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

CASA review of my video

delbz

New Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2018
Messages
3
Reactions
6
Age
56
Hi folks,
This thread is mainly for Australian forum members.

I recently bought a Mavic Pro and wanted to ensure I fly within Australian laws.
I asked CASA about flying over private property as this is ambiguous to me. This is CASA's response.

-------------
Good afternoon,

CASA's role is restricted to aviation safety, CASA has no jurisdiction over land use matters and matters of trespass and privacy however when operating a drone/RPA for Recreation (fun) an operator must ensure they comply with the information and rules provided on the CASA website at Flying drones or model aircraft recreationally | Civil Aviation Safety Authority

When reviewing the rules at the above link you will see that among those listed:

· you cannot operate any closer than 30 metres of people, unless the other person is part of controlling or navigating the drone and

· you must not fly your drone over the top of people

· you must not operate your drone in a way that creates a hazard to another aircraft, another person, or property (e.g. house).

While not a CASA regulation we do encourage operators to adopt a fly neighbourly policy and remind operators to become familiar with their obligations in relation to privacy, nuisance and trespass.

Even though you are not intending to land on your neighbour’s property you may consider contacting them to inform them of your planned operation.

----------------
I wanted more clarification so I sent a short video clip of my Mavic flying around the neighborhood to CASA to seek feedback on whether I am breaking any rules with this type of flying.

Here's CASA's response.

-----------

Thanks for providing the video link and allowing me to assess the video with the intention of providing guidance/education on the regulations for you.

The initial scene where your son and the dog are present – may be deemed to breach the 30m minimum distance to a drone. The measurement of 30m is measured from the point on the ground directly beneath the drone, 30m in every direction. It is not measured from the drone itself. Hence in effect there is a cylinder of 30m radius around a person of unlimited height to which a drone cannot be in proximity of that person. It also by effect means a drone cannot fly over people.

At 0.48 (and subsequent areas where flown over houses) in the video, this part would be deemed populous. As an operator you cannot control the movements of people below in the area where the drone is flying and not only would this pose a problem with the 30m rule, in the event of a failure, if also would mean that you cannot clear the area and not cause damage to property or injury to someone. Flying over a populated area is for certified aircraft (at a minimum height typically at 1000FT) and there are no certified unmanned aircraft in Australia presently.

cid:image002.jpg@01D3855E.F4C3D090

The other footage within the video has no issues from what I can tell.
I am more than happy to discuss over the phone if you require further clarification as to the various aspects outlined above.

-----------
So, it's now clear from that Australians cannot fly their drones within 30m of humans or houses, no matter how high. This clarifies the summarised rules at Droneflyer | Recreational drone rules and regulation

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Great video by the way

A Mavic coming down at terminal velocity can do a bit of damage as it's about 740grams (a P4P is worse at 1.4kg) , just imagine that dropping from 120m.

So I probably support the 30m horizontal separation rule, as I wouldn't want to hurt anyone.

It's pretty clear in the CASA rules " you must not fly over people"

Flying drones or model aircraft recreationally | Civil Aviation Safety Authority

Just fly in the bush, the scenery is better anyway

Also some councils are prohibiting the flying of drones outside of designated areas, that is what my council (Stirling in Perth) is doing, they have council inspectors looking for drone flyers, ready to fine us.

It's a matter of time, we will all need to take out third party liability insurance, to protect ourselves against inadvertently hurting someone with our drones e.g like we do with our cars etc.

Also we'll be restricted to flying like other RC modellers in designated RC club fields
 
Last edited:
As stated, it's about aviation safety. The common sense logic is: if it suddenly fails and falls, it shouldn't land on people or property. As for height, it shouldn't be high enough to hit/be hit by manned aircrafts. 30m is a guide. If the wind is blowing, consider extending that range. As the pilot, you should be able to see and avoid if it falls towards you. As for other people, they might not notice if the AC is falling towards them and get out of the way in time. Safety first; yourself, others, properties.
 
Just fly in the bush, the scenery is better anyway

Also some councils are prohibiting the flying of drones outside of designated areas, that is what my council (Stirling in Perth) is doing, they have council inspectors looking for drone flyers, ready to fine us.

For sure, would rather fly away from any homes or people, landscapes or derelict abandoned sites are far better and interesting.

I see increasingly blanket bans by councils Aust wide as a far bigger threat to suburban and semi suburban flying than CASA regs.
Believe me, more and more are doing this, it's under bylaw for 'Local Government Land Use' if people want to google their council name + bylaws and find it, read sections about model planes, drones, boats, and to a certain extent using land in ways that are not a risk to others.
A lot of beautiful coastline is being limited for flying, due to extensive foreshore areas being under council authority.

If you want to read more on privacy rules for photographing / videoing people in public, this document is an eye opener . . .

