As a Kiwi farmer who uses a drone on steep land to check on stock, water troughs etc. I break a few of the rules, as these rules don't make sense and are not making anything safer. I fly way past the visual distance that I can see the drone...although I would still see a plane or helicopter if it's in the area, but why are they allowed to fly low over my property if I haven't given them permission?
Aircraft pilots are not allowed to fly low over your property. Aircraft are not meant to decent below 1000ft unless planning to land. Larger aircraft are not meant to decent below an altitude that allows an alternative landing (there is a formula, usually means several thousand feet is the minimum). Outside of an emergency, aircraft should not be landing on your land without your permission. The only exception to all of the above rules are military aircraft. RNZAF aircraft are governed by the air force legal system and air force regulations. They can fly at speed and treetop level. Though the RNZAF don’t do it that very often.
ive complied and accuired my trust cert. but havent flown in over a year including several new toys still sitting in thier boxes, thanks bruce for still being here for us
I'm in Canada and I've completely stopped flying my quads because of all the regulations. Then on top of it all there are people who call the cops when you're just out having a good time in a park away from people. Not worth the hassle anymore.
If you fly sub250g in Canada you have the most relaxed regulations in the developed world. Spare a thought for Kiwis who can't fly *anywhere* without prior permission of the property-owner :-(
@@xjet That sucsk for you guys :( Nothing I own is under 250g though. My 1 meter by 1 meter quad is the most fun to fly. Just the 6S battery weighs like 4lbs. I'll think about your dumb government regulations when I dust my quads off in the basement.
@@Danieltaylorsoaringnz For someone who wants to remain 100 percent compliant with the regulations it can be quite difficult to negotiate the property permission rule and not being legally allowed to fly a tiny, completely harmless 25g drone using FPV goggles in your own back yard without a visual observer seems ludicrous to me.
Yeah it sucks. If i had known how bad they were when I got back in to it I wouldn’t have. I originally quit because of the need of a license being required back in 2017 or so. Sub 250 drones dont really fly very well
It has been years since I have been looking at drones here, checked the rules many times and they simply feel like they made for you to give up on this hobby. It's quite sad.
Same was given a dji drone as a present, looked at the airshare app, nope not allowed to fly it over my home apparently, looked at flying at the parks, but Council prohibit flying at parks. So really the drone has sat in its case apart from taking it up 20 feet outside my house for a short period of time all the while feeling guilty as hell. Has been a waste of money basically and a wasted present.
@@ryancarper595 I’ve recently brought a DJI drone. There are restrictions to where I can fly it in Perth. There are a couple of parks that are close to home, but they are out of bounds, too close to the airport. I don’t have a problem with that. I had taken it to fly near the ocean, I was very proactive to abide by the rules, (I would land if people or animals were in the vicinity), still had someone have a whinge to me about flying it.
Hi Bruce, WoW ! I guess I'm going to Canada, at least with my micros. Great shirt. Hope you and your family had a wonderful Christmas and a great new year.
These rules apply as is, for any drone under 25kg, which is an insane size drone. There's a big difference between five sacks of potatoes falling out of the sky on your head, and a 250 gram fpv, which is arguably less dangerous as a hitting cricket ball in the park. The rules are out of hand - they're so ridiculous that it encourages people to break them. I wanted to apply for a commercial license - if you've got the money - nearly $2000, they'll let you do nearly anything. Real Estate agents can fly over other people's property without permission. But the process requires essentially a business case - in my situation I wanted to do mapping, cinematography, time lapses, night flying, all sorts of things, but the commercial license needs you to specify EVERYTHING, and it's like you're applying for each permit individually, as opposed to "I'd like to use the drone and I'm not exactly sure what will apply". Flying over a road? You're toast. After requesting permission, they have to provide closure warnings, shut down the road and close the lanes, then you have to pay for the Ministry of Transport's time etc, it could easily cost thousands. I think to fly over national parks, you have to pay a $400 application fee, and you have to provide advanced notice to people in the area, get signed off from the Department of Conservation(and you pay for their processing time), do risk assessments, you can't take off and land in the same spot more than once etc. They've made it very clear - open for big business, but hobbyists can piss off. 🤑
Give this man $19,000 for summary of the rules. CAA that is 2,000 coffees. That’s six coffees a day for one year or one per day for six years. Bruce you are a treasure to the hobby.
