Actually, the basic vs advanced applies to where you can fly, not for what purpose. There is no longer any distinction between recreational and commercial flights.
Mavic Mini No Licence requirement question
- Thread starter fjc
- Start date
Actually, the basic vs advanced applies to where you can fly, not for what purpose. There is no longer any distinction between recreational and commercial flights.
You are missing the point of my response. It's about the fact that a MM can now take away any commercial jobs within its capabilities, and do so safer than any other drone, because the 249g weight is deemed sufficiently harmless.
Sounds like you realize the MM can easily take away business, in Canada, under the current regulations. The whole point of the sub 250g category is safety. If it hits someone, the harm will be de minimus, compared to your commercial heavy lifter! If the job can be pulled off with a MM, it is the right tool for the job!
It will not take away any business after the first few idiots will lose the drone in the stronger wind it will be back to usual. I don't think we should have an approach: "It is small so if it hits someone it is ok" we should be avoiding accidents by flying in good conditions. Not by flying anytime and saying: if I hit that lady with the kid it's ok the drone is light and most likely will not do any harm.
There are not many days in a month in Canada when you can really fly MM safely to do the job.
I have MM since day one and flew bigger drones and have a quite good comparison. I think when the client wants to do the shoot on Wednesday, you go and do it on Wednesday, how many times you will ask to reschedule due to windy weather. You might have more flexibility with real estate, but how are you gonna go about weddings etc, I'm not even mentioning any type of surveys, you gonna say: If the weather will be nice you will have your drone shoot?
Come on, that's just not professional
Mavic mini is a toy, it does what it does in certain conditions, but it is a toy, anyone trying to use for building serious business is delusional. As an odd addition for one-offs sure. But I already heard here it could be used as a rescue drone, so nothing will surprise me There will be more people with "I lost my drone on the first take off"At $399 a pop, you can lose more than four of them, before you will have paid for an M2P! If it can do the job, MM will take away business. With prop guards on around people, and the diminutive size and weight, it can get shots you wouldn't dare use a heavy lifter for. It definitely has its place. If the client is flexible on what day the shoot occurs and the MM owner offers to do it for $100 when the wind dies down, and you want $1000 to do it any day, the MM owner will always get first crack! You'll be backup!It will not take away any business after the first few idiots will lose the drone in the stronger wind it will be back to usual. I don't think we should have an approach: "It is small so if it hits someone it is ok" we should be avoiding accidents by flying in good conditions. Not by flying anytime and saying: if I hit that lady with the kid it's ok the drone is light and most likely will not do any harm.
There are not many days in a month in Canada when you can really fly MM safely to do the job.
I have MM since day one and flew bigger drones and have a quite good comparison. I think when the client wants to do the shoot on Wednesday, you go and do it on Wednesday, how many times you will ask to reschedule due to windy weather. You might have more flexibility with real estate, but how are you gonna go about weddings etc, I'm not even mentioning any type of surveys, you gonna say: If the weather will be nice you will have your drone shoot?
Come on, that's just not professional
?
I bet you didn't fly MM with prop guards on...I fly for pleasure so I will not be a backup
Bottom feeders that charger 100$ a session can't afford their MM to be lost 4 times because their uber gig would not pay for a replacement
They are taking away jobs that commercial serious pilot would not bother to do anyway. Not many people are ready to drive to the location to do the shoot and post-process for 100$ that is below desperation pricing, counting all the risks it is easier to make $ at the drive-through at Mcdonalds. I'm talking about professionals, not some clueless moonlighters, you get what you pay for.Some people drive 100 miles just for the opportunity to fly their drone. Getting paid anything when they get there is a huge bonus! It's a race to the bottom, if the MM can do the job. Far more people with MM's that would happily shoot it for free just for fun and the experience than professionals that need to earn a living at it. You do get what you pay for, but sometimes there is no budget for the best, so good enough will have to do! The gig economy has definitely changed everything. The Uber driver now carries a MM and shoots drone video in between rides, and picks up and charges dockless scooters at night!?
I fly for pleasure so I will not be a backup
Bottom feeders that charger 100$ a session can't afford their MM to be lost 4 times because their uber gig would not pay for a replacement
Thanev
Well-Known Member
So if I fly this straight into someone's face I can say it is "sufficiently harmless"....cooooool!
Yup.The laws are going to change concerning all drones regardless of weight.
