DJI Mavic, Air and Mini Drones
Friendly, Helpful & Knowledgeable Community
Join Us Now

Ottawa toughens rules for operating recreational drones

Question: The Mavic Pro is under a kilogram. Most I've read sat 1kg or 2kg to 35kg. What are the rules for less than 1kg? Anyone know?
 
This is one of the primary reasons. This clip was filmed in restricted flight zone where there is a flight path for Harbour Air.

Mavic Pro - Downtown Vancouver

[/QUOTE]

Honest question here. Would Harbour Air have been flying into there at this time of night?

I think what I would like to see from Transport Canada is actual incidents where public safety has been jeopardized by UAV's. Sure there's a risk of a drone falling out of the sky (looking at you Karma) and maiming some poor soul. But how likely is that based on the reports they've seen already.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tyeung

Honest question here. Would Harbour Air have been flying into there at this time of night?

I think what I would like to see from Transport Canada is actual incidents where public safety has been jeopardized by UAV's. Sure there's a risk of a drone falling out of the sky (looking at you Karma) and maiming some poor soul. But how likely is that based on the reports they've seen already.[/QUOTE]

Do we know if this was a recreational or a commercial flight? I think the topic for discussion is recreational bylaws only.

We can't just assume this was an illegal flight, the operator could have had permissions to fly at that time and very well could have got that clearance from air traffic control.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tyeung
Honest question here. Would Harbour Air have been flying into there at this time of night?

I think what I would like to see from Transport Canada is actual incidents where public safety has been jeopardized by UAV's. Sure there's a risk of a drone falling out of the sky (looking at you Karma) and maiming some poor soul. But how likely is that based on the reports they've seen already.

Do we know if this was a recreational or a commercial flight? I think the topic for discussion is recreational bylaws only.

We can't just assume this was an illegal flight, the operator could have had permissions to fly at that time and very well could have got that clearance from air traffic control.[/QUOTE]
At least 2 incidents have been reported here in Calgary. These were both reported by Westjet pilots at the south end of Calgary where they were still at 6,000 ft and 7000 feet. I know most folks, especially this crowd won't be doing that, but there are those who will just for the view as you've seen on Youtube. These individuals will not be controlled by regulations or laws. It would be interesting to see a compilation of the incidents reported by Marc Garneau.
 
For those thinking of selling up, I'd say take some time to see how affected you are. I've just spent some time in Google Earth just drawing the 9 km no fly zones around the various airports (around Winnipeg):

upload_2017-3-17_16-43-52.png

So much of the city is under the 9 km coverage except for the south-west corner. But there's still a variety of parks that I can fly in and the river is 150 m across for the most part, so I can still be in compliance with the regulation and not have to travel too far afield.

I'll keep a printed copy of the regulation and a map, similar to the above so I can demonstrate that I am in compliance.
 
This is a copy paste from globe and mail in Canada

Transport Minister Marc Garneau is cracking down on recreational drones with new safety restrictions to keep them nine kilometres from any airport and ban their owners from flying near people, buildings, at night and when first responders are at the scene of an emergency.

The rigorous rules that come into effect immediately also force recreational owners to clearly mark their drones with contact information. The federal government is promising even stricter regulations for all unmanned aircraft in June.

I am taking measures now, before a drone hits an airplane and causes a catastrophic accident. That’s the kind of nightmare scenario that keeps me up at night,” Mr. Garneau said in prepared remarks, provided to The Globe and Mail.

Mr. Garneau, who will announce the new rules at Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport on Thursday, has become concerned about the number of reported drone incidents, which have more than tripled from 41 when data collection began in 2014 to 148 last year.

“There have been several very worrying incidents in Canada involving near-collisions of drones and aircraft. We need to do everything in our power to stop this from happening,” Mr. Garneau said. “When there is a significant risk to aviation, I have the power to issue an immediate measure until new regulations can be enacted. And that is what I have done.”

Under the new rules, recreational drone operators must stay far away from controlled or restricted airspace, forest fires and first-responder emergency operation sites.

They also cannot fly higher than 90 metres; fly within 75 metres of buildings, vehicles or people; or fly within nine kilometres of any airport, heliport, seaplane base or airstrip where aircraft take off and land.

A senior Transport Canada official, who was involved in drafting the new rules, said there have been troubling incidents where people have flown drones over forest fires in British Columbia, forcing the grounding of water bombers. In other cases, seaplane and helicopter operations in Vancouver’s Coal Harbour have been halted because of drones flying overhead.

