Drones Gauteng Highcourt

Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), commonly known as a drone and also referred to as an unpiloted aerial vehicle and a remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), is an aircraft without a human pilot aboard.

Moderator: Moderators

Superfueler
Frequent AvComer
Posts: 695
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:49 pm
Closest Airfield: KMIA or on the Farm
Location: White River
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Drones Gauteng Highcourt

Unread post by Superfueler » Thu Mar 06, 2014 6:42 am

Viking wrote: Some exiting times ahead:)
Indeed!!! :D
farmpilot
Incipient Spin
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 6:43 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 2 times

Re: Drones Gauteng Highcourt

Unread post by farmpilot » Thu Mar 06, 2014 7:20 am

You have no idea what you are talking about.
I operate UAVs commercially in Europe.

Apart from France, where the UAV pilot has to have an ultralight license, it is not that difficult to fly them AND insure them.
My big rig with LIDAR eqpt costs well over 1Mil ZAR, and the insurance company have no problems insuring it.
I know SA has rules and legislation in place regarding UAVs.
Google is your friend as well as a phone call to CAA.

Don't waffle on about things if you don't know the facts...[/quote]

Really? So you can fly a drone for commercial work in Europe and the US without a licence or permission? <<Moderated - personal attack>>You CANNOT do it. You CANNOT legally fly any type of UAS in the US. You also clearly do not know anything about the film industry and the commercial use of Drones/UAS's. If you did you would know Universal and several other studios have banned their use in any an all production. Insurance have been bitten so many times they are referring claims. Each crash of a film drone is in the region of US$50K, six drones crashed on Fury Road.

I have spoken to the SACAA and they confirm my points, not sure which CAA you refer to.
You are right though, google is your friend and strangely it confirms my points.
http://www.unmannedtech.co.uk/regulations.html
http://www.missouridronejournalism.com/ ... the-globe/
http://www.uavs.org/aerial[/quote]


First of all, I never mentioned the US.
<<Moderated - personal attack>>
Secondly, I never mentioned that no permission is required, refer to am advice...[/quote]

Then don't accuse me of not knowing what I'm talking about and don't try and pull the wool over peoples eyes - it's very clear it is illegal to use them commercial and that what I was referring to.
User avatar
Roger
Seven Thousand
Seven Thousand
Posts: 7872
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 3:46 pm
Closest Airfield: FAPE
Location: Port Elizabeth
Has liked: 110 times
Been liked: 247 times

Re: Drones Gauteng Highcourt

Unread post by Roger » Thu Mar 06, 2014 8:11 am

Guys - personal attacks are not acceptable. Continue and warnings will be issued.
Don’t take things for granted… Tomorrow is not promised.
farmpilot
Incipient Spin
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 6:43 pm
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 2 times

Re: Drones Gauteng Highcourt

Unread post by farmpilot » Thu Mar 06, 2014 8:40 am

Skybound wrote:Guys - personal attacks are not acceptable. Continue and warnings will be issued.
Sorry I apologize, I don't normally bite but failed this time, again sorry
Wallfly
Engine Cranking
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2013 9:54 pm
Closest Airfield: Lanseria
Location: Sandton
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 4 times

Re: Drones Gauteng Highcourt

Unread post by Wallfly » Thu Mar 06, 2014 8:43 am

Albeit from the FAA, but it says a lot about the current situation regarding UAS everywhere, the local SACAA is in a similar situation.


Says Many Misconceptions Surround The Agency's Current Regulations

The FAA says there are a lot of misconceptions and misinformation about unmanned aircraft system (UAS) regulations, and has released a fact sheet that outlines its rules that currently govern the use of the aircraft. Have your pencils ready? Here we go.

Myth #1: The FAA doesn't control airspace below 400 feet

Fact—The FAA is responsible for the safety of U.S. airspace from the ground up. This misperception may originate with the idea that manned aircraft generally must stay at least 500 feet above the ground

Myth #2: Commercial UAS flights are OK if I'm over private property and stay below 400 feet.

Fact—The FAA published a Federal Register notice (PDF) in 2007 that clarified the agency’s policy: You may not fly a UAS for commercial purposes by claiming that you’re operating according to the Model Aircraft guidelines (below 400 feet, 3 miles from an airport, away from populated areas.) Commercial operations are only authorized on a case-by-case basis. A commercial flight requires a certified aircraft, a licensed pilot and operating approval. To date, only one operation has met these criteria, using Insitu's ScanEagle, and authorization was limited to the Arctic.

Myth #3: Commercial UAS operations are a “gray area” in FAA regulations.