Arts Law : Information Sheet : Street photographer’s rights
 
Hi folks,
This thread is mainly for Australian forum members.

I recently bought a Mavic Pro and wanted to ensure I fly within Australian laws.
I asked CASA about flying over private property as this is ambiguous to me. This is CASA's response.

-------------


----------------
I wanted more clarification so I sent a short video clip of my Mavic flying around the neighborhood to CASA to seek feedback on whether I am breaking any rules with this type of flying.

Here's CASA's response.

-----------



-----------
So, it's now clear from that Australians cannot fly their drones within 30m of humans or houses, no matter how high. This clarifies the summarised rules at Droneflyer | Recreational drone rules and regulation

Thoughts
Sounds to me like not directly over people, no matter how high. But with regard to structures, not closer than 30m. If so, you could fly over structures if over 30m above them. Right??
 
I saw this on the CASA website:-

Dirty Dozen: 12 ways your drone can land you in trouble | Flight Safety Australia
See Section 4.
"There are certain places where you shouldn’t fly your drone without first gaining the permission from the relevant authority.
These places include private property, national parks, secure or sensitive areas such as prisons, military bases, schools, council land and notable landmarks, where flying your drone could even gain you the unwanted attention of local law enforcement."
Private property?? I couldn't find any reference to that limitation anywhere else.
(I copied this from another thread I replied to.)
 
So, it's now clear from that Australians cannot fly their drones within 30m of humans or houses, no matter how high.

I don't think that's quite right. The amendment released has dropped the wording buildings/vehicles but still contains the word 'people'.
And I think it used to say something like "involved in the shoot" (dunno?) but now it stipulates 'unless the other person is essential to controlling or navigating the drone'.
Where CASA are getting their ruling from is to fly over a "populous" area. Therefore a bunch of houses like in your video is technically a no go.
But I think say doing a real estate shot or inspection of gutters or antennae for example, I can now flt closer than 30 mtrs, providing there are no people around.
 
I’m no lawyer, but have had some experience in legislation. I pose the question; “at what height can I fly across someone property before I need authority?”

In Queensland, every individual has the right of safe access to any front door of a house, unit, building. So if I can legally walk into someone’s yard and up to their front door, why does it all of a sudden change if I’m in the air.

Does the council have any say on over water activities? No. Councils generally only have jurisdiction to the high water mark, hence why people walk their dogs at low tide. Unless the State Government allows it councils have limited authority.

I understand that the Commonwealth, State, and local governments are all arguing, because in legal terms it becomes extremely challenging in regards legal jurisdiction.

If I’m not physically attached to terrafirma, then I’m not in that jurisdiction. I’m not at all saying it’s a free for all, and nor should it be in my opinion. CASA is the only authority for off terrafirma matters, except maritime which if you are on the water in each state is only out to 3nM from base line, and then it is the State, not LGA.

The 30m horizontal rule in the CASR does not mention vertical, it merely talks of separation. That’s because separation standards is what CASA works on. How many people do jets fly over? They allow vertical separation as a safety factor, and they wrote it in the regs. Have a look at the definition of separation.
 
Does the council have any say on over water activities? No. Councils generally only have jurisdiction to the high water mark, hence why people walk their dogs at low tide. Unless the State Government allows it councils have limited authority..

This council topic is one I am interested in, and it is difficult trying to ascertain what ALL council 'land' actually is.

Aussie flyers may or may not be aware that many local councils across the country are bringing in bylaws (termed Local Government Land or similar) banning drones, other recreational users of model boats, some even kites with 2 strings !!

This is a ban to launch, retrieve, or operate a drone on council authority land, you can launch elsewhere and fly over this land, areas such as foreshore reserves, suburban parks, sports ovals, etc. A footpath would also be off limits to launch / retrieve, or operate from, possibly carparks, a grey area that may vary.

Flying from an ok spot and flying to film might be possible, but often in effect can put you in a non VLOS situation, one CASAs rules of flight.
This sort of legislation effectively makes suburban flying with common sense to CASA rules much more difficult (sometimes impossible), and less safe, for tasks such as testing your settings, flight modes, etc at a public park in a quiet place / time.

If high tide mark is prevalent, we could operate hand launch to film coast, when and where we can adhere to CASA rules.
But I have found docs where councils are looking to rezone their authority down to low tide mark, even offshore a short distance.

CASA rules are relatively easy to follow, I see these ever increasing Council bans as a far more problematic issue than any other for suburban (and near metro) recreational flyers.
 
MAvic_South_Oz i was wrong in regards the high water mark in Queensland at least. the State Government (QLD) changed and now allows a LGA to make laws over water IF it is within their boundary set by the State Government. So some LGA in Queensland stop at high water mark, others have been granted authority further out by the State Government. I know that SA and QLD are fairly similar in their criminal codes, so maybe its similar in this stuff. You'd have to search to see the piece of legislation that empowers the LGA in your State, because thats how LGA's get any authority.