I’m a pilot of manned, transport-category aircraft (ie, airliner types). I know these rules seem mighty restrictive, and indeed some of them are in my opinion, such as needing permission to fly literally anywhere. Definitely there has been some over-cautiousness on the part of the CAA here. That being said, it’s honestly a little worrying to me sharing the sky with craft operated by people who do not require any licenses or ongoing proficiency assessment. The vast, vast majority of drone operators, professional or recreational, are good people who want to work and play alongside us - but I’ve had enough close calls with light aircraft, lasers and the like that I’m in favour of rules regulating drone activity also. Sadly, rules have to be written to the lowest common denominator. For every thousand recreational drone operators doing the right thing, there will be one gronk FPV’ing his way down my intake for a laugh - and that’s who the rules are written for. So to all the drone operators out there, recreational or professional, I’m pleased to share the skies with you. Welcome to the absolute raft of regulations that come with anything in aviation. For what it’s worth, there are literally thousands of pages of rules governing the operations I do daily, so I guess it could be worse? 😅
I agree and can understand why, 10 years ago when drones were new and there was little historical data on which to assess the risks, the regulations were quite restrictive. However, a decade later we have *plenty* of historical data to go on and we can clearly see that drones are not the danger we thought they might have been. The problem is that NZ's regulations have not been updated to reflect the *actual* risk and we're still unreasonably restricting the use of these craft based on unfounded fear. In respect to the competence of those flying drones I believe the 400ft AGL limit goes a long way towards addressing that -- providing at least a 100 ft vertical separation, especially where DJI drones are involved because this is enforced via the inbuilt geofencing. However, training, knowledge and competence doesn't necessarily remove the risk. Two of the very few evidenced instances of drones colliding with manned aircraft both involved highly trained and certified operators from within the Royal Canadia Mounted Police. In one instance they flew a large drone into their own helicopter and in another they flew a similarly large drone into a Cessna 172. In both cases the aircraft were damaged but in neither case was anyone killed or injured. Likewise, there are regular deaths involving trained, qualified and skilled manned aircraf that collide in the skies over our heads but to this day, not one single person has died as the result of the recreational use of multiritor drones anywhere in the world. This speaks to the intrinsic safety of these craft due to their low mass and speed -- something our regulations still ignore (unlike Canada's). As for that rogue FPVer -- we haven't had such an instance yet -- but plenty of manned aviators have killed themselves or others through reckless decision-making and idiotic behaviour. The reality is that idiots exist in all areas of human activity so none of us should throw stones perhaps.
@@jamesstonehouse3448 I appreciate the sarcasm and I do see your point - but to be fair we do actually do quite a lot in the industry to control birds. Nesting colonies are sometimes relocated, habitats created aimed at drawing birds away from airports, and all major airports have a well-realised bird management plan. This includes use of guns or mortars to disperse birds, and regular patrols by airport safety staff. So whilst we can’t regulate birds per se, we do literally everything else we can. But to your point, you’re absolutely right that aircraft come into contact with birds far more frequently than drones. That being said, I’m far more confident taking a duck or a goose down the intake as the engines have been tested and certified to withstand such an impact and continue operating. There is no such testing that I’m aware of for lumps of plastic and metal that can sometimes be significantly larger and heavier than local bird populations.
