Stig goes drone fishing
 

One has to wonder what space is taken up inside their heads, can't be brains!

...one has to wonder how Uber thinks their idea is any better

Let's just call it crocodile baiting....

Begs the question what CAsA would do to the likes of Lawnchair Larry or Danny Deckchair these days....

Key points:

• Quote:

  ---

  CASA says while it's a first for Australia, it's not a really sensible thing to do

  ---

  Not sure who wanted to have CASA's opinion on this in the first place, but thanks buddy, duly noted.
• Quote:

  ---

  An aviation expert says it was a risky move due to a lack of quality control over homemade drones

  ---

  It does take an aviation expert to conclude that this was indeed a risky way to fish. What a genius in fact.
• Quote:

  ---

  The drone's designer has declined to comment

  ---

  The only sensible bloke in the lot. The video says it all.
• Quote:

  ---

  CASA spokesman Peter Gibson said there were serious safety risks involved with what appeared in the footage.

  ---

  True thing. A fish died as a result of the flight.
• Quote:

  ---

  Mr Gibson said severe breaches of aviation regulations could result in penalties of more than $10,000 in fines or CASA could pursue court action.

  ---

  The occupant wasn't wearing a life jacket. Beginner's mistake, he should have known better. And drones don't glide too well.
  No worries mate, I think we'll just start another Go Fund Me page (see the other active thread on this forum) and we'll have you covered in less than 2 days
• Quote:

  ---

  It'll take some time for us to gather the information, analyse all that, determine what the appropriate course of action is

  ---

  By all means do invite the ATSB.
  I think you're rather embarrassed of your endorsement of some Uber Air Taxi for 2023 and see a few kids with a couple of beers just teach you a lesson.
  Ask them for help instead of punishing them.
• Quote:

  ---

  Aviassist, a drone training, licensing and auditing company, said the footage was risky due to the lack of quality control over the homemade drone.

  ---

  No idea how they infer that from that video which shows a perfectly stable flight. Bring in a fisherman and they'll tell you a thing or two regarding the required stability of a fishing rod.
• Quote:

  ---

  That's why CASA has the rule set that they do — that we don't fly near people or over the top of populated areas — because there isn't that quality regime.

  ---

  Clearly that drone was flying over massively populated areas.
• Quote:

  ---

  But Mr Gibson said Australia's drone safety regulations were comprehensive.

  ---

  Well, he might be the first one to say that.
• Quote:

  ---

  Mr Anderson said while it appeared that no-one had been hurt during the flight, it was a risky operation.

  ---

  Another PhD in risk management has spoken.
• Quote:

  ---

  "For the person on the chair, the risk could be computer errors where the aircraft flies away, could be motor failures where the aircraft ends up in an uncontrollable state,"

  ---

  While we're at it, let's rub in some good old TEM. You forgot that the rope might snap by the way.
• Quote:

  ---

  "Best-case scenario is the battery sets die and it plonks straight into the water."

  ---

  True. Can't happen with piston engines because they usually run on fuel and not on electricity.
• Quote:

  ---

  But he said as drones became more readily available, people needed a deeper understanding of how to use them safely.

  ---

  One safe use of drone, for instance, is to remove the batteries and store it in a drawer. A similar strategy has been implemented for aeroplanes over the last 20 years and many are now harmlessly sitting idle in hangars.
• Quote:

  ---

  "The perception is that they're easy to fly and nothing does go wrong."

  ---

  Whose perception?Rules for flying drones
• Quote:

  ---

  No flying more than 120 metres above the ground

  ---

  I think that everyone will agree that the drone wasn't that high.
  Funny that there's no garbage such as "no higher than 120 metres above the lowest point on the ground within a radius of 600 m" or some equally moronic clause
• Quote:

  ---

  No flying over or near an area affecting public safety or where emergency operations are underway

  ---

  She'll be fine mate.
• Quote:

  ---

  No flying within 30 metres of people

  ---

  That's an interesting one. Does that mean that the rope has to be at least 30 m or else the occupant would be less than this far away from the drone.
  I'll ask my legal team at work first thing tomorrow morning.
• If your drone weighs more than 100 grams, you must keep it at least 5.5 kilometres away from controlled aerodromes
  Tough one. Like 99.99% of Australia.
• Quote:

  ---

  No flying at night

  ---

  No, indeed not. Unless you have a current ReNVFR rating for this class of drone and have done 3 takeoffs and 3 landings, at night in the last 90 days nights.
• Quote:

  ---

  Your drone must stay within your line of sight

  ---

  It was not only within line of sight but also within line of
• Quote:

  ---

  No flying over or above people e.g. at festivals, sporting ovals, populated beaches, parks, busy roads and footpaths

  ---

  The Upper Coliban Reservoir in central Victoria is usually quiet between April and late September
• Quote:

  ---

  Flying must not create a hazard to another aircraft, person or property

  ---

  That'll be a deal breaker as soon as they build a second one.
• Quote:

  ---

  No flying in prohibited or restricted areas

  ---

  Wait, what if the restricted area is deactivated?
• Quote:

  ---

  Local council and/or national park laws prohibit drone flights in certain areas

  ---

  The Upper Coliban Reservoir in central Victoria is renowned for its progressive and liberal views when it comes to drones.

Was our intrepid adventurer pax or crew?

I wish I could catch fish pre-gutted like that one appears to be!

Why should CASA worry? Natural selection should sort it out. :}

says tail wheel.

They are worried because somebody went flying inspite of CAsA's efforts at killing aviation in Australia.

