Recreational drone now illegal in most of Canada...

[andy_k]

I have to disagree with you on the airline pilots bit - these are professional air crews that are used to seeing things in their field of vision at whatever altitude and reacting accordingly - if we decide to rubbish their opinion and abilities who do we believe? These are trained professionals with no hidden agenda - if they see something, they report it, without bias - show me one forum/facebook group populated by drone operators that can say the same. I know several people who have flown drones to the heights mentioned in some of these reports - they aren't 'commercial/consumer' kit, they are custom built stuff that can perform way outside the operating window of DJI phantoms - they have used them, legally to track/film model rocket launches and weather observations - if they can build gear capable of this, then so can other people - just because you haven't seen this type of kit doesn't mean it doesn't exist

 

[jwmcgrath]

the simple option is for drone flyers to join the AMA/MAAC - and get them to lobby on your behalf as they have to listen to their members. As a bonus you get public liability insurance for wherever you fly as long as you abide by their rules/guidelines (please note it is NOT just for club field flying) so you represent yourselves as responsible pilots willing to accept rules decided by a large organisation. This kind of representation is what gets people listening not the odd letter here and there from Facebook groups and forums. Opposition needs to be organised and looking at it from the outside, the AMA/MAAC seem to be your best choice.

With all due respect, I think that a better, more suitable option is registration, licensing and "fair" regulation.

I don't want to join a club. I don't need to be part of a movement. I'm not a lobbyist by nature. I just want a clear set of realistic, comprehensible rules as determined by an elected government of my peers... not à one-sided, arbitrary and singular decision by a sole minister

And I truly believe licensing and registration will "help" convey the importance of safety, understanding and adherence to rules.

Those that will be idiots will fly recklessly, drink and drive, speed, and be idiots.

 

[andy_k]

By this argument, would you not consider that if his approach to this were comparable, would he not be making driving virtually impossible or entirely impractical for the vast majority people, by virtue of the argument that this is the best way to avoid an accident?

but it's not virtually impossible is it? It's just virtually impossible in certain areas (I would guess 90% of Canada there is no problem) - much like snow boarding is virtually impossible in Malibu in July

 

[jwmcgrath]

I have to disagree with you on the airline pilots bit - these are professional air crews that are used to seeing things in their field of vision at whatever altitude and reacting accordingly - if we decide to rubbish their opinion and abilities who do we believe? These are trained professionals with no hidden agenda - if they see something, they report it, without bias - show me one forum/facebook group populated by drone operators that can say the same. I know several people who have flown drones to the heights mentioned in some of these reports - they aren't 'commercial/consumer' kit, they are custom built stuff that can perform way outside the operating window of DJI phantoms - they have used them, legally to track/film model rocket launches and weather observations - if they can build gear capable of this, then so can other people - just because you haven't seen this type of kit doesn't mean it doesn't exist

But there comes that statistic thing again... HOW MANY of these "custom kits" are up there, at that level, posing the danger? And how is this legislation going to change that?

I'm not saying that the pilots are wrong, I'm simply suggesting that MAYBE it's possible that as human beings, viewing something light coloured at several hundred or thousand feet away, at hundreds of miles per hour, may not be exactly what they think it is, and "drone" is an easy answer.

Trust me... if I think it's hard to fly now, I don't even want to see what it would be like IF a drone ever brings down a plane, nor am I shallow enough to discount the human element.

I just think they way this was done is WRONG. Even if it means what is MOST wrong is the singularity of the decision.

Had his been read into law, properly, my opinion may be different. I'm used to having a voice as a voting citizen. Maybe that's my mistake.

 

[jwmcgrath]

but it's not virtually impossible is it? It's just virtually impossible in certain areas (I would guess 90% of Canada there is no problem) - much like snow boarding is virtually impossible in Malibu in July

Actually it very much IS virtually impossible.

No being able to fly within 75m of an "animal, etc" is impossible, to my knowledge.