Honestly those who fail to move within reason should be punished. This can be achieved by mandating remoteID for the possibility of identifying those who f up. Why does everything need to be so heavily limited for everyone. Some proper guidelines would be enough IMO.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Years, Xjet! Great rules break down, Sir. You'll make a wonderful shill for the CAA some day 😊 That outro with footage of you riding a motocross bike over jumps, while your dji follows you is fantastic! So glad you're picking up the exciting hobby of competetive MotoCross, since RC flying has become too "dangerous" and requires heavy govt regulations. 😂 G'day from the east coast of the US! Where drones are more terrifying than our ever expanding national debt! 👍
Yes, most countries have "lighter" regulations for low-risk craft such as those under 250g. Here in New Zealand however, *every* craft under 15Kg is subject to exactly the same rules -- even a paper aeroplane which is categorised as a "free flight" model and can not be flown within 4Km of an airfield -- I kid you not!
Happy Christmas Bruce,,, very similar rules here in the UK ( and our governing body is also called the CAA. ( not fit for purpose either) As well as keeping VLOS, we are supposed to know the orientation of our drone AT ALL TIMES, ( useless rule if you’re trying to line a photograph / video up, or altering camera settings manually ) 😉😉
I've got agree the orientation rule here in the UK is pretty useless, if you only take off and fly vertically up to 10m or more, even when you know the direction the drone is facing, it's pretty damn hard to tell looking up from the ground.
As i said in a post above, my opinion is you have far more liberal rules around drone flying in the UK than we do here. I follow the “auditors” and going by their descriptions of where, when and how you can fly a drone it makes the New Zealand rules very restrictive. Here you can’t fly a drone anywhere unless you have someones permission. You can’t fly in public lands, parks or even for that matter, from the roadside on a public road.
I lost all my drones in a tragic boating accident. I will fly when and where I like. I fly safe, I fly within my limits, I don’t do dangerous stunts. I say bugger the authorities
You sir, have the perfect perspective. Rock on! 👊These regulations need to keep up with reality. It's due to the regulators being so out of touch. Haha he's right though, the kiwi regulators have no common sense.
I used to fly a drone around at the paintball field I played at always below tree top Hight. Right next to a large air port. My drone flying would only be an issues AFTER a plane chopped down a few hundred pine trees, and at that point my drone would of been the least of the planes issues. Its a real shame with the lidar on some drones now days It would be fun to go around New Zealand and look for interesting things.
A very fair summary i recon ! And i really like the Canadian two rules rule ....... Oh for more uncommon sence i will pray ! Awesome job XJet ! ❤😉🙃😎 NZ
I am thinking of going for my part102, would I then have a lot more freedom with my flying. What do you think about the 102 cert and have you any advice for a poor retired guy on the cost of this and ways to save on the outlay? Thanks for your video's and the time and effort you put into this. I agree that the rules are well out of date and need changing. I am originally from the UK were we have much more freedom on how we fly. thank.
A Part 102 can be an expensive undertaking. You might find that joining Model Flying New Zealand and getting your "wings" to be a cheaper and quicker way to gain some extra entitlements under the regulations (such as being able to fly within 4Km of an airport/helipad).
But Bruce there are exceptions to the rules. The one I'll point out is when my farmer neighbor wants to apply chemicals to his orchard with a 600 hp 7,000 lb fixed wing aircraft built by Grumman. He is allowed to be at any altitude necessary to get the job done. I am a 3,000 hr fixed wing, 80 hr (soloed) rotor wing pilot and I know too low when I see it.
Its almost impossible to follow these regulations wheter its in new zealand or in germany. They want to have a legal way to get you to pay fines and control you.
@@eyespy1415 they don’t care up to the point they lose their house paying legal fees and fines to the CAA. You’re don’t fuck around with waiving your junk in the face of government agencies that have prosecution powers and lawyers on full time staff. They can spend as long as they like fighting you in court without it costing them a dime. Even if you win, you still lose.
Almost as if the new drones being seen are connected to something like a DJI drone ban.....get a bunch of hysteria going and watch the bills get passed
Wish I'd seen this a few weeks ago before I'd read the rules and found airshare. All I want to do is take some old foamies for a spin at a local park/school. But apparently some of them have become too dangerous to fly since they were last flown (a few years ago). (The council have banned gliders greater than 1.5m.) Does the Ministry of Education have a policy on school field usage, or is it down to the individual school?
