Australian Rules and Regulations - CASA

[BlakPhoenix]

Yes, it is all in the wording, I think BlakPheonix is getting confused between Controlled Airspace and Controlled Aerodrome, from my understanding Controlled Airspace covers pretty much mainland Australia and Tasmania, so simply put, no matter where you are, no flying over 400Feet AGL and Controlled Aerodromes no flying at ALL within 5.5Km period.

As for unmanned helipads the rule is less restrictive and it is around approach and departure paths and the information can be found in this PDF from CASA website, it's in Appendix A, Page 61 101c01.pdf | Civil Aviation Safety Authority

Hi Roger
Your spot on - he is definitely confused. Guess that is understandable from those not conversant with aviation and CASA jargon. Some people just subscribe to the "don't let the facts get in the way of a good story" ideology.

Common sense tells you that if an experienced, licensed RPA organisation/operator cannot fly within 5.5 kms of a controlled airport then why would anyone think that an absolute newbie to RPA operation would be a less risky proposition and allowed by CASA to mix it up with controlled airport operations. Airports/helipads that are classed as Controlled have control towers as the number of movements in and out of these airport facilities are of a magnitude that warrant ATC services. EG, Moorabbin, Essendon, Tullamarine, Bankstown, Mascot, Bankstown, Jandakot, Coolangatta, Brisbane, Uluru, Alice Springs etc etc...


Thats what frustrates me the most - people talking about stuff that they are not qualified to comment on. And its this basic lack of awareness of the air legislation in Australia by RPA flyers that really worries the General Aviation and regular passenger carrier organisations and pilots. Thats why Senator Xenaphon is campaigning in Canberra right now to have the recently introduced RPA reg amendments rescinded - he is being lobbied heavily by the Aviation industry as they see the safety issues arising from the general public who fly RPAs with little understanding of what is legal and illegal. It will only take one major incident with an RPA for CASA to shut the door on us and bring in draconian laws that will see it very difficult to comply with regs and fly legally.

Good catch Roger, I had indeed.

This perfectly illustrates a vary valid point though, that CASA is not doing a good service to the community by the way that they are attempting to educate the community. It's not about making a good story gunpilot, I personally do not fly close to any airports because as I have said before I believe in safe flaying. It IS about ensuring that their website properly educates and illustrates the laws and regulations surrounding RPAs and where they can fly. If you are a regular citizen who received a drone over the past 6 months, you would go onto CASA, go into the drone page and hit recreational use. No where in that user journey does it anywhere state that you cannot fly within 5.5km of controlled aerodomes. It gives off the opposite impression! That may not be true, but that is exactly what they are implying. So it's hardly surprising that most of this thread discusses the ability to fly close to airports so long as you're not in the takeoff/landing zones.

Just today I saw two prominent Instagrammers upload photos that were taken just hundreds of meters from Sydney Airport and I'd wager that neither of them thought it was illegal.

Education is key, and I think CASA is failing this one which will only lead to more issues and laws restricting flight.

 

[gunpilot399]

BP
Turning the discussion around from initially saying that I was incorrect re the 5.5km exclusion zone to now saying you were confused by CASAs confusing regulations (they are'nt...if you carefully read PART 101 REGS then you would not have got it so wrong) is a weak excuse for not apologising to me for your original comment re me being incorrect. The CASA PART 101 regs are straightforward, and are the only basis on which you should conduct your flying. Its not CASAs problem, its your inability to read the regs correctly that is the cause of your confusion.

Next time you call someone out (especially when they have a far greater track record/years of experience in the aviation industry than youself...including RPA operations) you should ensure you are absolutely sure of your facts before advising others of incorrect practices. Again I state that telling others you are able to fly within 5.5km of a controlled airport is both irresponsible and downright dangerous.

Just hope other forum readers here have learnt from this and don't make the mistake you did. End of comment on this thread.

 

[BlakPhoenix]

@gunpilot399 I finally found the legislation that properly covers what we're after (why is this not linked on the sport & rec page?!). AC 101-10 v1.2 Remotely piloted aircraft systems – operation of excluded RPA (other than model aircraft), and on page 10 it's all made clear:

5. Operation in controlled airspace

• Micro RPA may be operated in controlled airspace, including within 5.5 km (3 NM) of a controlled aerodrome, but must remain below 120 m/400 ft.
• Very small excluded RPA may be operated in controlled airspace more than 5.5 km (3 NM) from the boundary of a controlled aerodrome, but not above 120 m/400 ft.
• Small and medium excluded RPA (other than model aircraft) are permitted to fly in controlled airspace (not above 120 m/400 ft or within 5.5 km/3 NM of a controlled aerodrome) provided the pilot holds a relevant (radio) qualification (see subregulation 101.280 (2)).
• Rules for the operation of small and medium model aircraft in controlled airspace are explained in AC 101-03.

https://www.casa.gov.au/file/171461/download?token=rD99831v

I believe this is where the confusion comes from. If you're flying a Micro drone then you can indeed fly within the 5.5km of a controlled aerodome, anything larger and you cannot. I guess you could say we're both right, but you're a more so since yours covers the Mav

 

[BlakPhoenix]

@Drone Runner perhaps we should add the below to the front page so that it is as easily visible as possible.