Fact—There are no shades of gray in FAA regulations. Anyone who wants to fly an aircraft—manned or unmanned—in U.S. airspace needs some level of FAA approval. Private sector (civil) users can obtain an experimental airworthiness certificate to conduct research and development, training and flight demonstrations. Commercial UAS operations are limited and require the operator to have certified aircraft and pilots, as well as operating approval. To date, only two UAS models (the Scan Eagle and Aerovironment’s Puma) have been certified, and they can only fly in the Arctic. Public entities (federal, state and local governments, and public universities) may apply for a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA). The FAA reviews and approves UAS operations over densely-populated areas on a case-by-case basis.

Flying model aircraft solely for hobby or recreational reasons doesn’t require FAA approval, but hobbyists must operate according to the agency's model aircraft guidance, which prohibits operations in populated areas.

Myth #4: There are too many commercial UAS operations for the FAA to stop.

Fact—The FAA has to prioritize its safety responsibilities, but the agency is monitoring UAS operations closely. Many times, the FAA learns about suspected commercial UAS operations via a complaint from the public or other businesses. The agency occasionally discovers such operations through the news media or postings on internet sites. When the FAA discovers apparent unauthorized UAS operations, the agency has a number of enforcement tools available to address these operations, including a verbal warning, a warning letter, and an order to stop the operation.

Myth #5: Commercial UAS operations will be OK after September 30, 2015.

Fact—In the 2012 FAA reauthorization legislation, Congress told the FAA to come up with a plan for “safe integration” of UAS by September 30, 2015. Safe integration will be incremental. The agency is still developing regulations, policies and standards that will cover a wide variety of UAS users, and expects to publish a proposed rule for small UAS – under about 55 pounds – later this year. That proposed rule will likely include provisions for commercial operations.

Myth #6: The FAA is lagging behind other countries in approving commercial drones.

Fact – This comparison is flawed. The United States has the busiest, most complex airspace in the world, including many general aviation aircraft that we must consider when planning UAS integration, because those same airplanes and small UAS may occupy the same airspace.

Developing all the rules and standards we need is a very complex task, and we want to make sure we get it right the first time. We want to strike the right balance of requirements for UAS to help foster growth in an emerging industry with a wide range of potential uses, but also keep all airspace users and people on the ground safe.

Myth #7: The FAA predicts as many as 30,000 drones by 2030.

Fact—That figure is outdated. It was an estimate in the FAA’s 2011 Aerospace Forecast. Since then, the agency has refined its prediction to focus on the area of greatest expected growth. The FAA currently estimates as many as 7,500 small commercial UAS may be in use by 2018, assuming the necessary regulations are in place. The number may be updated when the agency publishes the proposed rule on small UAS later this year.
User avatar
Roger
Seven Thousand
Seven Thousand
Posts: 7872
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 3:46 pm
Closest Airfield: FAPE
Location: Port Elizabeth
Has liked: 110 times
Been liked: 247 times

Re: Drones Gauteng Highcourt

Unread post by Roger » Thu Mar 06, 2014 8:58 am

Where FAA are as at end of last year and the roadmap ahead: http://www.avcom.co.za/aerocont/?p=261
Don’t take things for granted… Tomorrow is not promised.
User avatar
Christo
8000 Tousand
8000 Tousand
Posts: 8018
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 11:01 am
Location: Pretoria
Has liked: 37 times
Been liked: 61 times

Re: Drones Gauteng Highcourt

Unread post by Christo » Fri Mar 07, 2014 9:15 pm

Tested in court now and declared legal.

http://www.popsci.com/article/technolog ... ial-drones
Due to the price increase in ammunition, do not expect a warning shot.

Sig Sauer, kinda like Glock except for men. :wink:
User avatar
heisan
Six Tousand
Six Tousand
Posts: 6055
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:45 pm
Closest Airfield: Rhino Park
Location: Pretoria
Has liked: 40 times
Been liked: 344 times

Re: Drones Gauteng Highcourt

Unread post by heisan » Fri Mar 07, 2014 10:17 pm

Christo wrote:Tested in court now and declared legal.

http://www.popsci.com/article/technolog ... ial-drones
Yup - people complain about the CAA, but the FAA seems to take it to the next level. Model aircraft are not covered in the FARs - just by an AIC - and that AIC doesn't define what a model aircraft is. So now, they write another AIC banning UASs - where the definition is too broad, and covers model aircraft too.

There is an actual FAR in the pipeline to actually clear this all up, but it seems the process of publishing American federal regulations is quite involved.

