Australian Rules and Regulations - CASA

[Ozeb]

I think they are refering to some one else's private property without the owners permission.

Yes. But I couldn't find any other reference to it. If you go to the CASA site and look up the basic rules you will not find that flying over someone else's private property is verboten.
(BYW, that web page is 12 months old.) I would love some more recent information.
No mention of it here:-
Flying drones or model aircraft recreationally | Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Or here:-
Droneflyer | Recreational drone rules and regulation

 

[Simmo]

That '12 ways ' is just an advisory to new flyers, Casa have no 'jurisdiction' or even care basically what you fly over (on the ground), they were just spelling out common sense for the uninitiated. Flying over someone elses property without their permission is frowned upon as it might upset the owner, so its best to get permission.

 

[wombat]

If you are not sure about current rules you can always fill in their form on their site or email them, they will always reply, I have found them to be very helpful

 

[Simmo]

I agree @wombat they are great to deal with in most instances.
[email protected]

 

[Trooper63]

Hi, I’m fairly new here. Just completed RePL, but have a question.

In regards the 30m rule, it was suggested to me that this means 30m horizontal radius around an individual, AND unlimited vertical. So effectively you cannot at anytime fly over anyone even if you are at 100AGL.

I don’t believe the rules actually say that, they could be interpreted like that, but I don’t believe so.

Thoughts?

 

[Simmo]

Forget the 30 mtr rule in that respect. The wording is you cant fly over people. It doesn't stipulate a height, just that you cant.

 

[Trooper63]

Simmo, can you reference where it says "can't fly over people" for me.

101.238 say within 30m of a person.

a person does not equal a populous area, which I agree it says you cant fly over a populous area (crowded beach, sporting event - key words density of population in 101.025)

I could be wrong though, and that's why I'm asking.

 

[Simmo]

Simmo, can you reference where it says "can't fly over people" for me.

Here mate. Flying drones or model aircraft recreationally | Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Also, 'populous' could be one person.

4. Populous areas - for RPA operations, does not have its common meaning. Rather, it is defined in the regulations as:
…an area [that] has a sufficient density of population for some aspect of the operation, or some event that might happen during the operation (in particular, a fault in, or failure of, the aircraft…) to pose an unreasonable risk to the life, safety or property of somebody who is in the area but is not connected with the operation.
For example, if a rotorcraft-type RPA is flying at a relatively low height (i.e. ~30 m/100 ft) directly above a single person not associated with the flight, it may be considered to be operating in a populous area due to the fact that a complete loss of power may cause injury to the person below. Similarly, an RPA operating over a large public gathering at a higher level (e.g. 120 m/400 ft) would pose an unreasonable risk to the safety of the people below because, in the event of a systems failure, it may not be able to clear the area. This interpretation would apply equally to higher flight over built-up areas where there is a greater risk to property.

 

[Ozeb]

It makes you wonder then how air-shows are ever permitted. I've watch countless videos of planes crash on to the watching public. Just do a Youtube search of "airshow crashes". Airshows have lots of low-flying aircraft. That's why we go to see them.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

Hi, I’m fairly new here. Just completed RePL, but have a question.

In regards the 30m rule, it was suggested to me that this means 30m horizontal radius around an individual, AND unlimited vertical. So effectively you cannot at anytime fly over anyone even if you are at 100AGL.

I don’t believe the rules actually say that, they could be interpreted like that, but I don’t believe so.

Thoughts?

It's best interpreted as can't fly above, period, and 30m laterally is correct as it's been confirmed by individuals with CASA.

This wasn't clarified in the course of the training ??

Also, is it 15m of people laterally for RePL, or is that only if you have ReOC too ??

 

[Simmo]

Hmm its says ReOC? Operations between 30m and 15m - non-company personnel | Civil Aviation Safety Authority

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

Hmm its says ReOC? Operations between 30m and 15m - non-company personnel | Civil Aviation Safety Authority

Just completed RePL

Yes Trooper said he has just done RePL, so must be limited to 30m still, that's where I wasn't sure . . . ReOC is further cert, think RePL is related to operator, is ReOC to do with business operation of drones ?
An RePL holder can fly 30m to 15m from person under certain conditions, if flying for an ReOC holder ?
Or if Trooper holds both he's good to go with approval.

 

[Simmo]

Depends what he's flying!!! Have you read the requirements??!! Has to have 2 parallel batteries and shown that it can fly under control with one motor out!!!!

 

[Ozeb]

I'm watching the SBS film about the Ghan railway. Much of the film must have been shot using drones. There was a point when it flew very, very close to a wind turbine! And one sequence when it flew a few metres ahead of the engine but looking back to it. I'm very surprised that they were permission to fly near the wind turbines. Assuming they were?
The footage was very good BTW.
I also suspect the drone pilot must have used FPV goggles to avoid hitting the wind turbine blades.

 

[Simmo]

I'm hearing ya Ozeb, I've been trying to stick by the rules here in Australia, but only recently an Inspire 2 flew not 10 mtrs above my and about 20 other workers on a building site. It had to be a pro, I couldnt find the pilot... I thought how did he get permission to fly there??
With the newer amendments to 101 flying close to an object is no longer an issue, provided that you abide by the other rules in 101.

 

[AgPhotoWings]

Thanks for recommending the app. I just checked the area in Sydney and I guess I'll just leave my Mavic at home. It's blanketed with so many overlapping NFZs.

As an old time Sydney syder and chopper photo passenger. The rules are flouted all the time....I really don't think they would be concerned by a little Mavic

 

[Simmo]

As an old time Sydney syder and chopper photo passenger. The rules are flouted all the time....I really don't think they would be concerned by a little Mavic

Errm, I wouldn't like to test that theory, not at $9k per breach..

 

[AgPhotoWings]

When was the last time you herd it enforced...I think a bell jet ranger would be far more vulnerable to a commercial flight path?

 

[Ozeb]

Re the Ghan film. I looked at the credits and there was a helicopter pilot listed but not specifically a drone pilot..

 

[Simmo]

When was the last time you herd it enforced...I think a bell jet ranger would be far more vulnerable to a commercial flight path?

Easter egg hunt, wedding trigger drone fines | Civil Aviation Safety Authority