DG and the insanity of CAA part 101

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

Krieses
Flaps set for Take off
Posts: 92
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2013 12:18 pm
Closest Airfield: ORTIA
Location: Johannesburg
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0

DG and the insanity of CAA part 101

Unread post by Krieses » Thu Aug 29, 2019 7:33 am

So, The guys over at part 101 are apparently forcing RPAS operators to have all of their pilots undergo DG training. So, dg training I guess is not a bad thing but is it really necessary for pilots to have DG training. It is a good thing to understand what the dangers of a LIPO battery is but to have all pilots in a company have DG training is unnecessary, especially when part 101 forbids the carry of dangerous goods on-board UAV's. This is specifically true for companies in the film industry that will never apply to transport DG onboard their aircraft.
Chuck
Frequent AvComer
Posts: 751
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:08 pm
Closest Airfield: FLKK
Location: Lusaka, Zambia
Has liked: 37 times
Been liked: 17 times

Re: DG and the insanity of CAA part 101

Unread post by Chuck » Thu Aug 29, 2019 8:21 am

Krieses wrote:
Thu Aug 29, 2019 7:33 am
So, The guys over at part 101 are apparently forcing RPAS operators to have all of their pilots undergo DG training. So, dg training I guess is not a bad thing but is it really necessary for pilots to have DG training. It is a good thing to understand what the dangers of a LIPO battery is but to have all pilots in a company have DG training is unnecessary, especially when part 101 forbids the carry of dangerous goods on-board UAV's. This is specifically true for companies in the film industry that will never apply to transport DG onboard their aircraft.
Sanity has nothing to with it, it's just another percieved ICAO box to be ticked. In this case your drone operators need a course so that they understand what they are NOT allowed to carry, which would make some sense if you were carrying cargo, but if you aren't it doesn't. Theres typically no sense in arguing this otherwise commonsense point with the authorities as not having all rules apply to everybody is complicated, tiresome and would mean more work for them. It's much easier to just tell you that everybody needs the $150 two year recurring course. It's not their money and time, why would they care!?
These users liked the author Chuck for the post:
Krieses
'What we find on internet, we readily believe, and what we ourselves find, we imagine others find also.'
Julius Ceasar, 44 BC

Your warning level: [1]

http://www.chickenwingscomics.com/comic ... cw0466.jpg
User avatar
Multirotordronepilot
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2017 8:12 am
Closest Airfield: Grootfontein
Location: Home
Has liked: 39 times
Been liked: 57 times

Re: DG and the insanity of CAA part 101

Unread post by Multirotordronepilot » Thu Aug 29, 2019 8:59 am

Chuck wrote:
Thu Aug 29, 2019 8:21 am
Krieses wrote:
Thu Aug 29, 2019 7:33 am
So, The guys over at part 101 are apparently forcing RPAS operators to have all of their pilots undergo DG training. So, dg training I guess is not a bad thing but is it really necessary for pilots to have DG training. It is a good thing to understand what the dangers of a LIPO battery is but to have all pilots in a company have DG training is unnecessary, especially when part 101 forbids the carry of dangerous goods on-board UAV's. This is specifically true for companies in the film industry that will never apply to transport DG onboard their aircraft.
Sanity has nothing to with it, it's just another percieved ICAO box to be ticked. In this case your drone operators need a course so that they understand what they are NOT allowed to carry, which would make some sense if you were carrying cargo, but if you aren't it doesn't. Theres typically no sense in arguing this otherwise commonsense point with the authorities as not having all rules apply to everybody is complicated, tiresome and would mean more work for them. It's much easier to just tell you that everybody needs the $150 two year recurring course. It's not their money and time, why would they care!?

Could not have put it better, very well said Chuck.

In essence if your going to make such a fuss about a simple relatively cheap 1 day course then perhaps consider another means of using your time to make money. Its a non event in the scope of other challenges you may face.
Trevor
Defense Contractor/Test Pilot
Commercial pilot,Instructor
Responsible Person Aircraft
TopRC HawkerHunter
JetLegend ViperJet
BVM F80 ShootingStar
1/3 J3 Cub
ZS-VVR
J3 Clipped Wing Cub Replica ZU-XXX
If flying slow isn't fun, you're doing it wrong

Return to “Drones, UAVs”