CC

Melbjorn,
Great stuff!!
Can anybody confirm it is real, as opposed to a photoshop job just to stir up the Airstapo.
Tootle pip!!

Melbjorn.. TOPS !! Best cackle Ive had for years. ! Not many of those in aviation where CAsA is concerned.
No doubt about the Gibbo he's an intellectual whizz bang with the words.!

Reminds me of a saying I heard often in the Army
"Bullsh1t baffles brains"

Sums up PR and spin miesters people to T

CC

"Bullsh1t baffles brains"

aka excreta taurum vincit - or similar, my Latin is very rusty now

https://www.theage.com.au/national/drone-fisherman-could-land-in-hot-water-as-regulator-investigates-20190830-p52md3.html

Two year project according to this. Why wouldn't you see if it passes the beer test?

It most certainly passed the "beer test", after numerous consultations I expect.

Thank god we didnt have red tape when Smithy and Hudson Fish were opening up QLD and NT after the first war. We needed to innovate.
I mean, this drone went about as high as a tall tree and carried that fella over a bit of water. Danger to others = nil. C'mon casa.

This man is obviously an innovator and should be punished as such! 50 penalty units!

Given that it is "manned" is it still in fact a "drone"?

Would it now be classified rotorcraft, multi engine etc etc?

The tether looks at least 10m long. Doubt a helmet will prevent zero injuries when a 30kg mass hits you at 10m/s.

I couldn't find any info on the duration of the flight, was it up there in the same league as being fired from a cannon?

BTW, it's been done before many times by many others in many different ways and all had the same common problem - the battery duration in flight mode is just not practical.

You can get it tinkering,
You can even get it hovering,
Matter of fact I've got it now.

These legends should be awarded the Bronwyn Bishop Transport Innovation Award

.....hahahah I like that, she was just corrupt, not stupid like these fools!:-)

Folks,
Now we know it is real, I must say it is a pretty impressive device to (according to today's SMH), lift 110 kg with 15 minutes endurance.
What the guys need to do, to make it all "legal", is get it certified and registered in the Experimental Amateur Built Cat., talk to RA Oz, chaps.
Tootle pip!!

Geez that's a bit harsh, I see ingenuity, intelligence, perseverance, wit and mateship.

Whilst the danger level is no doubt somewhat above that of indoor butterfly identification it is probably on par or less than that of some other pretty conventional pursuits such as scuba diving, snow skiing, wake boarding, dirt bike racing, etc..

I know the city folk live for it, but playing with ones telephone just doesn't cut it for many of us country folk.

Love it...have been designing something similar, but to sit in, not to hang from.
Obi.. CAsA and the Gibbo can probably list the "risk assessment" hazards and regs pertaining to the requirements for indoor butterfly id. after all it is an aircraft / a bio-flying machine.
Hard hat, safety goggles, face mask ...and of course the approvals to do so. After you've written your 'exposition' /manual.and outlaidmany 1000s of dollars.

Honestly nothing that innovative about what they've done, haven't pushed any boundaries that haven't already been pushed.

For all those saying CASA/ATSB shouldn't waste their time they absolutely should, because for every idiot like this that does it in the middle of no where and doesn't risk other there will be a bunch of others emboldened to try it themselves infront of their mates where they could indeed hurt someone else.

I'm not saying this sort of thing shouldn't be done, but it should be done the right way.

Couldn't agree more but hey we are probably in the minority here as being stupid & plastering it all over social media seems to be an Australian thingy!:-)
Personally I hope CASA throw the book at them as they give the drone industry a bad name/tag!!

You think??

I dare say that the fact this took them 2 years of trials and testing to get to the stage they did likely indicates they started from scratch with little functioning knowledge of the problems and solutions to those problems that would have to be overcome.

To undertake any complex project that you are unfamiliar takes a degree of personal inventiveness and as Peter Gibson stated in the media... well that's a first for Australia.

Those that belittle or mock these guys probably have never scratch built anything of significance.

Don't get me wrong here I believe CASA are quite right to have a word with these guys and point out a few things, that is there job after all, I hope they leave it that though. If we were to impose the view that only those with the way with all and time to undertake a similar bold project in full compliance with the myriad of red tape and regulations then we would kill the spirit of inventiveness and likely in time end up a country of people that can't build much at all of any significance. If you doubt this then have a look around we've arrived there.

Wunnerful wunnerful!! Another " Prince of Process" --- the wonderful bureaucratic mind that sees "the process" as the object of the exercise, any potential outcome, if any, is a purely secondary issue, as long as you do things "THE RIGHT WAY".

From Machtuk: "Personally I hope CASA throw the book at them as they give the drone industry a bad name/tag!! ----- won't you be disappointed if they haven't done much "illegal" , and there is no "book" to be thrown.

Some of you blokes should get a life ---- nothing they were doing was endangering anybody but themselves ---- and CASA policy is quite clear, stemming from a S.10 directive in 1997, in the case of sports aviation, amateur built etc, where all participation is voluntary, CASA's interest is " the safety of other airspace users and those under the flightpath of the aircraft.'

Tootle pip!!

Gupta is onto it.

People need to be reminded Mr P Gibson is a very long ter CAsA trough dweller now labelled The Corporate Spokesman.
One would think that in an Agency such as CAsA the ceo and Board would expect truth of fact and integrity and accuracy of output.
Alas Mr Gibson has proved time and again the CAsA mantra ..Any old Bullsh*t and fairy stories will do..
With politicians, bureaurats, PR and advertising ,we now most surely live in the Age of Spin and Bullsh*t.

For your second PPRuNe post, bigdoggottaeat, perhaps more info?