only to see a drone!

 

 

[Jaba-who]

So far I am amazed at the she'll be right attitude expressed by some here.

 

"as long as people follow the rules"

 

Sorry to remind you but we live in a world of f@$kwits who DON'T follow the rules. In fact many of them don't know the rules and when it comes to rules (all rules not just UAV rules) of those who do know them, a lot have shown themselves to be belligerently non-adherers to rules.

 

We have had lots of news examples (and despite the protestations from some quarters of "this can't be true" or "there's no proof") - verified examples of drones flying around airports, near fire fighting operations, over crowds at football and cricket matches and over other people's property.

 

You tube is full of videos from drones and of drones flying at high altitudes, out of line of sight, over crowds and with autonomous flight to GPS co-ordinates. Youtube has videos of drones with pistols and small machine guns fitted flying and firing at targets. This is real stuff that exists here and now. And when there are a couple of idiots putting these drones with guns on Youtube you can be sure there will be many more who are doing it and not posting their videos.

 

To state "videos don't have much zoom " etc etc so aren't a problem now is just a head in the sand statement. A year or so ago cameras were even poorer than then they are now, but now they are light years better and next year they will be even better.

 

I have at least three mates who own drones with the capability of totally autonomous flight anywhere they choose to send them. These are not expensive these days and were bought on line. . To suggest they are expensive and therefore not going to be a problem is just plain loony. The price is low enough that "enthusiasts" have them now and as prices go down, as they have been for several years, the usage will increase. They exist and people are doing this stuff with them now.

 

 

[jetjr]

CASA realise its too hard to regulate and control so decide to exclude them from being their problem.

 

Their operational zone and altitude could be simply limited with software, legislate they come with AU rules documentation. Perhaps even inbuilt tracking or gps logging.

 

Even of partially empty levels of control it would allow prosecution when used incorrectly. Even if some are unlocked or defeated, the bulk would abide limits.

 

 

[M61A1]

So far I am amazed at the she'll be right attitude expressed by some here."as long as people follow the rules"

 

Sorry to remind you but we live in a world of f@$kwits who DON'T follow the rules. In fact many of them don't know the rules and when it comes to rules (all rules not just UAV rules) of those who do know them, a lot have shown themselves to be belligerently non-adherers to rules.

 

.

That's how a free society is supposed to work.

It's the same reason you are allowed to fry recreationally. We have "rules", people who don't follow the rules get dealt with by the law. There are many who would rather that rec flying was outlawed. I'm sure I could get some great pics with my Drifter.

 

You above statement about f@$kwits could apply to rec flying , motorcycling, aeromodeling, motorists and generally every walk of life.

 

Make the rules well known, THEN deal with those who break them.

 

 

[Jim McDowall]

It's the same reason you are allowed to fry recreationally.

Yep, I had a barbecue last weekend!