[Kharon]

Drone deaf and bone idle.

Has anyone actually sat down and read; I mean really read the 2013 ‘model’ on which CASA based their rule set – 101.  I find the ‘101’ descriptor amusing; for indeed it is.  I expect I could rattle on about this ‘model’, produce logical argument and drag out the many flaws; those which would add fuel to the Senators little pyre. But not today. The Senators have people of wit and intelligence on tap – what I will do is give them a starter for 10 points; two paragraphs; to pick the bones out of.

This report presents the findings of a study carried out by Alexander Radi M.Sc.during a four months research internship at CASA (Canberra). The aim of the study is to provide the Standards Development branch at CASA with an assessment of injury severity from the impact of small Remotely Piloted Aircraft (RPA) into a person on the ground.

Of particular interest are combinations of RPA mass and impact velocity which cause non-severe injuries.

Due to the complex geometry of the RPA and the non-trivial biomechanics of the human body, major simplifications and assumptions had to be made during the adaptation of the BC. The current model ignores the collision dynamics and the RPA material’s frangibility and elasticity, making its predictions over-restrictive.

Disallowance is a little too genteel. CASA will simply shrug, rework, redraft and come back with the same rubbish, wrapped up in better paper. The Senators need to bang some silly heads together and tell the CASA oiks to do some real research and come back with a honest, sensible, effective rule set which will help protect the not only the people and transport operations, but government against a huge liability. That’s what the FAA are doing – their job.

Arggh – I’ve no patience for more on this – handing over. Anyway the Norfolk Ditching - version 2 is due out today; better get the coffee pot on.

Toot toot.