Re: Regulation of UAV operations

Subject:

Comments:
: "A review of Part 101 is due to commence shortly and all interested parties are welcome to submit comments. Details will be available on this website." : This is coming upon us much sooner than expected I will say it can only be a good thing. : I note the mention of illegal operations Mal. : I will speak for myself only and say : There are NO illegal operations occuring simply because there is no one getting paid for the operations of Helicams that dont have an OC and it is debatable whther those that do have an OC are getting paid either. : The false allegation that has been circulated about illegal operations occuring was diseminated via one individual to others, that person was associated with an OC holding operator. : That claim made was false and the purpose of it was as has been revealed, for commercial advantage, that person I am informed by the OC holder has been dismissed and is no longer employed or involved within the industry of UAV. : I dont expect any such allegations will be coming from anyone else in future. : If you want me to call you and give you precise details of this Mal then say so and I shall. : Any person who assumes that I may recieve any rewards directly or indirectly in any form for my Helicam operations are sorely mis informed. : There is a considerable amount of mis information and speculation about Helicam operations and UAV as a viable commercial entity, the risk it poses, the envelope of proposed operations and many other aspects I will mention as I have in other forums. : Most of the speculation from within Aus and outside is from those who are offering systems at great cost the prospective UAV operators and have shown clearly they do have a commercial interest in elevating the popularity and potential of UAV above what it actually is. : Buyer beware. : The realistic potential for UAV in Austrlia is very low in fact. : For Videography prospects are worse. : I say that with experience of much work and no pay to try to prove it to professionals, award winning photograpers and a videograper with full size rotorcraft operating 4 days a week as a company with 40 year video production experience in Aus. : The Helicam is simply not a useable platform in the reality here in Australia for anything more than one offs you may get if you meet the right people, simply soliciting for the work will get none. : For small town rural TV netowrks it may be a cheaper option for taking pictures of a paddock of sheep but otherwise the media is little interest in it. : The helicam cant be operated where there are people and suburbia so large networks have no use for them. : In the USA they have many, we have few. : UAV wont ever be allowed to operate in the suburan areas commercially in Aus as it will never be allowed by law and or by-law, regardless of CASA allows it or not. : Appart from the commercial realities there is the weather, what a pity it isnt nice and sunny everyday, we could fly and shoot pics, but its not and there are more bad days than good days for shooting aeriel photos from a UAV. : Ones you intend to be paid for that is, or it is not a UAV, it is a Model Aircraft. : Anyway thiose are simply some points regarding the reality of operational UAV in Australia and if Helicams are not about all there is, then where are the rest I ask. : On this statement Mal : "The civil UAV industry worldwide has been hampered by a lack of enabling legislation." : With respect this is simply not the case. : The UK allows Helicams to operate for payment to 7kg without certification and they are far more densely populated. : These are CAA UAV regulations in effect and have been for some time and do work. : Verbally CAA states that they will tollerate heavier craft without certification so long as there is no safety concerns but operators voluntarily remain under the 7kg in respect of this alowance given them. : The FAA has stated it has no intention of putting resources to regulating craft operated in non controlled airspace (as we do) unless their is a cause and need for such regulations and there has been no such need to date. : Model Aircraft already cover all of the air safety aspects for such operations. : Same for CAA, its a Model Aircraft even if it gets paid becuase they focus on safety issues not financial matters. : You can confirm that with the FAA and the CAA Mal and it comes from multiple sources with verbal confirmations. : Why Australia is choosing to ignore what is working in the US and UK and reinvent the wheel here I dont know but that has only served to extinguish all gradually maturing UAV development that eminates from hobbyists like myself, no bank would bankroll a UAV/Helicam nor will any prudent financial investor so it is as equally unreasonable to expect that any hobbyist maturing the system to a merchantable level should be forced by regulations to invest large sums early in the operations. : This and a number of other unreasonable obstacles have put up a virtual wall prohibiting all but those who are prepared to shut their eyes and throw a large sums of cash at it and hope they get some back. : I find it at odds that we should be expected to make foolhardy financial investments in certification to a raft of regulations for UAV or Helicams, then be expected to be prudent managers of safety within our foolhardy financial investment. : I have many other aspect of this topic to address and will continue it in another post. : Regards : Dave

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL: