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

new Alberta Canada pilot

Hi Fingers284. Welcome to drone flying from a fellow Albertan. Here is a screen shot of information regarding drone flying in Canada. The right side of the page speaks specifically to RPAS under 250grams. If you are looking for more information visit the Transport Canada website. It’s all there.
Enjoy your MiniSE.
DENIS
 

Attachments

  • DC77D96B-9431-43AA-8F86-EDAF8E429E95.png
    DC77D96B-9431-43AA-8F86-EDAF8E429E95.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 4
Welcome to the MavicPilots forum. Enjoy, and happy flying! ??
 
Greetings from Birmingham Alabama, welcome to the forum!
 
very new to the sport, bought first outfit 3 days ago (Mini SE) and have only 30 minutes fly-time total. I'm also an old boy with modern technology limitations....but I have a 6 yr old Granddaughter that can help a bit in that regard. So my main target of interest will be getting the most out of the Fly app.
Congratulations I’m also very new you will find a lot of info and great people here
 
Welcome from New Mexico. My wife and I spent many summers riding horses with our friends at their ranch in Caroline. There are lots of good folks here willing to share and learn.
My daughter just bought and moved into a property 15 mi south of Caroline (1/2 mile of James River frontage). She and her man have a few nags on the place to ride regularly. In my younger days I spent many weeks riding the pack trails from Caroline area to the National parks boundaries....know the area very well. Sure wish I owned a drone back then , a library of vids would be far better 'remeberance tools" than my old forgetful noggin.
 
Lucky! I didn't have that even when I was 20! :-(

Sounds like you have an ideal setting to get lots of practice. It's taken me years to reach 41 hours flight time (in 10-20 minute flights) because I have to drive to a safe place to fly. Bet you'll overtake me soon (especially with a granddaughter to fly with!).

I use Drone Pilot Canada to plan and log flights. It has a view showing flight regulations for micro-drones like the Mini. (And a view showing the DJI restrictions, which aren't the same as the legal ones.) Also stores documents like my sRPAS Certificate and equipment manuals.


You can also get the planning information from the NRC but I like having everything in one place.

Concerning the "practice & safe place to fly" just yesterday evening had an open fire BBQ cooking fire going in the back yard & thought I would get a few minutes flying in while waiting on the meal ....fired up the bird and hit the "go up stick" and flew the dang thing right through a flock of our local wild pigeons....didn't hit any but it sure wasn't from my :good management at the controls.....them bird were far better at evasive maneuvers than I was.
Those bird wanted nothing to do with me and my bird....they still haven't returned today. ..couldn't help but think of Sully & the Hudson river and how quick that could happen.
 
Visual line of sight (VLOS) means not only that you can see the drone unaided (without binoculars), but see it well enough to control it without the camera view. I'm impressed with your eyes because I can't see the Mini (well enough for VLOS) further than 300m or so — too many years reading screens :-(
Sub 250g the main regulation is 900.06 which applies to all drones. The (sub 250g) can operate in controlled airspace and near aerodromes as long as 900.06 is maintained, no coordination is required. No certificate or registration is required. Can it fly BVLOS, Yes. Should it fly VLOS, Yes it should. "Should" and Must" are two totally different terms and are not part of 900.06. The Transport Canada Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) clarifies this if you need further information.
So many people start quoting rules and regs for Basic and Advance when talking about sub 250 gram that don't apply.
 
Sub 250g the main regulation is 900.06 which applies to all drones. The (sub 250g) can operate in controlled airspace and near aerodromes as long as 900.06 is maintained, no coordination is required. No certificate or registration is required. Can it fly BVLOS, Yes. Should it fly VLOS, Yes it should. "Should" and Must" are two totally different terms and are not part of 900.06. The Transport Canada Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) clarifies this if you need further information.
So many people start quoting rules and regs for Basic and Advance when talking about sub 250 gram that don't apply.
I wasn't quoting regulations, but referencing the web site.

Pilots of micro drone don’t need to register their drone or get a drone pilot certificate to fly them. Pilots of micro drones are not bound by the same requirements as other drones. However, you must not operate your drone in a reckless or negligent manner as to endanger or be likely to endanger aviation safety or the safety of anyone.

While there are no prescriptive elements of the regulations, there is an expectation that the pilot of a micro drone to use good judgment, identify potential hazards, and take all necessary steps to avoid any risks associated with flying your drone.

