Have your say on new CASA rules

[Phill]

Its only a proposal at this stage, not legislated yet.
The $1-160 touted fee is only for Excluded or commercial users.
Rec. operators would still have to do a 'weaker' exam, and pay $20 per year.

I did an example of their "proposed" exam some time ago.
It was just the rules contained in the Can I Fly There app.
If you don't know them you shouldn't be flying in the first place.

 

[Simmo]

I think this will be a little more involved. Especially for Excluded operators.

 

[Meta4]

I'm pretty happy with it overall except maybe the yearly registration of each RPA. If you own multiple birds it could end up costing a bit. If they went one registration fee per operator rather than RPA's I'd be happier.

I wonder how they can justify that when they were talking about registration on a "cost recovery" basis.
And if you owned two or three birds, you aren't going to have 2 or three in the air very often using all that airspace.
You'd be flying one at a time and the others would be sitting in a cupboard causing no-one any harm or concern.

The idea that recreational flyers only need an 8 minute quiz but <2kg commercial users should do a 30 minute quiz is interesting.
If there was a difference in risk between <2kg commercial flyers and recreational flyers, wouldn't the higher risk category be the general recreational group?
It seems to follow Senator O'Sullivan's idea that <2kg commercial operators were going to be a serious safety risk.
He seemed to think that opening up <2kg rules was somehow relaxing the previous safety rules.
Why was he so convinced that commercial users are the dangerous flyers?
He never got it that the same safety rules applied and the only change was that you would be able to sell photos that it was already legal to take.

Here's the brains behind this whole thing:
https://www.smh.com.au/technology/q...ones-following-committee-20170906-gyc7ek.html

 

[Muttley]

The idea that recreational flyers only need an 8 minute quiz but <2kg commercial users should do a 30 minute quiz is interesting.
If there was a difference in risk between <2kg commercial flyers and recreational flyers, wouldn't the higher risk category be the general recreational group?
It seems to follow Senator O'Sullivan's idea that <2kg commercial operators were going to be a serious safety risk.

That does seem odd, especially when it is the same aircraft.

 

[Phill]

I think this will be a little more involved. Especially for Excluded operators.
View attachment 60568

I saw that somewhere but can't find it now.
Seems easy enough for excluded.

 

[Simmo]

The way I see it the weight class system is gone? There is no Sub 2kg any more?? It says 'excluded Any RPA weight'???
I have posed the question to CASA.

 

[Meta4]

The way I see it the weight class system is gone? There is no Sub 2kg any more?? It says 'excluded Any RPA weight'???
I have posed the question to CASA.

There are two categories of excluded operators.: Sub 2k and flying over your own land

 

[Meta4]

The $1-160 touted fee is only for Excluded or commercial users.
Rec. operators would still have to do a 'weaker' exam, and pay $20 per year.

I think that $20 per year is pretty steep for recreational use and wonder how they can justify that annually just to keep you on a database.

When it comes to the excluded operators, except for a few farmers, most are going to be essentially recreational flyers that could from time to time sell a few photos.
That is if they are lucky enough to be able to find anyone that would pay for them.
Perhaps I'm wrong but I wouldn't think many sub 2kg commercial users are making very much at all.
Is it right to expect those users to pay $100 or more per year to be registered?
What about a backup drone that is rarely used?

 

[bushie]

I think the $20 per year is a bit steep. My wife ocasionally flies my drone so th a t is $40 per year out of our pension.

 

[Phill]

I think that $20 per year is pretty steep for recreational use and wonder how they can justify that annually just to keep you on a database.

When it comes to the excluded operators, except for a few farmers, most are going to be essentially recreational flyers that could from time to time sell a few photos.
That is if they are lucky enough to be able to find anyone that would pay for them.
Perhaps I'm wrong but I wouldn't think many sub 2kg commercial users are making very much at all.
Is it right to expect those users to pay $100 or more per year to be registered?
What about a backup drone that is rarely used?

By having an ARN which is free I'm already in their data base and receive their email notifications etc so why do they need $20 from me?

 

[Meta4]

By having an ARN which is free I'm already in their data base and receive their email notifications etc so why do they need $20 from me?

Exactly ... and that's $20 per year too.
I wish I'd thought to mention that in my comments to them

 

[Simmo]

I mentioned it bud.
Also, the fact that most rec flyers, that are serious, know the rules, go to the effort of getting an ARN, notifying intent, and then dont go out trying to hit on every real estate shop in town!!!
I think, if the proposals go ahead, I will go back to being classed as a rec operator.... deal with whatever comes after that...

 

[Phill]

Exactly ... and that's $20 per year too.
I wish I'd thought to mention that in my comments to them

I mentioned it in mine and so has Simmo and hopefully a lot of others.

 

[Phill]

I mentioned it bud.
Also, the fact that most rec flyers, that are serious, know the rules, go to the effort of getting an ARN, notifying intent, and then dont go out trying to hit on every real estate shop in town!!!
I think, if the proposals go ahead, I will go back to being classed as a rec operator.... deal with whatever comes after that...

I'll be doing the same.
I'm in real estate and keep getting hit on by drone owners all the time.
When I tell em I've got my own I never hear from them again.
I only use mine for my own stuff and don't get paid for it so it looks like rec for me too.

 

[bushie]

I mentioned it in mine and so has Simmo and hopefully a lot of others.

I mentioned as well, but with my wife flying sometimes it becomes $40 per annum.

 

[packnrat]

Me too but at least they let us have a say.

have a say ok, maybe.
but will they care what you said? did they even listen to you?
some of these bureaucrats go in with there mind already made, there vote was sold to the highest bidder.

 

[Phill]

I mentioned as well, but with my wife flying sometimes it becomes $40 per annum.

Isn't it per drone not per person?

 

[Simmo]

Isn't it per drone not per person?

The cost of registration has yet to be determined by CASA. The cost will depend on whether you fly your drone for fun or profit. It is likely to be a $20 or less annual fee (per person) for recreational drones and for some model aircraft operators. There will also be an annual registration fee likely to range from $100 to $160 per drone, for each commercial drone.

 

[Phill]

The cost of registration has yet to be determined by CASA. The cost will depend on whether you fly your drone for fun or profit. It is likely to be a $20 or less annual fee (per person) for recreational drones and for some model aircraft operators. There will also be an annual registration fee likely to range from $100 to $160 per drone, for each commercial drone.

Yep
Thanks for the correction.
I went back and reread it after I posted that.
Per person could get expensive for a family with a couple of kids.

 

[Phill]

I just got the results from the last CASA survey.
Doesn't really say much.