Unfortunately it seems to be down to the individual schools and they are extremely risk-averse these days. Nobody wants to be held responsible if someone gets hurt 😞
One question which I always ask and thought I had a good understanding of. The 120m max altitude this is measured from sea level, correct? Not from take-off/ home point?
Fly below 120 metres (400 feet) above ground level - so it's relative to the current elevation of the drone in respect to the ground below. Not the absolut sea level.
The FAA rules on Remote ID have been rolled out, with widespread incorporation by the hobby drone community. A recent joint statement coming from the FBI, the FAA and a few other entities, about their determination that the drones invading New Jersey, Colorado, Arizona, Oregon and a few military installations are legal fliers, civilian and commercial jets, and a few stars. Nothing new there, but they the FAA admitted in the statement that they had not yet implemented a method for it to be used by local law enforcent agencies, there was no App, and no place to get it. They were pretty vague on what the plan was for making the RID system that they forced on us, at our expense, more than just extra weight, but they have asked for funding to do it.
Nope... that's the way it works in other countries but CAA has ceded control of the airspace (only for drones) to whoever owns or manages the land beneath.
It's quite restricting, especially in areas like auckland (lots of controlled airspace, roads owned by AT so not public property) but you can still fly in a lot of public parks.
@robomobius true. You can try highschools (with permission - on holidays and weekend when there is no sport usually) and if they have any taller buildings you're golden for FPV
@@TinyPirate Haha you're totally right. I'm currently at high school and for the first 2 terms of this year I ran a UAV class where I taught other students the UAV laws and basic quad-copter operation. We did the practical flight on a corner of the field next to some trees which was good because our entire school is quite a ways into protected airspace so shielded was the only option.
It’s crazy coming from an NZ microlight pilot. Microlights have less regulation and are very VERY close to that of a GA weight class and can get up to very similar speeds (130kn cruise). TL:DR Microlight planes have leas rules than drones or GA planes
This is one thing I absolutely hate about living in this country far too much red tape that usually makes absolutely no sense ! You are very well spoken thank you for all the advice and taking the time to make this video for us Kiwis ;)
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year Bruce. How do these regs apply to fixed wing models, slope soaring in particular? I used to fly back in the 90s and basically for slope flying it was "turn up and chuck a model off a hill/cliff", preferably on the windward side (dynamic soaring is the work of the dark lord). I'm looking at travelling the country quite extensively in retirement and just want to get a handle on the legal ramifications of stopping in the middle of nowhere and throwing a little converted foam chuck glider with 2 micro servos off a hill for a quick flight. Surely if the model was in its original free flight toy configuration there wouldn't be issue (or would there be now days?) Obviously follow all the safety "guidelines" but elsewise is it a bit "If a r/c glider flies in the high country and nobody sees it... did it really happen?".
Yep, there is no distinction made between traditional fixed-wing RC models and multirotor drones here in NZ. Sadly, the traditional hobby here didn't push back when the regs were proposed a decade ago so everyone's now treated the same. Your attitude of "if nobody saw anything, did anything actually happen?"is the one used by a lot of people I know. What is it they say? "When it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission then we won't bother asking permission"
I have a "grassy field" available to me now but summer doesn't start here in NZ for another couple of weeks. It's been really windy for months now and we had driving rain (again) this this week. I think Bill and the boys will likely stay at the airport because of the convenience of a runway) so I'll be flying alone 😕
Summary 3 Bruce rules (which would work worldwide): 1. Don't fly above 400 feet. 2. Don't fly within 4km of an airport or helipad. 3. Don't endanger people or property. Summary CAANZ rules: I lost count, and interest. Kia ora from over the ditch.