As a good practice, you should always:
  • maintain the drone in direct line of sight
  • do not fly your drone above 400 feet in the air
  • keep a safe distance between your drone and any bystanders
  • stay far away from aerodromes, airport, heliport and waterdrome
  • avoid flying near critical infrastructures
  • stay clear of aircrafts, at all time
  • do a pre-flight inspection of your drone
  • keep the drone close enough to maintain the connection with the remote controller
  • avoid advertised events
Follow these guidelines to avoid flying in a negligent or reckless manner and being subject to fines. Enjoy a safe flight and minimize the risk of incidents. Remember: if you feel that your flight is risky, don’t do it.
A friend of mine, who's a lawyer, said that it would be very difficult to defend yourself if anything bad happened and you weren't doing everything you should be doing; maybe technically you didn't have to, but not doing so would be prima facie evidence of recklessness or negligence. He said that in the absence of more substantive regulations you would be reduced to defending your judgement — and the fact that something went wrong could easily be used to claim that your judgement was deficient.

(He has lots of stories about defending people who haven't broken any laws or contracts. He says even open-and-shut cases are expensive; cases that involve 'judgement' are incredibly expensive even when you win.)

Long-winded legal moral of the story: better to be cautious and avoid legal trouble than have to win in court.

As to the advisability of maintaining VLOS, I was flying my older Phantom last year using my old iPad, and the screen suddenly blanked and it wouldn't restart. It was no problem flying the drone back visually (controller still worked) because I had VLOS. Not certain what's up with the iPad — it's functional now with some lines on the display, but I'm not about to trust it for flying again.
 
Concerning the "practice & safe place to fly" just yesterday evening had an open fire BBQ cooking fire going in the back yard & thought I would get a few minutes flying in while waiting on the meal ....fired up the bird and hit the "go up stick" and flew the dang thing right through a flock of our local wild pigeons....didn't hit any but it sure wasn't from my :good management at the controls.....them bird were far better at evasive maneuvers than I was.
Those bird wanted nothing to do with me and my bird....they still haven't returned today. ..couldn't help but think of Sully & the Hudson river and how quick that could happen.
So your drone makes a good scarecrow? Or at least scarepigeon. :)

(Actually, I'd expect crows to come back, and possibly mob the drone. Smart and cunning beasts, corvids are.)

I make a point of keeping an eye out for birds, and steering clear of them. Even with DJI Refresh I'd rather not lose a drone to birdstrike.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrjohnc1
I wasn't quoting regulations, but referencing the web site.


A friend of mine, who's a lawyer, said that it would be very difficult to defend yourself if anything bad happened and you weren't doing everything you should be doing; maybe technically you didn't have to, but not doing so would be prima facie evidence of recklessness or negligence. He said that in the absence of more substantive regulations you would be reduced to defending your judgement — and the fact that something went wrong could easily be used to claim that your judgement was deficient.

(He has lots of stories about defending people who haven't broken any laws or contracts. He says even open-and-shut cases are expensive; cases that involve 'judgement' are incredibly expensive even when you win.)

Long-winded legal moral of the story: better to be cautious and avoid legal trouble than have to win in court.

As to the advisability of maintaining VLOS, I was flying my older Phantom last year using my old iPad, and the screen suddenly blanked and it wouldn't restart. It was no problem flying the drone back visually (controller still worked) because I had VLOS. Not certain what's up with the iPad — it's functional now with some lines on the display, but I'm not about to trust it for flying again.
Your friend the lawyer should educate himself with Canadian drone laws. Its very clear on what you can and cannot do with a sub 250g drone here in Canada. If your going to offer advice at least offer facts.

Micro remotely piloted aircraft systems(mRPAS) are made up of a remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) weighing less than 250g and its control station. The weight of the control station is not factored in to the weight calculation when determining whether an RPAS is micro (< 250 g) or small (250 g to 25 kg). However, the weight of any payload carried, such as optional cameras, will be considered part of the weight.
Pilots of micro RPASs are not subject to Subpart 1 of Part IX of the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARS), so they are not required to register their RPAs or obtain a certificate to fly them. However, they must adhere to CAR 900.06 and ensure they do not operate their RPA in such a reckless or negligent manner as to endanger or be likely to endanger aviation safety or the safety of any person. While there are no prescriptive elements of the regulation that inform the pilot how to accomplish this objective, there is an expectation that the pilot of a micro RPAS should use good judgment, identify potential hazards, and take all necessary steps to mitigate any risks associated with the operation. This should include having an understanding of the environment in which the RPA pilot is operating, with particular attention paid to the possibility of aircraft or people being in the same area
If CAR 601.04 – IFR or VFR Flight in Class F Special Use Restricted Airspace or Class F Special Use Advisory Airspace, 601.16 – Issuance of NOTAM for Forest Fire Aircraft Operating Restrictions, and 5.1 of the Aeronautics Act restrict the use of airspace to all “aircraft”, they therefore apply to micro RPAs as they are considered aircraft under the Aeronautics Act and CARs. For more information, see RAC 2.8.6 Class F Airspace in the TC AIM.
A pilot that is found to have created a hazard to either aviation safety or people on the ground is subject to an individual penalty of $1,000 and/or a corporate penalty of $5,000 (CAR 103, Schedule II)
As such drones in this category have a very limited set of restrictions, basically 900.06:

900.06 No person shall operate a remotely piloted aircraft system in such a reckless or negligent manner as to endanger or be likely to endanger aviation safety or the safety of any person.
In short:

  • No registration required
  • No pilot certificate required
  • No flight restrictions beyond Class F Restricted areas and any NOTAMs limiting all aircraft use including models that may be in effect
Basically, fly smart and don’t be an idiot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrjohnc1
Your friend the lawyer should educate himself with Canadian drone laws. Its very clear on what you can and cannot do with a sub 250g drone here in Canada. If your going to offer advice at least offer facts.


As such drones in this category have a very limited set of restrictions, basically 900.06:


In short:

  • No registration required
  • No pilot certificate required
  • No flight restrictions beyond Class F Restricted areas and any NOTAMs limiting all aircraft use including models that may be in effect
Basically, fly smart and don’t be an idiot.
My friend the lawyer was arguing that in the absence of both statute and case law "fly smart and don't be an idiot" is incredibly vague and subject to interpretation.

“No person shall operate a remotely piloted aircraft system in such a reckless or negligent manner as to endanger or be likely to endanger aviation safety or the safety of any person.”

His advice was to treat the guidelines listed as "good practice" on the website as being what courts will likely use to determine what a "reckless or negligent manner" looks like*, at least until a few cases provide some precedents or Transport Canada issues new regulations. Being a test case is expensive, even if you win.

I consider his advice, based on decades of experience as to how the legal system operates, well worth the beer it cost me :) You can follow it or not — I'm sharing it in the spirit it was given, as advice.


And fingers284, none of this is meant to spoil your fun with your new aircraft. Didn't mean to hijack your thread — was just trying to share some advice that I've found helpful.


*As is, not following them could be considered reckless or negligent, assuming that something went wrong enough for the matter to land before a court.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrjohnc1
Your advice said he cannot fly to the end of his property because he would be beyond VLOS. Since he would not be breaking any laws flying a Sub 250 gram drone he can fly it till it ran out of battery power as long as he followed 900.06.
So please stop giving advice on what your lawyer friend thinks are the rules and follow what Transport Canada has put out.
I have been doing this since late 2014 and have been involved in many recommendations when the new rules where coming to Canada. What bothers me with so many giving advice on here is it is not complete.
I am sure you mean well but please do so with the facts and not what you think someone should do.
Its really to bad this forum does not have someone like @BigAl07 or someone else that knows international rules like they know USA rules. Being a international forum you would think they would. :rolleyes:


 
Your advice said he cannot fly to the end of his property because he would be beyond VLOS. Since he would not be breaking any laws flying a Sub 250 gram drone he can fly it till it ran out of battery power as long as he followed 900.06.
So please stop giving advice on what your lawyer friend thinks are the rules and follow what Transport Canada has put out.
I didn't say that.

I recommended being familiar with the regulations, and provided a link to the Transport Canada drone operations guide for micro drones (which I quoted in #29). I also defined VLOS. I never claimed the "good practice" guidelines were regulations, but I admit to believing that following them is a good idea.

My lawyer friend, based on several decades of practice, clearly has less faith in common sense than you have. It comes of defending clients who haven't broken regulations, but had their judgement questioned after the fact by people with lots of time to think of what they should have done in a quickly-evolving situation (and needing someone to blame and/or pay for said situation). His view was that if a drone pilot was being investigated, showing that they were following the practices recommended (if not required) by Transport Canada would help their case (and conversely, not following them would make their defense harder).