Thanev
Well-Known Member
I fully agree in that you" get what you pay for". I see these tiny drones messing with the market of the "pros" much like the point and shoot cameras did in the wedding business.?
I fly for pleasure so I will not be a backup
Bottom feeders that charger 100$ a session can't afford their MM to be lost 4 times because their uber gig would not pay for a replacement
Pros will continue to get paid for what they do if they provide a superior product and can SELL themselves.People who care about results will hire these pros for important shots.Those with no skill sets in capturing video or post production will fall to the bottom.
The consumer who pays bargain level prices should be prepared for the results and will get what they pay for.
Hey, don't blame the messenger. The FAA and Canada have both decreed that drones weighing under 250g don't require registration, and pose so little risk of harm that in Canada, they are exempt from almost all drone regulations! Take up your concerns with them!
Thanev
Well-Known Member
I agree with what you mentioned on their stance,but I do believe bad things are in store for us with the message of lower mass =less chance of serious injury.There seems to be a conception that under 250gm has no rules to follow,at all.Drones over 250gm hold very little chance of harm when flown by educated pilots.My point is simply I see that loophole closing after a few complaints /injuries.And in some cases,the enforcement agencies need to be schooled.
Last edited:
Funny we were talking about this. Yesterday a friend of mine got a ticket in Toronto, actually, he got 3 tickets. He was flying in one of the green city parks, the cop came over and said they had received complaint. He said there were only people in the dog area and nowhere else as it was clod. He was trying to tell the cop his Mavic Mini is 249g etc. showing him all kinds of regulations etc. The police said they do not care, to take it to court: "I'm giving you the lowest fine I can". $500 ticket for flying close to people, even tho he was quite far from people according to him, I believe him he is the safest guy I know — second $500 ticket for operating in the park, the park had sign "no drones", and third $500 ticket for flying without a license. He said he will take it to court, I'm sure he will win, but all the stress and time lost at work is not worth it flying in the city. There is our 249g mavic mini stress test. A few more of those and everyone will be selling back the drone on kijiji. No matter how you look at it, it will cost him a day at work and the cost of parking in the city court. Cop said this could cost him $5000 if he would not like drones himself...
Thanev
Well-Known Member
In speaking with the Police here,they have taken a hands-off approach.Until.there is a complaint they need to act on.
I consider myself fortunate in that I am close to beautiful areas outside of city limits.Not everyone is that fortunate. A freind even offered the use of his scanner to monitor police activity in the rural areas.Now THAT IS SAD.The laws are killing the hobby for the kids though.Sad society we now live in.
I consider myself fortunate in that I am close to beautiful areas outside of city limits.Not everyone is that fortunate. A freind even offered the use of his scanner to monitor police activity in the rural areas.Now THAT IS SAD.The laws are killing the hobby for the kids though.Sad society we now live in.
Last edited:
Flying openly in public is always risky, regardless of how legal it is. Flying stealthily from outside the park would have been far wiser. Don't point a target on your back. Be discreet. Fly from where you can't be seen, and early in the morning or when no one else is around.
ajkm
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2019
- Messages
- 251
- Reactions
- 153
- Age
- 66
So, a number of comments:
1. “And since you need no licence, that would preclude you from having to know the rules in the first place.”
- This would be a breach of CARs 900.06 and would most likely be considered reckless/negligent piloting by TC. Deliberately not knowing the regulations would, imho, be an irresponsible approach to take for someone who is professing to engage in “commercial purposes”.
2. CARs draw no distinction between commercial and recreational flight.
3. Without an Advanced OpS certificate, 900.06 would in my view tend to restrict operation in controlled airspace etc.
4. Have you added the decal to your MM? Do you ever use prop guards? Either will make the MM subject to the regulations, as will landing legs, LED strobe lighting, or anything else that a commercial operator might consider to be operationally required.
Please always fly responsibly, whether or not you choose to register your RPA and obtain your certification. You are flying in airspace that others are using having gained the requisite knowledge - this is also another reason why you need to have an understanding of the rules that apply.
1. “And since you need no licence, that would preclude you from having to know the rules in the first place.”
- This would be a breach of CARs 900.06 and would most likely be considered reckless/negligent piloting by TC. Deliberately not knowing the regulations would, imho, be an irresponsible approach to take for someone who is professing to engage in “commercial purposes”.
