[Peetwo]

Barry O again calls for ban on recreational drones -

Via the SMH:

Queensland senator Barry O'Sullivan calls for ban on drones following committee

10 September 2017 - 12:00am
By Andrew Brown

A Coalition senator has called for a ban on the use of unlicensed drones following an appearance at a senate committee on their use.

Queensland senator Barry O'Sullivan is advocating for a recall on all drones operating without a commercial license until regulations preventing further mid-air incidents are brought in.

Senator Barry O'Sullivan is calling for a ban on all non-commercial drones.
Photo:Alex Ellinghausen

The senate committee, examining regulations surrounding the use of drones in Australia, held its last public hearing in Canberra in late August.

"If there's a rag doll at Kmart that has a button come off and a child could choke as a result, if one child is at risk, every one of them is recalled and taken off the shelf," he said.


Drone Flight Academy president Jeff Cotter is not supportive of the proposed ban on drone regulation.

"Yet here we have drones in a box that can impact on passenger aircraft, and we're paralysed in efforts to bring it to a halt.

"If I were king for a day, every drone in this nation, other than the ones that are commercially licensed, would join the rag dolls in the same room."

The final public hearing of the committee heard testimony from members of Airservices Australia, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.
The committee heard there were around 180 near misses between drones and other aircraft last year.

Senator O'Sullivan said those who fly drones should be subjected to similar levels of aviation training as other pilots, to ensure no near misses happen.

"I don't place any different value on one aircraft over another, whether it's manned or unmanned. As far as I'm concerned they're the same," he said.

"But one airborne craft is piloted by people who are pre-eminently trained in all sort of aviation principles and aircraft management, compared to the other craft that's piloted by a 15-year-old that just got a drone out of a box and has never been in control of any airborne craft that's sharing the same space."

Jeff Cotter is the director of the Drone Flight Academy in Canberra, which runs courses on building drones as well as training people how to fly them responsibly.

He said he can understand the senator's stance but said calling for a total ban now was "too little, too late".

"One of the big issues with drones is that it's not so much the fault of the people buying them, but the vendors," he said.

"People sell them as toys, and it's reasonable to forgive the customers for not realising that there are restrictions around their use."

CASA regulations prevent drone users from flying in populous areas, within 30 metres of people, no higher than 120 metres and at least 5.5 kilometres away from airfields.

Mr Cotter said while a total ban on drones may not work, he said a ban on selling them at retail stores was one solution to prevent mid-air incidents.

"It's a matter of better education and preventing them being sold in toy shops," he said.
"Drones being self-regulated would be a way to go, and you can have some kind of national body made up of enthusiasts and you have to be a member of a club and can only fly at registered sites."

With drones becoming more popular, Mr O'Sullivan said urgent action was required in order to make Australian airspaces safer.

There's an estimated 50,000 drones in Australia with companies such as Dominos and Australia Post exploring options of using drones for deliveries.

"All of the issues with drones were foreseeable and the challenges were predictable, and we should have stopped the sales of airborne devices that have any potential to impact on air safety," he said.

Given the last Senate Inquiry hearing was nearly two weeks ago I do wonder about the timing of Senator Barry O's announcement...
Maybe it was timed for maximum impact for the media in attendance at the National's Federal conference in Can'tberra? Either way it would've been a bit embarrassing for our Greatest Aviation Disaster, miniscule NFI 6D Chester...
From the Senate Inquiry Submissions page I note there has been an additional submission published - 89 Mr John Reidy-Crofts (PDF 24 KB) - which IMO is worthy of reproduction (in part):
      

In a recent email advice issued by Mark Lewis, Recreational RPAS Inspector, RPAS National Operations CASA/Aviation Group and directed to Michael Severn of Perth Drone Shop, he advised the following:

“In G Class airspace, you can fly a recreational RPAS/Model aircraft (subpart G of CASR 101) as high as you want, as long as you satisfy the criteria for being able to continuously see, orient and navigate the aircraft with your own eyes. As G Class airspace is uncontrolled airspace, you fly to the VFR rules the same as every other airspace user would. As the primary method of deconfliction in uncontrolled airspace for VFR flights (regardless of manned or unmanned) is see and avoid, this also extends to recreational RPA/model aircraft to ensure appropriate separation in maintained. This system has been in effect since modeling started in Australia, well over 40 years ago.”