There are etc's everywhere! [emoji6]

Additionally, and in all seriousness, we are required to stay 75m from people. The fact is, ANYWHERE I can go with my drone, someone else can follow. I can be in violation at any time, whether I am when I take off or not.

 

[jwmcgrath]

but it's not virtually impossible is it? It's just virtually impossible in certain areas (I would guess 90% of Canada there is no problem) - much like snow boarding is virtually impossible in Malibu in July

My Dad has a 17 acre farm. It's only 400' wide, his acreage is all depth. He has neighbours on both sides. I've done virtually all of my flying there.

But his neighbours are expected to be allowed to be on the property line at any time and are now entitled to a birth of 246' from either side.

I am no long permitted to fly directly down the center line of his 400' wide property without being in violation of these new regulations.

Oh, and he often has deer and wild turkeys roaming. Strike two.

 

[andy_k]

Actually it very much IS virtually impossible.

No being able to fly within 75m of an "animal, etc" is impossible, to my knowledge.

There are etc's everywhere! [emoji6]

Additionally, and in all seriousness, we are required to stay 75m from people. The fact is, ANYWHERE I can go with my drone, someone else can follow. I can be in violation at any time, whether I am when I take off or not.

Flying at 76m above ground level makes you 75m clear of 99% of animals - presumably, just looking around you at take-off would give you enough information to work out if you were clear or not!

Maybe you can't fly in your own back yard any longer - so drive somewhere else! How do you think people like rock climbers maintain their hobby? Do they insist that if they can't climb up rocks in the middle of a city their hobby is doomed or do they a, just drive out of town to the nearest rocks and climb there or join a club and climb at their indoor facilities? It's not about not being allowed to fly, there are plenty of places where you can still fly - it may just require a little bit more effort - it's tough but where were you all when this was being discussed? Where were your representatives lobbying on your behalf?

 

[jwmcgrath]

Flying at 76m above ground level makes you 75m clear of 99% of animals - presumably, just looking around you at take-off would give you enough information to work out if you were clear or not!

Maybe you can't fly in your own back yard any longer - so drive somewhere else! How do you think people like rock climbers maintain their hobby? Do they insist that if they can't climb up rocks in the middle of a city their hobby is doomed or do they a, just drive out of town to the nearest rocks and climb there or join a club and climb at their indoor facilities? It's not about not being allowed to fly, there are plenty of places where you can still fly - it may just require a little bit more effort - it's tough but where were you all when this was being discussed? Where were your representatives lobbying on your behalf?

Yes... 76m above the ground and below 90m total. We have a 14m window to fly in.

And that's only if someone or something doesn't come along when you have to land.

Discussed?? There was NO discussion. I'm not sure if you know how all this came about...

It was a sudden, unilateral decision made by ONE man, exercising his authority as Transport Minister because "he can't sleep at night" worrying about a drone strike with an aircraft. His words.

He claims he has the authority to enact an interim measure prior to further restrictions or laws.

There was no opportunity for lobbying. There were no open forums, community meetings, invitations for feedback, warnings or press releases.

A sudden, unilateral decision.

Respectfully, if people choose to follow the letter of the restrictions "as published", without trusting in the "grey area" of whatever the "intent" was, there is effectively nowhere to fly that can't be considered in violation.

 

[andy_k]

How many laws do people follow to the letter? How many laws are enforced to the letter? My guess is none and none so why the fuss?

How many people never break the speed limit in their cars when nobody is looking? How many people use their phones to text whilst driving when nobody is looking? How many people living in the arse end of nowhere will use their car to drive home after they've had a few drinks knowing the nearest police car is probably 50 miles away?

Do you get the drift?

It's only against the law when there is someone there to enforce that law.

If you don't fly over people and buildings - there's nobody to report you (I have yet to hear of an animal picking up the phone and dialing the police to report an incident)

If you fly over open land (and jeez there is enough of that in Canada) nobody is going to give a **** whether you are 90m or 100m above the ground are they?

