May I fly my drone over Town

[Pegasus-Systems]

Hi all. We live in a valley. Blessed with a mountain on the one side and a river on the other side of the valley. I love capturing these beautiful images. May I take off from my house climb straight up to 100m and head off across town to these beautiful landmarks. My immediate neighbours do not mind it at all and have given me permission. This would be my take off and landing area.

The CAA indicate Im required to be 50m away from people.
Reading through the law it does not state vertical seperation? Does my height of 100m count as 50m away from people? Only when I am over the land marks that do not pose a risk to the public do I decend. The CAA rules seam a bit vague.
Thanks all.

[Shepherd]

I get that you might see them as vague, but they really are not.

There is a specific way to read them, and its a bit like learning a new language. Hard at first bit gets easier the more you do it.

But in short answering your question about flying 50m away from people... Your vertical separating does not count as you are not allowed to fly over people at all unless specifically approved in your operating manual forming part of your ROC.

Not 100% sure about legalities for flying a drone in your specific area, but this link will help only slightly if you know how to read it.

Perhaps someone in CT familiar to the area could give you a specific answer about that one...

Link: https://skyvector.com/
or https://drones.org.za/dronemap2/map.html - Original Post for this link here: viewtopic.php?f=286&t=223823

[Romeo E.T.]

Does my height of 100m count as 50m away from people?

And what if your 10kg drone crash down vertically from "your" 100m height onto a house/car/people directly below, where is your 50m clear statement now ?

Also are you not supposed to stay below 40 ft as per the CAA guidlines for using a drone as a "toy" ?

[V5 - LEO]

...and only fly "line of sight", so no FPV, sorry

[grounded]

Hi all. We live in a valley. Blessed with a mountain on the one side and a river on the other side of the valley. I love capturing these beautiful images. May I take off from my house climb straight up to 100m and head off across town to these beautiful landmarks. My immediate neighbours do not mind it at all and have given me permission. This would be my take off and landing area.

The CAA indicate Im required to be 50m away from people.
Reading through the law it does not state vertical seperation? Does my height of 100m count as 50m away from people? Only when I am over the land marks that do not pose a risk to the public do I decend. The CAA rules seam a bit vague.
Thanks all.

http://www.caa.co.za/Pages/RPAS/Remotel ... stems.aspx

Acceptable uses of RPAS

For private use –

(a) The RPAS may only be used for an individual's personal and private purposes where there is no commercial outcome, interest or gain;

(b) The pilot must observe all statutory requirements relating to liability, privacy and any other laws enforceable by any other authorities.

For all other use –

(a) an RPA must be registered and may only be operated in terms of Part 101 of the South African Civil Aviation Regulations.


Dangers of negligent operation of an RPA:

Collision with other aircraft, with possible fatal results

(a) Collision with other aircraft, with possible fatal results

(b) Injury to the public

(c) Damage to people's property

(d) Legal liability for breaking laws such as privacy by-laws and other laws enforceable by other authorities.


Do's and Don'ts

DON'TS

DO NOT, through act or omission, endanger the safety of another aircraft or person therein or any person or property through negligent flying/operation of Remotely Piloted Aircraft, or toy aircraft.

Do not fly/operate Remotely Piloted Aircraft, or toy aircraft 50 m or closer from:

Any person or group of persons (like sports field, road races, schools, social events, etc.)
Any property without permission from the property owner.


Unless approved by the SACAA, DO NOT fly/operate Remotely Piloted Aircraft or toy aircraft:

Near manned aircraft
10 km or closer to an aerodrome (airport, helipad, airfield)
Weighing more than 7 kg
In controlled airspace
In restricted airspace
In prohibited airspace.

Do not fly/operate Remotely Piloted Aircraft, or toy aircraft higher than 150 ft from the ground, unless approved by the Director of Civil Aviation of the SACAA.



DO'S

Fly/operate Remotely Piloted Aircraft, or toy aircraft in a safe manner, at all times.
Remotely Piloted Aircraft or toy aircraft should remain within the visual line of sight at all times.
Fly/operate RPA in daylight and clear weather conditions.
Inspect your aircraft before each flight.

NOTE: The Director of Civil Aviation has designated an external organisation to oversee the operations of recreational aviation.