Interestingly in QLD a LGA can only make a law that the State is allowed to make. So aircraft covered under Commonwealth Law can't be legislated against in State nor LGA. Hence why many LGA's are using CASA's excluded definition.
 
What if I operate a hovercraft that doesn't touch the ground? Is CASA interested? If not, at what height does it become interested?
 
Good example. CASA excludes WIGs as aircraft generally. AMSA includes them for commercial operations as vessels. BUT does the State Government include them as road vehicles? Can you register a hovercraft and drive down a road? My cursory belief is that the State Governments would somehow have included them, and therefore empowered the LGA to do same. Even if it was a commercial hovercraft, AMSA still excludes some areas of control, allowing the States to do it.

Ozeb, the major difference is aircraft can fly outside of ground effect. A WIG supposedly can’t, so they generally stay as land/sea craft.
 
MAvic_South_Oz i was wrong in regards the high water mark in Queensland at least..

Thanks Sean, I will try and dig more, but think there will be no info online, I think it's something they don't share, something I will have to somehow discreetly inquire about.
It'd be good to know so where councils introduce draconian bylaws, they can be dealt with legally, knowing your rights and theirs.

I see councils cleaning beaches after big summer days (since many people in general are pigs, and don't take their rubbish with them), so figure they would be wanting authority to low water mark at least a part of their legal needs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Trooper63
Hi folks,
This thread is mainly for Australian forum members.

I recently bought a Mavic Pro and wanted to ensure I fly within Australian laws.
I asked CASA about flying over private property as this is ambiguous to me. This is CASA's response.

-------------


----------------
I wanted more clarification so I sent a short video clip of my Mavic flying around the neighborhood to CASA to seek feedback on whether I am breaking any rules with this type of flying.

Here's CASA's response.

-----------



-----------
So, it's now clear from that Australians cannot fly their drones within 30m of humans or houses, no matter how high. This clarifies the summarised rules at Droneflyer | Recreational drone rules and regulation

Thoughts?
Hi Delbz
I fly around your area as I live in Hope Island.
some good flying in this area!
Cheers
 
This council topic is one I am interested in, and it is difficult trying to ascertain what ALL council 'land' actually is.

Aussie flyers may or may not be aware that many local councils across the country are bringing in bylaws (termed Local Government Land or similar) banning drones, other recreational users of model boats, some even kites with 2 strings !!

This is a ban to launch, retrieve, or operate a drone on council authority land, you can launch elsewhere and fly over this land, areas such as foreshore reserves, suburban parks, sports ovals, etc. A footpath would also be off limits to launch / retrieve, or operate from, possibly carparks, a grey area that may vary.

Flying from an ok spot and flying to film might be possible, but often in effect can put you in a non VLOS situation, one CASAs rules of flight.
This sort of legislation effectively makes suburban flying with common sense to CASA rules much more difficult (sometimes impossible), and less safe, for tasks such as testing your settings, flight modes, etc at a public park in a quiet place / time.

If high tide mark is prevalent, we could operate hand launch to film coast, when and where we can adhere to CASA rules.
But I have found docs where councils are looking to rezone their authority down to low tide mark, even offshore a short distance.

CASA rules are relatively easy to follow, I see these ever increasing Council bans as a far more problematic issue than any other for suburban (and near metro) recreational flyers.


Here on the Sunshine Coast the Council require you to submit an application to use council land (around $418 for commercial users for the first year and $99 pa after that) and also require you to have $20 million public liability insurance. So for a Mavic user that's $1000 to be able to fly for the first year (If you application to Council is not successful the $418 is non refundable)
But if you are using private property no application or PLI is needed.
 
Great video by the way

A Mavic coming down at terminal velocity can do a bit of damage as it's about 740grams (a P4P is worse at 1.4kg) , just imagine that dropping from 120m.

So I probably support the 30m horizontal separation rule, as I wouldn't want to hurt anyone.

It's pretty clear in the CASA rules " you must not fly over people"

Flying drones or model aircraft recreationally | Civil Aviation Safety Authority

Just fly in the bush, the scenery is better anyway

Also some councils are prohibiting the flying of drones outside of designated areas, that is what my council (Stirling in Perth) is doing, they have council inspectors looking for drone flyers, ready to fine us.

It's a matter of time, we will all need to take out third party liability insurance, to protect ourselves against inadvertently hurting someone with our drones e.g like we do with our cars etc.

Also we'll be restricted to flying like other RC modellers in designated RC club fields

Somrone should take Stirling on. Mandurah have decide they dont have the poweer for such rules
Only CASA does
 
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
130,596
Messages
1,554,226
Members
159,602
Latest member
Tenakeetwo