Surely this can't be legal?
The following users liked this post:
The biases some have fallen for here are well understood.
4k60fps (or even better) stabilized and post enhanced are many orders of magnitude better than anybody here’s eyesight.
so the instant reaction is “that must be fake” so we go looking for things to prove it.
You can pause and zoom that video in all sorts of places and see the real world going on at extraordinary distances and detail. Very cool.
very real.
4k60fps (or even better) stabilized and post enhanced are many orders of magnitude better than anybody here’s eyesight.
so the instant reaction is “that must be fake” so we go looking for things to prove it.
You can pause and zoom that video in all sorts of places and see the real world going on at extraordinary distances and detail. Very cool.
very real.
Then we'll wait for reports of the application of the full force of the law against the miscreant drone operator.
If it's anything like the UK nothing will happen.
The CAA say they have no resource and it's a police matter and the police say they don't have the resource and it's a CAA matter.
Strange that in this instance the UK CAA think that zone infringement has nothing to do with them!
Watch them all cover their arses when something finally hits.
The CAA say they have no resource and it's a police matter and the police say they don't have the resource and it's a CAA matter.
Strange that in this instance the UK CAA think that zone infringement has nothing to do with them!
Watch them all cover their arses when something finally hits.
- fly over the movement area
- fly over or in the departure or approach path
- create a collision hazard to other aircraft taking off or landing,
If the drone weighs less than 250 g (and if it was the DJI Mini 3 Pro pictured in the thumbnail, it does) and they did not:
- fly over the movement area
- fly over or in the departure or approach path
- create a collision hazard to other aircraft taking off or landing,
In order to do so, they must have jailbroken the unit or used alternate non-approved software that has potentially removed safety controls.
It’s not just this video, is the one over the Sydney harbour that’s potentially worse.
A 249 gram Drone can fly near an airport with no clear guidelines on operating in proximity to aircraft, however where the operator may fall foul of the laws would be that the aircraft is unlikely to be in line of sight, unless perhaps they were operating it from the nearby port.
If the drone was fitted with the larger extended capacity battery, then that would take it to 290’ish grams and everything changes completely.
With some coordination between authorities, an identification and search warrant could be obtained within a day or so.
I tried to take a photo of a house near Essendon a family member was selling in Strathmore and despite me entering in the acknowledgement and receiving the sms etc, it would only fly for one minute.
Errr not quite. If you take it to a large airport, you can’t fly for more than one minute, it shuts down.
I tried to take a photo of a house near Essendon a family member was selling in Strathmore and despite me entering in the acknowledgement and receiving the sms etc, it would only fly for one minute.
I tried to take a photo of a house near Essendon a family member was selling in Strathmore and despite me entering in the acknowledgement and receiving the sms etc, it would only fly for one minute.
I'm left wondering if it's different then in UK/Europe perhaps.
Sounds daft but due to EU pressures on DJI the limits were removed, I believe, in January this year.
Yep, quick double check.
From January 2024 the majority of the geofencing has been removed for UK/Europe.
I have personally see a DJI mavic 3 flown within a UK ATZ after simply cancelling the alert warning.
An Enhanced Warning Zone is a circular area that extends 2 km outwards from the perimeter of an Authorization Zone. When a drone is approaching this area from the outside, the DJI GO app will issue a warning. Users must then confirm that they wish to continue flying.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The operation can be legal if operating under CASA's automated airspace authorisation approvals.
- CASA 03/24 – Area Approval for Operation of RPA within 3NM of Controlled Aerodromes using CASA-verified Drone Safety App – Canberra (YSCB), Adelaide (YPAD), Perth (YPPH) and Sydney (YSSY) Instrument 2024
- CASA 65/23 – Approval and Permission for Operations of RPA within Sydney Harbour Restricted Airspace R405A/B Instrument 2023
In the USA it is illegal to put an ADS-B Out transmitter on a drone; is that the case in Australia as well? Being visible to ATC and those with ADS-B In would seem a higher priority than filing paperwork. Alternatively, having ADS-B Out required for all manned aircraft and requiring ADS-B In on drones along with evasion software would satisfy the need for separation without burdening the ATC with drone tracking and the drone with a battery requirement for the transmitter.