For more information on the operation of model aircraft, please contact the South African Model Aircraft Association (SAAMA), www.samaa.org.za.

[Ricoby]

[some content in response to removed posts removed]

In my opinion, a drone is an unmanned aircraft that is used to deploy or deliver a payload, or used for specialised purposes, such as geographic survey's etc.
I have a DJI Spark. In my opinion, that is a quadcopter, not a drone. It is used for my amusement and for my amateur photography. I had a DJI Phantom 3 Pro before that but sold it went for the spark as the spark is more convenient to carry around. Both are classed as a "consumer product". So it is also a Quadcopter, not a drone.
Just canvas the people in your small town and ask them if they don't mind you flying your quadcopter over the town at a reasonable height not to cause a nuisance. If you living in a valley, I doubt there are many low flying aircraft in the area.
I reckon a person flying a small fixed wing foamy in a public park or sport ground is more dangerous than a consumer type quadcopter that has gps positioning, remote viewing and collision avoidance systems.

[Pegasus-Systems]

Thanks for that. I have held a commercial multi engine IF fixed wing license since 2006.Including Turbo prop. I enjoy my mavic zoom and the neighbours kids loves to fly with me. I have seen many a fixed wing airplane bomb our town way lower than 300ft. If he to have an engine out it won't be good. I am struggling to wrap my head around the aggressiveness of the posts I have been getting. But I feel you have cleared it up well.
Thank you sir.
Sincerely
P

[Rotor kop]

[some content in response to removed posts removed]
In my opinion, a drone is an unmanned aircraft that is used to deploy or deliver a payload, or used for specialised purposes, such as geographic survey's etc.
I have a DJI Spark. In my opinion, that is a quadcopter, not a drone. It is used for my amusement and for my amateur photography. I had a DJI Phantom 3 Pro before that but sold it went for the spark as the spark is more convenient to carry around. Both are classed as a "consumer product". So it is also a Quadcopter, not a drone.
Just canvas the people in your small town and ask them if they don't mind you flying your quadcopter over the town at a reasonable height not to cause a nuisance. If you living in a valley, I doubt there are many low flying aircraft in the area.
I reckon a person flying a small fixed wing foamy in a public park or sport ground is more dangerous than a consumer type quadcopter that has gps positioning, remote viewing and collision avoidance systems.

Good advice. Many years ago some clown here on Avcom gave me my dislike for "drones" and some of their users. This oke went on about the need for helicopters is going to end and that drones are going to take away our jobs as helicopter pilots. The arrogant oke went on to say a number of other negative things about aircraft in general will be replaced by these things. From that day i took a huge dislike to the thing. My point is that ones comments can be a life changer for some people, unfortunately i have to include myself in a lot of negative input i often give however my wife says i am getting a lot better This post of yours is a good example of a neutral response. The last few months i have been looking closer at the quad copter and may even buy one one day...i have come close to hitting a drone thing in the chopper once. I dont know who was playing with it but fortunately i saw it slightly below me and could climb above and continued my flight. Not a problem in the main rotor but i definitely dont want it in the tail rotor

[Pegasus-Systems]

[some content in response to removed posts removed]In my opinion, a drone is an unmanned aircraft that is used to deploy or deliver a payload, or used for specialised purposes, such as geographic survey's etc.
I have a DJI Spark. In my opinion, that is a quadcopter, not a drone. It is used for my amusement and for my amateur photography. I had a DJI Phantom 3 Pro before that but sold it went for the spark as the spark is more convenient to carry around. Both are classed as a "consumer product". So it is also a Quadcopter, not a drone.
Just canvas the people in your small town and ask them if they don't mind you flying your quadcopter over the town at a reasonable height not to cause a nuisance. If you living in a valley, I doubt there are many low flying aircraft in the area.
I reckon a person flying a small fixed wing foamy in a public park or sport ground is more dangerous than a consumer type quadcopter that has gps positioning, remote viewing and collision avoidance systems.