Operation in controlled airspace

• Micro RPA may be operated in controlled airspace, including within 5.5 km (3 NM) of a controlled aerodrome, but must remain below 120 m/400 ft.
• Very small excluded RPA may be operated in controlled airspace more than 5.5 km (3 NM) from the boundary of a controlled aerodrome, but not above 120 m/400 ft.

 

[gunpilot399]

@Drone Runner perhaps we should add the below to the front page so that it is as easily visible as possible.

BP
Hooray. Finally you have read the regs properly and your misunderstanding of the regs re 5.5kms exclusion zone have been cleared up. Would doubt anyone on this Mavic Forum is interested in Micro RPAs (less than 100grams - if you were to take them outside in any more than the slightest of breezes they would just blow away).

I guess your last post was a kind of apology and I accept and lets move on mate - safe flying.......................

 

[Drone Runner]

@Drone Runner perhaps we should add the below to the front page so that it is as easily visible as possible.

I've updated the front page with the Commercial Operations rules as requested.

 

[Drone Runner]

@gunpilot399 I finally found the legislation that properly covers what we're after (why is this not linked on the sport & rec page?!). AC 101-10 v1.2 Remotely piloted aircraft systems – operation of excluded RPA (other than model aircraft), and on page 10 it's all made clear:
https://www.casa.gov.au/file/171461/download?token=rD99831v
I believe this is where the confusion comes from. If you're flying a Micro drone then you can indeed fly within the 5.5km of a controlled aerodome, anything larger and you cannot. I guess you could say we're both right, but you're a more so since yours covers the Mav

You were right the first time... gunpilot and blak don't know what they're talking about and have no idea what the rules from CASA are regarding recreational flights.
They are exactly the type of people I warn against, spouting what they think the rules are without having any proof or evidence to back them up.
CASA does not hide the rules and they're written in fairly simple terms. Please stop making up rules and then trying to impose them on others.
Please get ALL rules regarding drone from CASA directly and not some random on the internet.

 

[mikelowrey]

@gunpilot399 I finally found the legislation that properly covers what we're after (why is this not linked on the sport & rec page?!). AC 101-10 v1.2 Remotely piloted aircraft systems – operation of excluded RPA (other than model aircraft), and on page 10 it's all made clear:



https://www.casa.gov.au/file/171461/download?token=rD99831v

I believe this is where the confusion comes from. If you're flying a Micro drone then you can indeed fly within the 5.5km of a controlled aerodome, anything larger and you cannot. I guess you could say we're both right, but you're a more so since yours covers the Mav

1. The document you have referenced is not legislation. AC stands for "Advisory Circular". It is an advisory document from CASA, summarising certain regulations for ease of public consumption.

2. The particular AC document you have quoted, AC 101-10 is for excluded RPA operating for commercial purposes, not for sport or recreational purposes. That is the reason it isn't linked on the sport & rec page. I'll refer you to 2.2.5 below.

From AC 101-10
"2.2.5 Sport or recreational purposes means operating an RPA as a hobby or for pleasure. The operation does not generate a direct commercial outcome of any sort (for the pilot or any third party). 2.2.6 The use of an RPA for any sport or recreational operation defines the RPA as a 'model aircraft'. Guidance on operating model aircraft can be found in AC 101-03."

For future reference, we will be using AC 101-03. Link below

https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/files/net351/f/_assets/main/rules/1998casr/101/101c03.pdf

7.2 Models weighing up to 25 kg 7.2.1 Unless approval has been obtained beforehand, model aircraft should only be flown: July 2002 4 AC 101-3(0): Unmanned aircraft and rockets: Model aircraft (a) when the weather is suitable; (b) clear of the movement areas or runways of an aerodrome; (c) below 400ft above ground level unless: (i) clear of controlled airspace, and (ii) further than 3 nautical miles from any aerodrome: (d) within sight of the operator at all times; (e) well clear of populous areas; (f) at least 30m clear of persons, vessels, vehicles or structures. This can be reduced for persons behind the direction of take off. Other model operators and any assistants or officials may be within this distance; as may vessels, vehicles or structures under their control.