In any case, I agree with you that distance limits are not part of the regulations for micro-drones. I think maintaining VLOS prudent, especially as I've had one screen failure.

More importantly, it sounds like fingers284 has a perfect place to practice flying (and a granddaughter to practice with) so I'd hate for him to damage his drone in a forced landing.
 
With the right knowledge and situational awareness flights with a sub 250 gr drone can be done safely in controlled airspace or near airports. The reality is many do not have the knowledge to know the difference. So your lawyer friend might be right.

Here is what I recommend. These are recommendations and not regulations. So take them for what they are worth.

2.0 MICRO REMOTELY PILOTED
AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (mRPAS)—LESS
THAN 250 g
Micro remotely piloted aircraft systems (mRPAS) are made up
of a remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) weighing less than 250 g
and its control station. The weight of the control station is not
factored in to the weight calculation when determining whether
an RPA is a micro RPA (< 250 g) or a small RPA (250 g to 25 kg).
However, the weight of any payload carried by the RPA, such
as an optional camera, a lens filter, pegs, propeller guards, stickers,
and lights, will be considered part of the total weight. The micro
RPA could thus reach 250 g or more and be made in the category
of small RPA from 250 g to 25 kg and have to comply with
Subpart 1 of PartIX of the Canadian Aviation Regulations(CARs),
requiring, among other things, an RPA registration and an RPA
pilot certification.
Pilots of mRPASs are not subject to Subpart 1 of Part IX of the
CARs, so they are not required to register their RPAs or obtain
a certificate to fly them. However, they must adhere to CAR900.06
and ensure they do not operate their RPA in such a reckless or
negligent manner as to endanger or be likely to endanger aviation
safety or the safety of any person. While there are no prescriptive
elements of the regulation that inform the pilot how to accomplish
this objective, there is an expectation that the pilot of an mRPA
should use good judgment, identify potential hazards, and take
all necessary steps to mitigate any risks associated with the
operation. This should include having an understanding of the
environment in which the RPA pilot is operating, with particular
attention paid to the possibility of aircraft or people being in the
same area.
As a rule of thumb:
(a) Maintain the mRPA in direct line of sight;
(b) Avoid flying your mRPA above 400 ft in the air;
(c) Keep a safe distance between your mRPA and other people;
(d) Stay far away from aerodromes, water aerodromes, and
heliports;
(e) Avoid flying near critical infrastructure;
(f) Stay clear of aircraft at all times;
(g) Conduct a pre-flight inspection of your mRPA;
(h) Keep the mRPA close enough to maintain the connection
with the remote controller;
(i) Follow the manufacturer’s operational guidelines; and
(j) Avoid advertised events.
These guidelines will help you avoid flying in a negligent or
reckless manner and being subject to monetary fines. They will
also help ensure that you enjoy a safe flight and minimize the
risk of an incident. Remember: if you feel that a flight is risky,
do not fly.

If CARs 601.04 and 601.16 as well as section 5.1 of the Aeronautics
Act prohibit for all “aircraft” the use of airspace, they therefore
apply to micro RPAs because they are considered aircraft under the Aeronautics Act and the CARs. For more information, see
RAC2.8.6 Class F Airspace in the Transport Canada Aeronautical
Information Manual (TC AIM).
Micro RPAs are therefore prohibited from entering the following
zones without proper authorization:
(a) Class F Special Use Restricted airspace;
(b) Zones for which a NOTAM for forest fire aircraft operating
restrictions has been issued; and
(c) Zones in which section 5.1 of the Aeronautics Act restricts
the use of airspace for all aircraft.
A pilot that is found to have created a hazard either to aviation
safety or to people on the ground is subject to an individual
penalty of $1,000 and/or a corporate penalty of $5,000
(CAR 103, Schedule II). https://tc.canada.ca/.../files/2021-03/AIM-2021-1_RPA-E.pdf
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrjohnc1
My friend the lawyer was arguing that in the absence of both statute and case law "fly smart and don't be an idiot" is incredibly vague and subject to interpretation.

“No person shall operate a remotely piloted aircraft system in such a reckless or negligent manner as to endanger or be likely to endanger aviation safety or the safety of any person.”

His advice was to treat the guidelines listed as "good practice" on the website as being what courts will likely use to determine what a "reckless or negligent manner" looks like*, at least until a few cases provide some precedents or Transport Canada issues new regulations. Being a test case is expensive, even if you win.