In Canada, even the 400ft rule doesn't apply to sub250g drones. After rigorous testing with their much bigger drones and manned aircraft, the RCMP have determined that if their 8Kg drones won't bring down a helcopter or a C172 then the sub250g craft have no chance of doing so :-)
So long as you have permission. The problem is that it can be a time-consuming and difficult task to determine who has ownership of the property over which you're flying. Even "public" land isn't owned by the public -- it's owned by a bureaucracy and managed on behalf of the public which is why you need to get DOC's permission by checking if such activities are allowed and/or requesting the necessary permission from them via their website (with accompanying payment).
Been looking for drones like plagueing new jersey. Nil! Those intergalctics must be scared off by our rules, sob...great effort Bruce. Very good advice.
Ok so In Herne Bay Auckland there are three helipads that don’t show on AirShare. Why is this? I presume under the 4km rule I can’t fly anywhere there. Since most Helipads are not marked on AirShare w wild I know where they are?
That's a good question. It's possible that they're private helipads and therefore not "listed" in the AIP (CAA's official list). In that case there may not be a 4Km exclusion zone around them because they likely fall into the same category as farm-airstrips. It might pay to ask the CAA through their website.
@@xjet i do not think there is a distinction, it’s a part 157 determination or it’s not. So can’t fly in Auckland city anywhere by that rule. CAA are not helpful, they want the sky to themselves and see uav’s as a nuisance to got rid.
You’ll be restricted anyway due to Mechanics Bay, Auckland Harbor, and Auckland Hopsital helipads. But to Bruce’s point, if the helipad is not promulgated in the AIP, it does not count in terms of the 4km rule. What Bruce eluded to is that there is a way around this rule, and that is that the flight is shielded, that is: Below and within 100m horizontal of a manmade or natural structure. The obstacle needs to be of sufficient strength and durability to arrest the flight of the drone in the event of a flyaway and this barrier needs to be between the drone and the airport/ helipad.
What do you do when the local council don't reply back with and answer to asking for permission to fly some where? I have asked several local councils if I can fly at a park or dive a building and the few answers I did get back where apply for 101 and 102. Do I really need to spend all that money to just fly at a park. Thank you for your time. I have been limited to my back yard as I have not had any definitive answer as of yet. I'm located lower edit north island if that helps.
Personally, I would use the contact form on their website (if they have one) to lodge a "service request" (because that provides you with a reference and proof they've received the query) advising them that you intend to fly in a particular location and inviting them to advise you if this would be a problem or a breach of their bylaws. If they don't respond then they have implicitly agreed to allow you to fly and if they do respond then at least you've established a line of communications that you can pursue to find out how to get the required permissions. But I'm just a cunning old sod who's well-versed in dealing with obstructive councils 🙂
@xjet that is how I seen it. If it was an issue they would have stipulated such. Thank you for your reply. Stay within drone laws and keep contact verification. Thanks.
I live just down the road from you in Taupo and I tiki tour around the central north island on my motorcycle and always with my drone. I try to go where there aren't many people when I fly but sometimes there is and the reaction I get is fascination and alot of questions. But yeh common sense and respect for other people are my base rules 🤙
Thanks Bruce for speaking out the truth, you said that they are trying to destroy the hobby, you were spot on, so many have quit flying because of all these new bs rules. Happy New Year 👍💪✌
There was a move a year or two ago to update them and there was a public consultation but nothing has happened since. The new Civil Aviation Act comes into effect this year and all that does is provide greater enforcement of the current decade-out-of-date rules. I guess this isn't a priority. I also note that the job of making rules seems to have been handed off to the Ministry of Transport which is kind of crazy because my drones don't transport *anything*. Looks to me like it's a real hot potato that nobody wants to own or do anything about. In the meantime, NZ drone and RC model flyers suffer unreasonable restrictions.
Crazy thing is that you can fly a 135gm DJI Neo as well as a 25kg drone with no licence as long as it's not for commercial use! The only thing you must have is that if the drone is between 15kg and 25kg, someone to certify that it's air worthy.
My drone says now I’m in a low fly zone where I live so limited to 30meters distance rendering it as much as useless yet nothing online about any such Mapua low fly zone a helicopter pilot told I am in (not near any airport or helipad)
I wish that if you were flying close to the roof height (shielded operation), you should still be able to fly your drone within 4km of airport. It's so convenient to use the drone to inspect the roof.