If you don't post illegal flight videos on YouTube and Facebook how are people going to know it's you?

Just because you can't fly in your own back yard any longer doesn't mean you can't fly, it means if you want to fly you have to go look for somewhere else where you can

 

[LongDono]

Flying at 76m above ground level makes you 75m clear of 99% of animals - presumably, just looking around you at take-off would give you enough information to work out if you were clear or not!

Maybe you can't fly in your own back yard any longer - so drive somewhere else! How do you think people like rock climbers maintain their hobby? Do they insist that if they can't climb up rocks in the middle of a city their hobby is doomed or do they a, just drive out of town to the nearest rocks and climb there or join a club and climb at their indoor facilities? It's not about not being allowed to fly, there are plenty of places where you can still fly - it may just require a little bit more effort - it's tough but where were you all when this was being discussed? Where were your representatives lobbying on your behalf?

You are acting like a lot of crazy dangerous things have happened and that the vast majority of us have not been flying safe and cautious. Will all due respect, that does not apply to 99% of us. I do not want to lose a $1500 investment, not hurt someone or their property, so I've always flown safe. What we know is safe and the governments' overkill definition are not the same and that is what this thread is about.

You act as if we just need to suck it up, find the middle of the forest somewhere, a forest where there are apparently no people or animals around.

With regards to this, you have misinterpreted the law: The 75 m distance is from every man, woman, child, vehicle, building, sentient creature is LATERALLY. If you are 76 m in the air, it's the same as if your UAV was directly on the ground underneath it. Given this, we get the subject for this thread, because recreational flying is effectively illegal everywhere in Canada, or at least 99% of where you would want to fly, when you take this into consideration.

For a law that has its basis in the potential catastrophe of a UAV hitting a plane (there has never been a single documented collision, but lots of convinced pilots, until they are told the drone was obviously bleeding), there is a lot of obsession over what goes on low to the ground. There are already laws in place to charge for harm to people and property in the unlikelihood they occur.

To compare this to speeding and other forms of law breaking: Yes, that is what people will have no choice but to do, in order to fly their UAV. But it shouldn't be illegal because it isn't dangerous, that is why everyone is upset. We shouldn't have to break the law to enjoy our hobby, but now we are criminals, if you see us, call 911 like the government says.


Respectly,
...Donovan

 

[Juno]

Not sure if this was already posted in this thread (probably was -- either way it's worth sharing again), but this petition has accumulated quite a few signatures, and everyone here should take a moment to add theirs if they haven't already.

Marc Garneau: Immediate HALT of Transport Canada New Safety Rules for Recreational Drone use in Canada

 

[jwmcgrath]

How many laws do people follow to the letter? How many laws are enforced to the letter? My guess is none and none so why the fuss?

How many people never break the speed limit in their cars when nobody is looking? How many people use their phones to text whilst driving when nobody is looking? How many people living in the arse end of nowhere will use their car to drive home after they've had a few drinks knowing the nearest police car is probably 50 miles away?

Do you get the drift?

It's only against the law when there is someone there to enforce that law.

If you don't fly over people and buildings - there's nobody to report you (I have yet to hear of an animal picking up the phone and dialing the police to report an incident)

If you fly over open land (and jeez there is enough of that in Canada) nobody is going to give a **** whether you are 90m or 100m above the ground are they?

If you don't post illegal flight videos on YouTube and Facebook how are people going to know it's you?

Just because you can't fly in your own back yard any longer doesn't mean you can't fly, it means if you want to fly you have to go look for somewhere else where you can

Why the fuss?

Because I shouldn't be EXPECTED to break the law to enjoy a hobby.

I shouldn't have to be concerned that the one guy that is a drone hater may happen along when I'm enjoying a harmless hobby.

I shouldn't have to be looking over my shoulder when teaching my kids the basics of flight analytics or flight.

I shouldn't have to be prepared to talk my way out of a $3000 fine for flying over Bambi.