I consider his advice, based on decades of experience as to how the legal system operates, well worth the beer it cost me :) You can follow it or not — I'm sharing it in the spirit it was given, as advice.


And fingers284, none of this is meant to spoil your fun with your new aircraft. Didn't mean to hijack your thread — was just trying to share some advice that I've found helpful.


*As is, not following them could be considered reckless or negligent, assuming that something went wrong enough for the matter to land before a court.
Absolutely not man, I'm soaking this up like a sponge as I'm sure some others are.

The VLOS parameters are something I will take seriously when flying high-wide & handsome BUT I will also use Augustine's regs as a guideline when using my drone for the reason I bought it for....probably the most obscure reason you have ever heard for owning one.
I and the wife are heavily involved in the shooting sports and do a lot of long range shooting with iron sit
My friend the lawyer was arguing that in the absence of both statute and case law "fly smart and don't be an idiot" is incredibly vague and subject to interpretation.

“No person shall operate a remotely piloted aircraft system in such a reckless or negligent manner as to endanger or be likely to endanger aviation safety or the safety of any person.”

His advice was to treat the guidelines listed as "good practice" on the website as being what courts will likely use to determine what a "reckless or negligent manner" looks like*, at least until a few cases provide some precedents or Transport Canada issues new regulations. Being a test case is expensive, even if you win.

I consider his advice, based on decades of experience as to how the legal system operates, well worth the beer it cost me :) You can follow it or not — I'm sharing it in the spirit it was given, as advice.


And fingers284, none of this is meant to spoil your fun with your new aircraft. Didn't mean to hijack your thread — was just trying to share some advice that I've found helpful.


*As is, not following them could be considered reckless or negligent, assuming that something went wrong enough for the matter to land before a co. absolutely not man....I'm soaking this up like a sponge

My friend the lawyer was arguing that in the absence of both statute and case law "fly smart and don't be an idiot" is incredibly vague and subject to interpretation.

“No person shall operate a remotely piloted aircraft system in such a reckless or negligent manner as to endanger or be likely to endanger aviation safety or the safety of any person.”

His advice was to treat the guidelines listed as "good practice" on the website as being what courts will likely use to determine what a "reckless or negligent manner" looks like*, at least until a few cases provide some precedents or Transport Canada issues new regulations. Being a test case is expensive, even if you win.

I consider his advice, based on decades of experience as to how the legal system operates, well worth the beer it cost me :) You can follow it or not — I'm sharing it in the spirit it was given, as advice.


And fingers284, none of this is meant to spoil your fun with your new aircraft. Didn't mean to hijack your thread — was just trying to share some advice that I've found helpful.


*As is, not following them could be considered reckless or negligent, assuming that something went wrong enough for the matter to land before a court.
absolutely not man, I'm soaking this up like a sponge, hopefully others are also.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrjohnc1
The VLOS parameters are something I will take seriously when flying high-wide & handsome BUT I will also use Augustine's regs as a guideline when using my drone for the reason I bought it for....probably the most obscure reason you have ever heard for owning one.
I and the wife are heavily involved in the shooting sports and do a lot of long range shooting with iron sit
So scooting downrange to check hits?

(Which makes more sense than towing a target — but I've seen videos of that on YouTube. Didn't end well for the drone!)

I'd had one screen failure and two video signal disconnect/freezes in 41 hours of flying. The video came back after a few seconds. No idea how common this is but it's one of the reasons I'm really careful of VLOS. Also, I'm usually flying over forest so simply ditching the drone would likely lose it up a tree I can't climb. If you're over your own land and don't have a lot of places for your drone to get stranded out-of-reach then losing it's less of a worry for you (especially if you have DJI Refresh).

If you're planning on making any videos you might find some of Stewart and Alina's tutorials useful:
 
very new to the sport, bought first outfit 3 days ago (Mini SE) and have only 30 minutes fly-time total. I'm also an old boy with modern technology limitations....but I have a 6 yr old Granddaughter that can help a bit in that regard. So my main target of interest will be getting the most out of the Fly app.
Welcome from Long Island NY. What an awesome hobby to share with your granddaughter. Awesome. Have a blast. Just remember, we fly drones and we crash drones. It’s all worth the effort and enjoyment. Best to you and yours, Godspeed, Droniac (recommendation: question away on the very best of the best forums. It’s drone home. I think you’ll find the same).
 
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
131,133
Messages
1,560,160
Members
160,105
Latest member
anton13