“Of our top five airports [across Canada], we are seeing incidents where pilots are reporting seeing these drones 200 or 300 feet away as they approach the airport during one of the more critical points of the flight,” the official said.

The new restrictions apply to anyone operating an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) weighting more than 250 grams and up to 35 kilograms. Any recreational operator who fails to comply with the new flying restrictions would face fines of up to $3,000.

The RCMP and police forces across the country will be working with Transport Canada inspectors to enforce the new measures.

Until now, the rules required recreational-drone owners to be able to see their aircraft at all times when the vehicles are in flight but there were few other restrictions, except that they were not permitted to fly into the clouds or in restricted air space such as airports. Unlike commercial users, recreational-drone flyers also do not need a certificate to operate their UAVs.

Anyone flying drones for commercial, academic or research purposes are not affected by the new measures. The military, law enforcement and businesses have increasingly been using drones but obtain special flight operating certificates. Energy companies, for example, use drones to inspect pipelines while farmers use them to monitor livestock.

“The government certainly doesn’t want to restrict drones so much that we hinder innovation because it’s so important to our economy and standard of living,” Mr. Garneau said. “But, like any new technology, drones must be used with care. And we cannot wait until something bad happens before we act.”

Mr. Garneau said Ottawa plans to propose new regulations that govern all unmanned aircraft in June. Those regulations will lay out rules of flight, knowledge testing, minimum age limits, pilot permits and how drones are to be marked and registered.

The department is considering an age restriction of 14 to operate a small drone and a minimum of 16 to fly a drone heavier than one kilogram. People may also have to pass an exam to fly drones for recreational purposes.
Marc Garneau should be ashamed of himself.
Being a former pilot and astronaut he knows about the thrill of flying.
How dare him deny that to others!
The only good that can come from this recreationally, is that it keeps the Yahoo!'s from flying and that continues most of the flyers out there.
The good news is that it doesn't affect commercial operations for those with an sfoc. I'm happy about that as I will no longer have a yahoo flyer bothering me near my job site!
Good riddance to those people who blatantly disregard the law.
 
Do we know if this was a recreational or a commercial flight? I think the topic for discussion is recreational bylaws only.

We can't just assume this was an illegal flight, the operator could have had permissions to fly at that time and very well could have got that clearance from air traffic control.
At least 2 incidents have been reported here in Calgary. These were both reported by Westjet pilots at the south end of Calgary where they were still at 6,000 ft and 7000 feet. I know most folks, especially this crowd won't be doing that, but there are those who will just for the view as you've seen on Youtube. These individuals will not be controlled by regulations or laws. It would be interesting to see a compilation of the incidents reported by Marc Garneau.[/QUOTE]
A drone can't go 7000 feet high!
 
At least 2 incidents have been reported here in Calgary. These were both reported by Westjet pilots at the south end of Calgary where they were still at 6,000 ft and 7000 feet. I know most folks, especially this crowd won't be doing that, but there are those who will just for the view as you've seen on Youtube. These individuals will not be controlled by regulations or laws. It would be interesting to see a compilation of the incidents reported by Marc Garneau.
A drone can't go 7000 feet high![/QUOTE]
Tell that to the Westjet pilots that reported them. Both these items showed up in the Calgary Herald with the heights reported. If that's what is being reported in the formal incident reports, then you better take that up with TC. Actually drones can easily hit those heights. 10 ft/second vertical for 600 seconds (10 minutes) and voila - 6000 ft AGL. Watch some crazy Youtube as well. My scratch built could easily hit these heights, especially my octocopter that could do insane verticals for 20+minutes. I've never done it but do the calculations. And if you don't think they can fly at those altitudes, the specs on DJI products say they can fly at 5,000 metres. Watched a Youtube video of a guy who took a P2 on his climb to Everest. He flew it at Base Camp and it flew well.
 
For those thinking of selling up, I'd say take some time to see how affected you are. I've just spent some time in Google Earth just drawing the 9 km no fly zones around the various airports (around Winnipeg):

View attachment 8728

So much of the city is under the 9 km coverage except for the south-west corner. But there's still a variety of parks that I can fly in and the river is 150 m across for the most part, so I can still be in compliance with the regulation and not have to travel too far afield.

I'll keep a printed copy of the regulation and a map, similar to the above so I can demonstrate that I am in compliance.

I'm in the winnipeg area too.