2. CARs draw no distinction between commercial and recreational flight.
3. Without an Advanced OpS certificate, 900.06 would in my view tend to restrict operation in controlled airspace etc.
4. Have you added the decal to your MM? Do you ever use prop guards? Either will make the MM subject to the regulations, as will landing legs, LED strobe lighting, or anything else that a commercial operator might consider to be operationally required.
Please always fly responsibly, whether or not you choose to register your RPA and obtain your certification. You are flying in airspace that others are using having gained the requisite knowledge - this is also another reason why you need to have an understanding of the rules that apply.
ajkm
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2019
- Messages
- 251
- Reactions
- 153
- Age
- 66
**This is absolutely inaccurate information about the Canadian regulations.**
Please refrain from making definitive statements about the laws in another country unless you have direct knowledge of them.
Even for Canada this is much opinion and misinformation.
"decal" decal for what?
"Prop guards" etc. relating to increasing the weight. I suspect you are referring to a RPA with a "maximum take-off weight of 250 g. What you are missing is :
Part IX — Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems
Division I — General Provisions
Interpretation
900.01 The following definitions apply in this Part.
...
payload means a system, an object or a collection of objects that is on board or is otherwise connected to a remotely piloted aircraft but that is not required for flight. (charge utile)
Whether prop guards, lights, extended landing gear or even the camera are required for flight has not been tested in the courts. "a commercial operator might consider to be operationally required." Consider and opinion are not relevant to law.
You should stop giving misinformation and maybe remove the "·TC Advanced Ops RPAS Pilot
& Flight Reviewer" from your signature. This is not the first time you have given bad information.
Cookedinlh
Well-Known Member
I've studied and discussed the rules for years . . wrote a 3 page summary on Canadian PART IX and posted it. My discussions with Transport Canada tell me the ONLY rule that applies is Fly responsibly and do anything you want just "don't be a danger to people or other aircraft" . . and that bit of wisdom will last only as long a someone does not get hurt . . or an aircraft incident happens with a sub 250 drone. The rules can change at any time so I expect someone will try to get the limit dropped to 25 g someday. Meanwhile I believe DJI Mini and the like are now fair game for any application commercial or otherwise and in Canada at least, all those SPECIFIC rules (PART IX) only apply to 250g+ machines and operations.
I've always thought that technology will move a lot faster than rules so . . like now . . the rules only apply to what you make the rules for and micro-miniaturization will continue to lead..... This one (at 18grams) has been around since 2013 with the Brit Army and already has a dual camera IR version . . . commercial versions at 1/10th the weight of the Mini will be $100 in the next couple of years . . what do you think the RULES will say then!
I've always thought that technology will move a lot faster than rules so . . like now . . the rules only apply to what you make the rules for and micro-miniaturization will continue to lead..... This one (at 18grams) has been around since 2013 with the Brit Army and already has a dual camera IR version . . . commercial versions at 1/10th the weight of the Mini will be $100 in the next couple of years . . what do you think the RULES will say then!
ajkm
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2019
- Messages
- 251
- Reactions
- 153
- Age
- 66
The decal provided with the MM that can be coloured and applied to the RPA immediately puts the MM over 250g TOW. I believe you are misinterpreting 900.01 in this instance; the decal, strobes, landing gear etc that some choose to use put the TOW (which is defined in CARs 101.01) over the 250g.
The 900.01 definition to which you refer, only relates to Part IX ("The following definitions apply in this Part.") and specifically to 901.43 which describes four types of payload that a 250g-25kg RPA pilot may not carry in the absence of an SFOC.
As for the ad hominem insult - perhaps we could stick to facts rather than personal attack? I'm quite prepared to discuss and debate the issues (particularly from an aviation law perspective), but would expect to do so with respect and courtesy. The items in my signature to which you refer are the relevant qualifications in this forum and I have no problem at all standing over them.
Last edited:
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
New Threads
-
3 Repairs done(mostly) Now off to explore Raja Ampat
- Started by Vernon
- Replies: 0
-
Air 3s Exploring 70+ Jaw Dropping Places in Canada 2025 | Epic 4K HDR Tour
- Started by FirefliesStudios
- Replies: 2
-
-
Air 3s This is Norway - Relaxing Natural Beauty
- Started by spamgnome
- Replies: 1
-
Forum statistics