In Canada you can legally fly a sub250g drone (such as the DJI mini series) in such circumstances and I believe Australia is smart enough to realise that you can fly almost right up to the boundary of an airport so long as you're not on the approach or departure paths -- because manned aircraft, even at an airport, aren't supposed to be below 400 feet unless they're actually on approach or departure. It would also be great if CAA would look at the more than 10 years of historical data we now have that show (as acknowledged by Transport Canada in their rules) that smaller craft (sub250g) pose virtually zero threat to manned aircraft, person or beast. Sadly, CAA is effectively asserting that my 25g drone is just as dangerous as a 14.9Kg octocopter -- because the rules and restrictions for both are identical. Are they really serious about that?
The rules for shielded flight are extremely poorly written, and deceptive - if you parse the language, as long as there's a physical barrier between you and the airport, it actually counts. In my case - there's a huge hospital blocking the helipad. The rules were written with runaway RC planes in mind, not drones.
@@TheAlastairBrown I have also argued that the "physical barrier" could also be distance. If you're flying 2Km away from an airport with a drone that can't fly more than a few hundred metres then distance is surely a physical barrier. CAA were not too receptive to that suggestion though.
No, of course not because, as we know from experience, a tiny drone falling into a grassy field in the middle of nowhere is far more dangerous than a manned aircraft falling into a suburban area with houses, cars and playgrounds below. Sigh! Bureaucrats!
@@foobarf8766 That's because a one tonne Cessna 172 will cause an *awful* lot more damage than a 249g drone if it crashes into your back yard or hits your car (and such things *do* happen).
@@foobarf8766so you’d choose a 300 odd ton, but fully insured Airbus A380 crash onto your neighbourhood rather than an uninsured 250g drone? Good luck with that mate.
As far as CAA is concerned, only those airfields or a helipads registered with the CAA matter. Check that map on the Airshare website (linked in the description) to see if there are any near you. A small top-dressing strip on a farmer's field is unlikely to be registered so won't matter but it pays to check and be sure.
So just to be a little bit nit picky about a couple of points... It's 120m above ground level - so if you are on the top of a mountain like (away from an aerodrome) at 1,470 m then it would be 1,470 m plus 120 m. DJI drones don't limit it to 120m I'm not sure of the full history of it, because I only just got my second drone, in a Boxing day sale, but in the latest firmware update the DJI Fly App allows you to increase the max height past 120m (whether or not you should of course is the point of the video). Also as of Novemember 2024 DOC have made it much easier to get a permit. It's still pretty pricy but for $180 for 1 year you can get a recreational permit for "Green" zone land which covers pretty much anything that isn't "special" in some way - so for example I checked all of the Remutakas, Tararua and Pureora forest are Green, but things like Kapiti Island is "Red".
This video is aimed at someone who's just got a drone so I wanted to keep things as simple as possible so didn't go into detail about AGL etc. As for DOC... having to pay for the right to fly over *public* land is interesting isn't it? Perhaps it's a sign of the future when any use of the public airspace will involve a fee. I also feel for tourists who would have to know this in advance and be sure to lodge their request in sufficient time before their arrival.
From my reading of the UK operational authorisation 16 wording relating to spotters, if one satisfies OA16 generally so it is applicable, I think one could make the argument that in a cordoned off sterile area (like a bit of private property, maybe), below a limited height and for the appropriate craft, spotters could be deemed unnecessary. The wording says "any spotters ...". Well, any is zero upwards, it doesnt imply at least one. Haven't read those rules recently, but that is how it used to be. When I put this to some important people however, I was told that was not how one was supposed to read it.