Given that a drone will typically have an omni-directional transmitter to send back video, and that frequency space is well known, adding ground tracking stations to locate any signal source in that frequency range that is above the horizon and is moving would seem technically possible. I expect the StarLink antennas are tracking with less power at the ground, all a drone tracker needs is a general direction from a wide beam receiver and a similar steered array to narrow it down.
Given that a drone will typically have an omni-directional transmitter to send back video, and that frequency space is well known, adding ground tracking stations to locate any signal source in that frequency range that is above the horizon and is moving would seem technically possible. I expect the StarLink antennas are tracking with less power at the ground, all a drone tracker needs is a general direction from a wide beam receiver and a similar steered array to narrow it down.
After selling 10-20 Million drones into the US market over the last decade the number of collisions with aircraft is countable on one hand and the number of fatalities remains 0. In contrast, between 300 and 400 pilots, passengers, and people on the ground are killed by manned aviation each year, and have had that rate for decades.
While there is a theoretical risk there seems to be no practical risk evident, particularly compared to weather and birds.
The main risk that drones pose is they are capable of reaching above the walls of sports stadiums to allow those without tickets to watch the games. In the US they are considered a risk to corporate livestock farmers who raise their animals in horrific conditions, release animal waste into local rivers, and otherwise commit terrible acts, but are located far enough from the roads that this can only be seen by drones. The claim there is that al Qaeda might get info on rural hog farms and use that information in some way. No one says what way, but it's presented as a terrorist danger.
There was recently the case of an engine suffering what appeared to be compressor stall; at least it was belching flames in a spectacular manner. This was attributed to bubble wrap. Which is one more case of bubble wrap doing damage to an aircraft engine than the 10-20 Million drones have managed in the USA, which is 0.
Can stuff happen? Sure. A seat switch could put a dozen people in the hospital. Which is also a dozen more people than drones have injured with respect to aviation operations in the USA.
I'd rather make active avoidance a key component over depending on some long chain of rules that are certain not to be followed by all users.
While there is a theoretical risk there seems to be no practical risk evident, particularly compared to weather and birds.
The main risk that drones pose is they are capable of reaching above the walls of sports stadiums to allow those without tickets to watch the games. In the US they are considered a risk to corporate livestock farmers who raise their animals in horrific conditions, release animal waste into local rivers, and otherwise commit terrible acts, but are located far enough from the roads that this can only be seen by drones. The claim there is that al Qaeda might get info on rural hog farms and use that information in some way. No one says what way, but it's presented as a terrorist danger.
There was recently the case of an engine suffering what appeared to be compressor stall; at least it was belching flames in a spectacular manner. This was attributed to bubble wrap. Which is one more case of bubble wrap doing damage to an aircraft engine than the 10-20 Million drones have managed in the USA, which is 0.
Can stuff happen? Sure. A seat switch could put a dozen people in the hospital. Which is also a dozen more people than drones have injured with respect to aviation operations in the USA.
I'd rather make active avoidance a key component over depending on some long chain of rules that are certain not to be followed by all users.
The following users liked this post:
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Enroute from Dagobah to Tatooine...!
Posts: 791
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Mech Engr, you might change your mind after having a near miss with a drone from the front-left seat of a fast-moving aircraft... I'm sure there are a number of pilots on here who've had them - me included. Just because you perceive the risk to be low doesn't mean it can't happen or that the consequences should be disregarded. It's only a matter of time... Trust me, see and avoid is hard enough to apply to other aircraft at times let alone something like a drone...
The following users liked this post:
Mech Engr, you might change your mind after having a near miss with a drone from the front-left seat of a fast-moving aircraft... I'm sure there are a number of pilots on here who've had them - me included. Just because you perceive the risk to be low doesn't mean it can't happen or that the consequences should be disregarded. It's only a matter of time... Trust me, see and avoid is hard enough to apply to other aircraft at times let alone something like a drone...
ADS-B Out is so no one has to see anything. In the US it just isn't universally required for manned aircraft and, for some manned aircraft, is prohibited.