Since I ordered the DJI Phantom 2 Vision Plus quad copter a couple of weeks ago (expected delivery late this week), I have done some investigation online.
For those interested there are a couple of forums with good information and anecdotes (not all of them good) for those new to the hobby:
http://www.phantompilots.com
http://www.djiguys.com
Some excellent advice I have learned...
- Practice learning to control the UAV initially by using a 'trainer', ie a $50-$80 quad copter toy that uses a typical "mode 2" remote control.
- Practice with the trainer a lot before moving up to the more expensive Phantom. Fly low and slow.
- Practice outdoors in a wide open area. Keep any and all observers behind you and away from the aircraft. A good idea to keep in mind is that it is a flying lawn mower.
- Create a thorough preflight checklist, including safety. Use it every time
- Read the forums shown above and learn the hard lessons that others have learned for you
- Have a second person with you to act as a spotter to keep an eye on the quad copter. It can be hard to see.
While the Phantom does have some commercial applications, it is essentially a hobby craft.
My research into high potential commercial applications has inspired me to put together a business plan with the goal to initiate a UAV services business later this year, but the Phantom will augment a 'professional grade' quad copter and mapping tools.
What are the air-space rules for UAV's in Canada? The States FCC has a blanket non-commercial use without special permit.
The FCC has "guidelines" on UAV use and are uninforceable (so said a judge).
pretty sure you dont want to test that theory, unless you like giving money to attorneys. The government has lots of money for attorneys.
Not quite the 'Wild West' for commercial UAV applications in Canada....thankfully. It is a more level playing field.
Their commercial use is regulated by Transport Canada (TC). The mandate of TC is to ensure safety of the public and the protection of other users of the airspace during UAV operations.
Details are available here.
After reading a number of the 'anecdotes' on the forums I linked to earlier in this thread, the regulation of commercial use from a safety and liability perspective is clearly required.
The number of these systems out there is growing rapidly as is irresponsible and just plain dumb use.
I am reminded of what happened with the Segway. As people began using the Segway, the stories showing people using them unsafely and then often arguing with authorities led to severe restrictions if not outright bans on their use except by operators such as authorized tour groups in a controlled setting.
Don't have to test. Read for yourself.
http://www.dailytech.com/Court+Rules+that+FAA+Cannot+Ban+Commercial+Drones+Dismisses+10000+Fine+for+Drone+User/article34468.htm
Pirker then appealed the fine, and the court found that the FAA doesn’t have any regulations that govern model aircraft flights or those that classify model aircraft as an "unmanned aircraft." In other words, the line between drone and toy hasn't been drawn.
The FAA successfully banned the commercial use of unmanned aircraft over the U.S. airspace (until it develops rules for their part in the national airspace, at least), but there are no clear-cut rules for commercial drone use. In fact, the FAA is considering dealing with the drones on a case-by-case basis. In this case, it wasn't clear if it was an unmanned drone or toy plane. - See more at:
http://www.dailytech.com/Court+Rules+that+FAA+Cannot+Ban+Commercial+Drones+Dismisses+10000+Fine+for+Drone+User/article34468.htm#sthash.79vw0XSI.dpuf
FAA Has appealed the judges decision and has released further regulations.
From Dave Morton FAA aviation inspector "“Unfortunately this particular activity has created in the blogosphere and in the media and in lots of other places this idea that the FAA is impotent to do anything about unauthorized operations, which is not true,” he said of the Pirker case. “We are taking enforcement action against those [incidents] that we think are egregious.”"
So fly commercially at your own risk.
UAV needs commercial regulation ASAP, making all commercial applications illegal is a detriment to US.
Court Papers
http://www.kramerlevin.com/files/upload/PirkerDecision.pdf
If you want to read more about the decision.
This is what I was wondering in my original post. Then things went sideways. :-/
With the draconian US policy, I was curious about foreign policy's concerning the use of UAV's. I have heard that many countries are far less stringent in the use for commercial activities.
I can understand the safety factor that the FAA is pushing. It's their attitude towards the commercial application that is puzzling to me!? Why do they think they have a mandate on commercial applications?
How are we to innovate without making money at something? Safety, sure, it is within their domain. Not irrational application of policy. It takes a pragmatic mindset to determine how to use the sky for industrial/recreational activities.
That's up to us to determine and regulate. IMHO.
regardless of all the hype, UAV use commercially in the US is against FAA regulations until they come out with their guidelines (supposedly in the fall) Anyone who decides to use them commercially should be aware of the possible legal and financial pitfalls.
One judge and one decision are not something I would bet my house against.
Rockets vs. UAV
I think these things are more dangerous than the UAV I have. Where is the outrage?
10 and over, flies over 1,000 ft and zero control!!!
http://www.atlantahobby.com/Store/pc/viewPrd.asp?idproduct=16000&idcategory=844
Rockets vs. UAV
We had these when I was young 30+ years ago.
Here is a link to an article in the June 2014 POB that addresses the possible impact of the Pirker case on UAV operations in the US.
Rock on Mr. Magic! Good luck in your new endeavor!
Thanks Tom. I appreciate that.
What I have observed in the last few years that I have been involved with UAS work is that the flying is the easy part. It is what you do before and after the flying that requires the 'right stuff'.