On the subject of Rules - Do we have any more information (or even opinions) on the Drone show incident in the Orlando US ? My understanding is the company that ran the drones are Extremely strict in keeping with one of the more simpler of rules "NOT OVER PEOPLE" - which particularly makes sense when dealing with hundreds or thousands of drones - where the chance of failure is multiplied Substantially. So it seems odd that these units which were seen simply falling from the sky just went straight down, and managed to Injure people, including some kid that ended up with Open heart surgery... Oh but wait - that was the 1st story I saw. Subsequently when looking for more info, I found a report showing more ground footage, and they weren't just falling, there were at least 2 or 3 units seen zipping past, and at Great rates of knots. Indeed I would say faster than most commercial DJI drones I have flone. Ahhh - and the Kid who had open heart surgery...I saw a photo of the kid, he has a cut on his upper lip, and supposedly had damage to one of his heart valves requiring Open Heart Surgery. So - with the size of these drones, and the speed they were travelling, to be honest I would almost believe that to be possible - being a young kid, far less rib cage protection for the heart... But the photo showed no such surgery - not saying it wasn't a Pre-op photo...but it just makes the mind tick over a little ...and my point being - MEDIA... That's it nuf Said... MEDIA. You can keep fighting the CAA and the Councils Bruce - but Media are the killers of our Sport, Industry and hobby. That Company will be lucky to get out of this with remaining in business, as much as they have had an Extremely good reputation up to this point. Especially if They, and the FAA find it to be at fault. This incident is litterally that 1 Dog attack that just happened to be a small kids fault for taunting it...before owning Pitbulls becomes illegal in some states or countries...and/or you have 1 incident and as though it is hyperawareness kicking in the next thing you know Media outlets are shouting "And YET ANOTHER DOG ATTACK" - making us think we should euthanise All Dogs because it is a Plague. F*(&@# Media... @#*& Them all! (oh and include Waikato District Council in there too..!)
Yeah, that was a crazy situation and most of the other people I've spoken to suspect it was a firmware problem. Certainly the drones they're using are probably heavier and faster than they need to be for such applications. A friend of mine manufactures light-show drones in the UK and his are significantly lighter and slower than the ones used in the Orlando incident. I'm a little wary of the news reports on the condition of the boy who was hit. Remember this is the same news media that was telling us for weeks that the skies over New Jersey was filled with mystery drones just a little while ago. Those mystery drones were simply airliners but even when that was clearly proven, the media kept telling us that they were "unexplained". With this in mind, I remain a little skeptical about the extent of the boy's injuries -- especially when his family immediately started a crowdfunding appeal for donations, even though the drone company's insurance will be covering all the medical bills and costs.
@@xjet Yeah Very good point - saw the crowdfund thing, and yes I still sit in the 50/50 on that - because even if the Company's insurance cover initial treatment, there could be ongoing costs that they don't cover, because "Merika" - Yet yes - on the other hand "Merika" and "I tripped on a Micky D's pickle $100 Million please...!"
One place you'd be safe is out on the water while fishing, (I guess) using the drone camera to catch proof of "the big one that got away" lol. you don't need permission from fisheries, do you ??
They sure are tough. CAA spent THREE MONTHS investigating my flying after they saw that I'd flown a tiny (20g) drone in my own back-yard using FPV goggles without a visual observer. After that extensive investigation they decided that although I *had* broken the visual line of sight rule that "it was not in the public interest to prosecute". I think what they meant was "we would be laughed out of court if we tried". This shows that the rules are decidedly out of date and need updating to reflect the dramatic changes in technology and the virtually zero risk posed by very small drones (as acknowledged by Transport Canada's rules).
I might as well get a RC submarine, it will be easier and avoid the dogs ... and I give up on building an RC rocket... I also wanted to fly an RC glider in the past but it's just finding the time and space back then was just too much. I think Kiwis, especially the older folks (I'm in my middle age btw) , will be behind in terms of useful tech knowledge like flying drones when the need for it increases, like operating flying drones for electrical pylon safety checks etc...
Having been very temped to bat drones out of the sky at the Church of the Good Shepherd and the nearby shoreline of Lake Tekapo thanks to a busload of tourists perhaps they can be seized at the border. 😀 Dangerous and irritating. As a content creator I’ve been tempted but concluded it’s not worth the hassle. Good summary BTW . Are things different for commercial operators ?