The above advice is of concern and somewhat misleading. The question in my mind is how many recreational ‘excluded’ users of an RPA would be aware of ‘VFR’ and terms such as ‘deconfliction’ and ‘uncontrolled air space’. Until I read the CASA Advisory Circular, and made further enquiries by gaining web site access to how airspace is managed in Australia, I was not aware of what these terms meant.

This is an area that in my opinion requires further investigation leading to regulation for ALL remotely piloted aircraft systems.

I hold serious concern that under the current CASA Licensing and Operational rules for RPAS, a child or person of unsound mind, can operate a small (excluded) RPA without any pre-requite training or license requirements. I have also concerns over adults who may be of sound mind but have no understanding of VFR or other terms as mentioned above.

My concern can be best explained in a recent incident that I experienced whilst test flying my Phantom on an approved recreational reserve here in Perth uncontrolled air space. I had just landed my aircraft when I heard a high-pitched sound of an approaching Phantom. It was flying very fast at a low altitude only a few feet above head height. It missed me by some 20 meters and crashed into a nearby stand of trees. I investigated the crash site and found that two young teenage girls had operated the aircraft. When I questioned them as to what were they doing, they said they were trying to see how fast the Phantom could fly across country! They did not respond to my question ‘did they understand or know the rules for flying a Phantom’. Being young teenage girls, I did not pursue my discussion any further and walked away.

On another occasion whilst flying at this same reserve, I observed a middle aged male flying a Mavic Pro RPA. He had the aircraft positioned directly above a small family group who were taking family group photographs. The aircraft would have been well under 30 m in altitude and he was taking photos of the group who were taking photos. I approached this man and enquired was he aware of the rules and that in my opinion he was flying dangerously. He was not impressed with my comments and I thought it a better course of action for me to walk away. I am sure that these two incidences are only the tip of the iceberg!

I read recently in the West Australian newspaper that Senator Pauline Hanson had been observed flying a ‘drone’ from her hotel balcony in Queensland. Her remarks as printed were not appropriate for a Senator and highlight the need for regulation.

I have made enquiries with most Perth Metropolitan local councils and Regional councils about that council’s policy in respect to the flying of RPA’s within its boundaries. The response was very mixed and uncoordinated with most local My immediate concern is that in the eye of the public, they may consider that small RPA’s of 100g-2kg as being a ‘toy’, and this is far from the reality. My DJI Phantom 4 Pro weighs in at 1.388 kg and has a Max Flight Speed S 20m/s, a flight distance including altitude of 5000m. The speed whilst in sport mode can reach a speed of 70 kph and that in uncontrolled situations is highly dangerous. Consider for a moment the story I told (above) of the two young teenage girls who flew their Phantom at top speed and were not that far away from myself. If that aircraft had hit me in the head at say 70 kph, I don’t hold out much hope of surviving the impact!

Another concern that I wish to raise is relating to emergency helicopters operating on G class airspace at low altitudes and the serious risk a small RPA could do if it impacted with that aircraft. A RPA with a weight under 2kg can be likened to a flying house brick propelled at 70 kph. I hope that this imagery is not overlooked.authorities that I contacted stating that they had no policy for this activity.

There needs to be in my opinion, a standard policy that relates to ALL local government councils that is integrated with CASA Rules and Regulations. Being a past Chief Executive Officer of a several rural/regional local authorities and large metropolitan local authority, I have a few ideas as to how this could be achieved, however that is not the purpose of this submission.

Choccy frog for JOHN REIDY-CROFTS...


MTF...P2