I don't need the stress of knowing that what I'm doing MIGHT be enforceably wrong, even if I take the chance of exceeding the speed limit or *gasp* driving without my seatbelt.

I accept the consequence of whatever I do that may be outside the letter of the law, but I don't actively pursue it as a hobby.

And finally, but not least of all, people are actively being encouraged to call 911 to report infractions, and you just know some do-gooder wannabe is going to do exactly that.

If we accept this, how much worse is it going to get? For everyone?

I'm most upset about the process, as earlier mentioned. There is a process for this type of restriction. It wasn't followed. If it had, THEN there may have been some lobbying, or opportunity for feedback, or at least warning. Anything.

That's the drift I get.

 

[jwmcgrath]

Ford is investing millions in a new R&D complex right here in Ottawa, to develop self driving cars.

The action he has taken with regard to drones is somewhat the equivalent of unilaterally deciding one day that he is losing sleep over imagining an accident of such gross proportion due to a self driving car malfunction that he effectively eliminates roads as a means of product testing.

He's not saying you can't develop them, just that they can't be used anywhere you can find people, buildings, animals, or those darn etc's.

 

[daytona125]

I wonder if he's losing sleep over all those pesky Canadian geese flying anywhere they want and at anytime they want. A Canada goose is WAY more likely than my phantom to take down a plane. This is just stupid. Go after the bad people when they do something bad, don't go after everyone. Did I say this is stupid?

 

[Hotwire]

Your minister for moving-things is an ignoramus, as there have been plenty of RC aircraft up in the plus 400ft air space for decades. Most RC glider completions and recreational flying, have been using the same airspace for a long time, with not major problems. Birds constitute a larger threat to manned aircraft than do drones. Birds fly higher and in many cases are heavier. Multi-rotor drones are almost stationary and more likely to be hit than do the hitting.
This poly of yours is a fncking ****-traitor.

 

[J5255]

I have been reviewing circumstances relating to a few incidents where a Canadian was charged for flying a drone in an unsafe manner. The circumstances were at best if-ish. Is there anywhere on the net where we could review the court case and see the results. I have searched and all i seem to get is news articles on the "new drone laws". Also, when charged, who prosecutes? Magistrate or Transport?

 

[Laurend818]

I suspect it would be Transport unless the person charged made a legal challenge.. it is unfortunate but someone may need to do a challenge to get clarification. Unfortunately I think you would have little success as this "law" was put in place pending upcoming legislation. I think any judge that reviewed that challenge would defer the case until said legislation is in place.

The biggest thing we need to do is organize so that we have a seat at the table as MAAC has done. IMO MAAC were the only people that were consulted on this Order as there are directly referenced in it. I have been to a few MAAC fields where I have friends and I was very much made to feel the black sheep because I fly drones.

Organize people...that is the best we can do in the short time we have between now and the pending legislation in June.

Lol,, knowing our government, they didn't say which June.

 

[daytona125]

This is a recent video taken from Transport Canada's Facebook page. Are they not breaking many of the rules the just came out with? Are "they" exempt from their own rules? I know the video was taken before the new rules came out but should they not be leading by example?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Here is their main Facebook photo obviously taken by a drone over a road, likely around animals, float planes. Transport and Infrastructure in Canada

 

[quid246]

If someone really wants to dig deep on this... file a few Access to Information and Privacy requests here: Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) Online Request

If you can locate the infobanks, might be interesting to request copies of all e-mail correspondence and electronic notes and briefings to/form the Transportation Minister on this matter. It's all public record, let it shine!

 

[Northern Observer]

This is a recent video taken from Transport Canada's Facebook page. Are they not breaking many of the rules the just came out with? Are "they" exempt from their own rules? I know the video was taken before the new rules came out but should they not be leading by example?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Here is their main Facebook photo obviously taken by a drone over a road, likely around animals, float planes. Transport and Infrastructure in Canada

This video was collected likely by commercial drone operator -the flight is legal under the rules.