 

[Logger]

Typical CASA to hide that in the fine print. Good pick up.

I think I will be done with it and notify casa that I will be flying for hire or reward. I prefer to use the new simplified drone rules 101-01 than that old model aircraft set. Then I can make few bucks on the side to pay for my hobby to boot..

 

[mikelowrey]

Typical CASA to hide that in the fine print. Good pick up.

I think I will be done with it and notify casa that I will be flying for hire or reward. I prefer to use the new simplified drone rules 101-01 than that old model aircraft set. Then I can make few bucks on the side to pay for my hobby to boot..

Thanks @Logger. I agree with you in relation to the 01 rules, simple and well defined boundaries. However, I'm wondering where @gunpilot399 and @Drone Runner stand on this in light of this new information. There will surely be some red faces, and a few more sport and rec drones flying within the 5.5km radius.

 

[colvill]

Interesting and helpful thread. I live about 3km from an unmanned/uncontrolled regional airfield (Mittagong). There is no tower and there is very little traffic out of the airport. Assuming I play safe and keep below 100m am I OK to fly over my property?

 

[Logger]

Interesting and helpful thread. I live about 3km from an unmanned/uncontrolled regional airfield (Mittagong). There is no tower and there is very little traffic out of the airport. Assuming I play safe and keep below 100m am I OK to fly over my property?

Colvill, If you deem yourself to operate for sport or recreation purposes (most people around here) as @mikelowrey has pointed out, the model aircraft rules apply. They are more restrictive than the new RPA SOCs and say no flight within 3nm (5.5km) of any aerodrome. So by the rules Not OK to fly over your own property if it is withing 3nm of any aerodrome!! Except if you actually read the rules, there is of course a caveat at 101.075 that says effectively:

Operations within the 3nm (5.5km) radius of an aerodrome or helicopter landing site are possible and lawful providing you comply with the Standard Operating Conditions listed above and ensure that you do not operate:

• on the approach and departure path, or
• within the movement area, or
• create a hazard to aircraft that may be using those areas.

So I will definitely be printing this page out and keeping their interpretation it for reference.

Also if you deem that what you are doing is NOT sport or recreation, that you are doing a spot of aerial photography or checking your fences then your are not forced into the model aircraft rules by that catchall. Then you are seemingly an Excluded Very small RPA and can apply the new RPA SOCs. They say no flight within 3nm (5.5km) of a controlled aerodrome which Mititagong is not. So you are good to go and fine to fly over your own property.

So at least two interpretations that allow you to fly legally at your place.

 

[Logger]

I believe I can fly in this scenario using the recreational rules. Do you blokes interpret it the same?

Location is in a capital city. 3.5nm from a controlled airport and 650 metres from a heliport. Take off from an empty park that has no council restrictions precluding me, then straight out over an empty waterway away from boats and people. Remaining well below 150' above height of heliport, so no hazard to helicopters departing and arriving in the area.

Thoughts?

 

[BlakPhoenix]

CASA just posted an update on their "Can I Fly There?" app mentioning that it will be live in May! They have also said that it will show emergency service restricted zones, but will not differentiate between active/inactive restricted zones yet.

Linky link

 

[KoalaGuy]

So can we fly mavic for recreational purpose since I believe it weighs more than 2kg?


Sent from my iPhone using MavicPilots

 

[Logger]

The Mavic weighs 734 grams. (p56 of user manual).

 

[KoalaGuy]

Thanks Logger.
Also do you know regarding the CASA rule on flying no over 120 meters in major city? I live in Sydney and would love to take some aerial photo of opera house, St Mary church etc. I really worried if I fly then i got fined by the park rangers...

 

[BlakPhoenix]

Thanks Logger.
Also do you know regarding the CASA rule on flying no over 120 meters in major city? I live in Sydney and would love to take some aerial photo of opera house, St Mary church etc. I really worried if I fly then i got fined by the park rangers...

You are not allowed to fly over 120m in controlled airspace (which covers most major cities in Australia). Furthermore there is a lot of restricted airspace around Sydney harbour due to low flying aircraft. You should download apps that show you where you can fly like HOVER or B4UFLY, etc.

 

[BlakPhoenix]

Man gets fined $900 for breaking 120m AGL rule: NSW Police Force

I wonder where in Katoomba he was flying, if it was near the airfield or not.

 

[jamesV]

CASA posted a message on Twitter about flying drones around Sydney Harbour