Thanks for that. I have held a commercial multi engine IF fixed wing license since 2006.Including Turbo prop. I enjoy my mavic zoom and the neighbours kids loves to fly with me. I have seen many a fixed wing airplane bomb our town way lower than 300ft. If he to have an engine out it won't be good. I am struggling to wrap my head around the aggressiveness of the posts I have been getting. But I feel you have cleared it up well.
Thank you sir.
Sincerely
P

[heisan]

[some content in response to removed posts removed]In my opinion, a drone is an unmanned aircraft that is used to deploy or deliver a payload, or used for specialised purposes, such as geographic survey's etc.
I have a DJI Spark. In my opinion, that is a quadcopter, not a drone. It is used for my amusement and for my amateur photography. I had a DJI Phantom 3 Pro before that but sold it went for the spark as the spark is more convenient to carry around. Both are classed as a "consumer product". So it is also a Quadcopter, not a drone.
Just canvas the people in your small town and ask them if they don't mind you flying your quadcopter over the town at a reasonable height not to cause a nuisance. If you living in a valley, I doubt there are many low flying aircraft in the area.
I reckon a person flying a small fixed wing foamy in a public park or sport ground is more dangerous than a consumer type quadcopter that has gps positioning, remote viewing and collision avoidance systems.

I see a lot of 'in my opinion' in that post... But not much of it lines up with the actual laws. The legal definition is:

“toy aircraft” means a product falling under the definition of aircraft which is designed or intended for use in play by children;

A DJI Spark has a recommended minimum age of 15, so it most certainly does not meet this definition. (The law makes no distinction between 'drone' or 'quadcopter' - only between RPAS, model aircraft and toy aircraft, with different restrictions for each.)

[Ricoby]

[some content in response to removed posts removed]
In my opinion, a drone is an unmanned aircraft that is used to deploy or deliver a payload, or used for specialised purposes, such as geographic survey's etc.
I have a DJI Spark. In my opinion, that is a quadcopter, not a drone. It is used for my amusement and for my amateur photography. I had a DJI Phantom 3 Pro before that but sold it went for the spark as the spark is more convenient to carry around. Both are classed as a "consumer product". So it is also a Quadcopter, not a drone.
Just canvas the people in your small town and ask them if they don't mind you flying your quadcopter over the town at a reasonable height not to cause a nuisance. If you living in a valley, I doubt there are many low flying aircraft in the area.
I reckon a person flying a small fixed wing foamy in a public park or sport ground is more dangerous than a consumer type quadcopter that has gps positioning, remote viewing and collision avoidance systems.

Good advice. Many years ago some clown here on Avcom gave me my dislike for "drones" and some of their users. This oke went on about the need for helicopters is going to end and that drones are going to take away our jobs as helicopter pilots. The arrogant oke went on to say a number of other negative things about aircraft in general will be replaced by these things. From that day i took a huge dislike to the thing. My point is that ones comments can be a life changer for some people, unfortunately i have to include myself in a lot of negative input i often give however my wife says i am getting a lot better This post of yours is a good example of a neutral response. The last few months i have been looking closer at the quad copter and may even buy one one day...i have come close to hitting a drone thing in the chopper once. I dont know who was playing with it but fortunately i saw it slightly below me and could climb above and continued my flight. Not a problem in the main rotor but i definitely dont want it in the tail rotor

I totally agree with you. Would not be nice to hit a drone or quadcopter in the air. Some people are irrational and irresponsible when flying anything. Having flown model aircraft for a number of years, I have seen the good and bad.
I have seen full size aircraft pilots taking chances as well. A few years ago a gyrocopter pilot killed himself and his passenger here in Lephalale because he though it was fun to skim over the river as low as possible, but hit a new "foofie slide" at one of the resorts along the river bank. I sometimes use to float fly off the river with my foamy beaver, but after I saw him come past me about 3m off the river, I gave that up.
There are more cases of pilots killing themselves and their passengers over stupid mistakes or arrogance than any other factor. If everyone sticks to their allocated airspace, everyone will be safe.
You will always get the idiot, either pilot or quadcopter flyer, that will act without disregard for anyone else. At my age, I have learnt to use common sense and logic and expect some idiot to do something stupid. Believe me, I have nothing against RPL holders. I just think some of them should take a chill pill. After all, multiprop drones started out as toys. It would be like commercial pilots trying to ban recreational aircraft.