A note about that south west corner not in the 9k radius, it would still fall under the 75m buildings and people rule.
Sorry to say, but the entire city is a no go for us now.
 
For those thinking of selling up, I'd say take some time to see how affected you are. I've just spent some time in Google Earth just drawing the 9 km no fly zones around the various airports (around Winnipeg):

View attachment 8728

So much of the city is under the 9 km coverage except for the south-west corner. But there's still a variety of parks that I can fly in and the river is 150 m across for the most part, so I can still be in compliance with the regulation and not have to travel too far afield.

I'll keep a printed copy of the regulation and a map, similar to the above so I can demonstrate that I am in compliance.
You also need to take into account heliports, or any other aerodromes as well (that means any helicopter landing pad like at a hospital, etc). Go into an app like airmap (who has a web app as well AirMap.io
And turn on all the restricted air space, heliports, special restricted use, etc. That's your no-fly zones.
 
Interim Order Respecting the Use of Model Aircraft - Transport Canada

Bascally, you can't fly your drone anywhere but a beach or open field.

Prohibitions
(5) (1) A person must not operate a model aircraft

  1. (a) at an altitude greater than 300 feet AGL;
  2. (b) at a lateral distance of less than 250 feet (75m) from buildings, structures, vehicles, vessels, animals and the public including spectators, bystanders or any person not associated with the operation of the aircraft;
  3. (c) within 9 km of the centre of an aerodrome;
  4. (d) within controlled airspace;
  5. (e) within restricted airspace;
  6. (f) over or within a forest fire area, or any area that is located within 9 km of a forest fire area;
  7. (g) over or within the security perimeter of a police or first responder emergency operation site;
  8. (h) over or within an open-air assembly of persons;
  9. (i) at night; or
  10. (j) in cloud.
 
Interim Order Respecting the Use of Model Aircraft - Transport Canada

Bascally, you can't fly your drone anywhere but a beach or open field.

Prohibitions
(5) (1) A person must not operate a model aircraft

  1. (a) at an altitude greater than 300 feet AGL;
  2. (b) at a lateral distance of less than 250 feet (75m) from buildings, structures, vehicles, vessels, animals and the public including spectators, bystanders or any person not associated with the operation of the aircraft;
  3. (c) within 9 km of the centre of an aerodrome;
  4. (d) within controlled airspace;
  5. (e) within restricted airspace;
  6. (f) over or within a forest fire area, or any area that is located within 9 km of a forest fire area;
  7. (g) over or within the security perimeter of a police or first responder emergency operation site;
  8. (h) over or within an open-air assembly of persons;
  9. (i) at night; or
  10. (j) in cloud.

I have to disagree. Have a look at what I posted earlier and what Glasswalker has linked to. Once you've figured out where your 9 km aerodrome exclusion zones are, then you'll see the areas where you can fly, which will most likely be parks, fields, over bodies of water.

The way I see it is (c), (d), (e), (f), (i), (j) are all highly enforceable and you'd have a hard time convincing a tribunal you weren't in contravention of the designated provisions. The rest are very loose and the only way I can see them being proven are with your own data logs or by some radar/laser measurement tool with a calibration record that can measure your craft's position at the time of the offence.
 
A drone can't go 7000 feet high!
Tell that to the Westjet pilots that reported them. Both these items showed up in the Calgary Herald with the heights reported. If that's what is being reported in the formal incident reports, then you better take that up with TC. Actually drones can easily hit those heights. 10 ft/second vertical for 600 seconds (10 minutes) and voila - 6000 ft AGL. Watch some crazy Youtube as well. My scratch built could easily hit these heights, especially my octocopter that could do insane verticals for 20+minutes. I've never done it but do the calculations. And if you don't think they can fly at those altitudes, the specs on DJI products say they can fly at 5,000 metres. Watched a Youtube video of a guy who took a P2 on his climb to Everest. He flew it at Base Camp and it flew well.[/QUOTE]

True, but there's a difference between taking off *at* 5000 meters and flying *up to* 5000 meters. No DJI consumer drone has been able to ascend more than 500 meters above its take-off point for close to two years now.

Yeah, a homebuilt could do it, but I have to imagine the vast majority of people who are building their own drones know better than to fly it to such a height in the first place.

It's kind of a bummer; I was hoping to head north and take some video along 0 Avenue to show the treelines and such, but now I'm not sure I can.
 
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
130,592
Messages
1,554,181
Members
159,596
Latest member
da4o98