South Africa's CAA is actually quite pro-active in this sense, in that everything is covered under the CARs, which are regularly updated as new developments occur. As can be seen by the latest updates, which define the differences between model aircraft and UAVs, and lump UAVs in under NTCA aircraft.
Justin Schoeman

ZU-FSR (Raven)
User avatar
chrisnic
Incipient Spin
Posts: 359
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 7:36 pm
Closest Airfield: Kitty Hawk
Location: Kitty Hawk
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 9 times

Re: Drones Gauteng Highcourt

Unread post by chrisnic » Sat Mar 08, 2014 3:45 am

Judge: FAA does not have authority to ban commercial UAVs
On Thursday, an administrative law judge ruled that the Federal Aviation Administration does not hold clear-cut authority to ban commercial unmanned aerial vehicles in U.S. airspace. The judge overturned a $10,000 fine the FAA had levied against a UAV pilot in 2012. Ben Gielow, general counsel of the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, said the issue "is finally starting to get the attention it deserves at the highest levels of the FAA." The Wall Street Journal (tiered subscription model) (3/7)
Pilots are just plane people with a special air about them.
User avatar
Brend@n
Flying to unmanned aerodrome
Posts: 382
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 4:12 pm
Closest Airfield: FAOR FARA
Location: Benoni North
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Drones Gauteng Highcourt

Unread post by Brend@n » Wed Mar 26, 2014 3:33 pm

Jacaranda also using drones to monitor traffic http://www.jacarandafm.com/post/live-dr ... ffic-feed/
Brendan
User avatar
Rudix
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1133
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 11:12 am
Closest Airfield: Rhino Park
Location: Pretoria - Rhino Park
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Drones Gauteng Highcourt

Unread post by Rudix » Wed Mar 26, 2014 5:28 pm

Remember the case of the guy flying over the hospital Mandela was treated in? Well, eventually all they could pin on the pilot was that he used a video downlink transmitter that he was not licensed to use! They tried to make other charges stick but no-go!

I have had no problems with insurance and my legal advisor is quite confident that I am, at the moment till the correct laws are in place, is doing nothing illegal using drones/UAV's for photography. When the laws are there I will comply.

The case in the USA where the FAA lost has set a president world-wide.
User avatar
Hexapilot
Steep Turn Right
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2014 11:51 am
Closest Airfield: Waterkloof
Location: Pretoria
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 9 times

Re: Drones Gauteng Highcourt

Unread post by Hexapilot » Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:22 pm

Where can I get a copy of the rules that apply when I plan to fly my UAV commercially?
I understand that RC rules apply when I fly for fun, but to charge money for it is obviously a different story.
I have a possible venture, and I need some info from guys in the know.
Going fast
Going up
Say my name...

DISCLAIMER:
DO NOT TAKE ME SERIOUSLY!!!
User avatar
heisan
Six Tousand
Six Tousand
Posts: 6055
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:45 pm
Closest Airfield: Rhino Park
Location: Pretoria
Has liked: 40 times
Been liked: 344 times

Re: Drones Gauteng Highcourt

Unread post by heisan » Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:52 pm

Hexapilot wrote:Where can I get a copy of the rules that apply when I plan to fly my UAV commercially?
I understand that RC rules apply when I fly for fun, but to charge money for it is obviously a different story.
I have a possible venture, and I need some info from guys in the know.
Go to www.caa.co.za and click on Legislation.

Now read Domestic Air Services 1991, and Civil Aviation Regulations 2012 (mainly Parts 24, 91 and 96). There are no separate rules for UAVs they are simply included under NTCA in the regulations.
Justin Schoeman

ZU-FSR (Raven)
Wayne01
Frequent AvComer
Posts: 631
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 8:02 am
Closest Airfield: virginia
Location: durban
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 4 times

Re: Drones Gauteng Highcourt

Unread post by Wayne01 » Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:11 am

Heisan, its easy. don't fly over 150m agl, get permission from landowner, don't fly in civilian airspace or restricted airspace, don't use public roads as a runway, if you fly over people remember, if you do injure someone there are other laws by which you WILL be prosecuted, if you fly beyond line of sight make sure you have permission from all property owners over whose property you will be flying. The suggestion or attempt to included uavs into existing legal framework that was written before uavs were even around will not stand in court,
User avatar
heisan
Six Tousand
Six Tousand
Posts: 6055
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:45 pm
Closest Airfield: Rhino Park
Location: Pretoria
Has liked: 40 times
Been liked: 344 times

Re: Drones Gauteng Highcourt

Unread post by heisan » Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:54 am

bumjive01 wrote:Heisan, its easy. don't fly over 150m agl, get permission from landowner, don't fly in civilian airspace or restricted airspace, don't use public roads as a runway, if you fly over people remember, if you do injure someone there are other laws by which you WILL be prosecuted, if you fly beyond line of sight make sure you have permission from all property owners over whose property you will be flying. The suggestion or attempt to included uavs into existing legal framework that was written before uavs were even around will not stand in court,
Those are the regs for model aircraft. Once you use it for commercial, scientific or research purposes, it becomes a UAV and falls under NTCA regs (including maintenance, type approval, etc) instead of model aircraft regs. Read the regs I pointed you to, especially the start of Part 24.
Justin Schoeman

ZU-FSR (Raven)

Return to “Drones, UAVs”