[Ricoby]

[some content in response to removed posts removed]
In my opinion, a drone is an unmanned aircraft that is used to deploy or deliver a payload, or used for specialised purposes, such as geographic survey's etc.
I have a DJI Spark. In my opinion, that is a quadcopter, not a drone. It is used for my amusement and for my amateur photography. I had a DJI Phantom 3 Pro before that but sold it went for the spark as the spark is more convenient to carry around. Both are classed as a "consumer product". So it is also a Quadcopter, not a drone.
Just canvas the people in your small town and ask them if they don't mind you flying your quadcopter over the town at a reasonable height not to cause a nuisance. If you living in a valley, I doubt there are many low flying aircraft in the area.
I reckon a person flying a small fixed wing foamy in a public park or sport ground is more dangerous than a consumer type quadcopter that has gps positioning, remote viewing and collision avoidance systems.

I see a lot of 'in my opinion' in that post... But not much of it lines up with the actual laws. The legal definition is:

“toy aircraft” means a product falling under the definition of aircraft which is designed or intended for use in play by children;

A DJI Spark has a recommended minimum age of 15, so it most certainly does not meet this definition. (The law makes no distinction between 'drone' or 'quadcopter' - only between RPAS, model aircraft and toy aircraft, with different restrictions for each.)

Where in my post did I refer to the Spark as a toy? It is actually quite a sophisticated little quadcopter. It has GPS positioning, collision avoidance, can recognise hand gestures, and also can return to it's original take off position by itself. I take it you are one of those unemployed RPL holders.
As for the "in my opinion's", aren't people allowed to have and express their opinions????

[heisan]

Where in my post did I refer to the Spark as a toy? It is actually quite a sophisticated little quadcopter. It has GPS positioning, collision avoidance, can recognise hand gestures, and also can return to it's original take off position by itself.

Well, you were trying to make a differentiation between a 'quadcopter' and a 'drone'. The closest equivalents in SA airlaw would be a 'toy' and an 'RPAS'.

(The word 'drone' is a serious PITA, as it has no legal meaning, or even any consistent customary meaning. Fortunately, the regs steer away from that mess by just referring to RPAS.)

I take it you are one of those unemployed RPL holders.

No. Just a fixed wing PPL who used to have the job of keeping an eye on the regs for one of the pilot organisations in SA. Although I no longer have that role, I do try to stay current on the regulations, and provide some info on Avcom when I get a chance.

As for the "in my opinion's", aren't people allowed to have and express their opinions????

Sure you have the right to an opinion. Just making sure that the readers know that it really is just an opinion, and bears no resemblance to the law.

[Ricoby]

Where in my post did I refer to the Spark as a toy? It is actually quite a sophisticated little quadcopter. It has GPS positioning, collision avoidance, can recognise hand gestures, and also can return to it's original take off position by itself.

Well, you were trying to make a differentiation between a 'quadcopter' and a 'drone'. The closest equivalents in SA airlaw would be a 'toy' and an 'RPAS'.

(The word 'drone' is a serious PITA, as it has no legal meaning, or even any consistent customary meaning. Fortunately, the regs steer away from that mess by just referring to RPAS.)

I take it you are one of those unemployed RPL holders.

No. Just a fixed wing PPL who used to have the job of keeping an eye on the regs for one of the pilot organisations in SA. Although I no longer have that role, I do try to stay current on the regulations, and provide some info on Avcom when I get a chance.

As for the "in my opinion's", aren't people allowed to have and express their opinions????

Sure you have the right to an opinion. Just making sure that the readers know that it really is just an opinion, and bears no resemblance to the law.

Laws are made from opinions, whether it be those of lawyers or politicians. We know the opinions of most of our politicians and some of the laws they make. They don't necessarily cater for all sections of the population. Even Juju Malema is allowed to have an opinion and influence some outcomes with his opinions. Besides, the law says you may not exceed the speed limit and must pay your etolls. Need I say more?
I am going to end here and not contribute furthermore to the debate. I have expressed my opinion.

[Mouser]

I am considering buying a drone to take site progress photographs (with the Employer's permission always) after seeing how these are used for planning from an ex SA engineer now in NZ. Some are in urban areas. I probably need to check SA regulations in detail but the small extract giving the 7kg machine weight, if I read it correctly, would seem to allow what I was looking at (Mavic Pro weighing about 1kg) to be flown?