Commercial operators are granted more lattitude and excused somewhat from the property permission rule -- however gaining such a certification is expensive.
makes me only want to fly drones in your backyard at this rate (or at least bring some kits over to build with you, you sound cool and i swear i bought a model airplane from someone who looked like you back in like 2008 or 2009 XD
I come from the Waikato and have been flying (mostly gliders but also drones and microlights) for 50 years and although I know the rules I also know that CAA are very pragmatic in their interpretation of these rules. For example model aircraft are regularly flown at Matamata and Tokoroa airfields, in fact these airfields are the primary sites for flying RC aircraft in the southern and western Waikato. Also thousands of people fly over DoC land without any concerns from DoC or CAA, that land being beach and the tidal area beside them. I really don't see any need to change the laws, if it isn't broke, why fix it?
If you’re targeting overseas viewers or visitors to NZ you might want to clarify what DOC land is. Even as a kiwi the context and way you said it in reference to urban restrictions of heli pads and hospitals it sounded like dockland.
The spotter (visual observer) rule seems common throughout the developed world despite the death toll associated with the recreational use of multirotor drones remaining stubbornly at zero.
It would be cool to get some moto X footage like you showed But where is the race track in Wanganui ? Right to the airport ! Where is the fishing done ? Right by the airport ! Where is the ski lake ? right by the airport ! and where is 90% of the parks and fields ? you guessed it , with 4 kms of the hospital heli pad. Cheers Bruce
Yep, you're dead right. This was at the Tokoroa motox track which is... right at the end of the runway of the local airfield. Apparently it's okay for one-tonne Cessna 172s to fly a few metres over the heads of motox riders who are jumping several metres into the air -- but it's not safe to fly a drone over the same. Go figure!
And to think the the DJI Phantom boys done this with their pranks: flying over nude beaches, flying over neighbors yard peeping on the girl laying out, flying into airspace C, B,D or E, etc. Punk kids did this to the hobby. And now look at it.
There are idiots in all fields of human endeavour and drone flying is no different. While it's true that, because they're so easy to fly and require little investment of time and effort to get in the air, the DJI-type drone is more likely to be used by such idiots, I've found that most DJI-type drone flyers are responsible types who don't engage in stupid activities. Remember, there are *millions* of DJI drones out there but only a handful of reported instances of agregious idiocy.
So how do you deal with manned aircraft flying over the areas you mention? If you are of a mind, a camera with a pretty average 200 mm telephoto lens is going to be as intrusive as a drone camera, if not more. Are you suggesting that manned aircraft are stopped flying over these areas? I like the UK stance in that no one owns the air space and therefore civil rights legislation around photography in public comes into play. As far as nude beaches are concerned, most beaches are public land and therefore anyone can go there. If people want to go nude then let them do it on private land if they don’t want public intrusion. My understanding of photography rules in public areas in New Zealand, is that our rules are similar to those in the UK, drone flying aside.
@@sojourn6697 I'll take it a step further: how about satellites in orbit that have resolution all the way down to the size of a quarter? Maybe the NSA, CIA, and government are peeping in. The point is, children have ruined the hobby. Okay. That can't be disputed. Untethered children that have been turned loose like a dog on society and now have come to this. Massive rules and fines for preventing actions that could have been avoided by simply having some couth.
I've sent online forms to my local council requesting permission to fly in parks. They have never replied so I've just been flying there. No issues, people come for a look see and a chat. Even let some people have a little turn.
And never expect either country to update , change, or remove any previously made rule because that would be them having to acknowledge that they have done something wrong or unnecessary and they don't want to be seen as really not having a clue as to what they are doing.
The most concise and informative UAV guide in 17 minutes. Brilliant as always Bruce.
Bruce, you are the best!
As a Kiwi farmer who uses a drone on steep land to check on stock, water troughs etc. I break a few of the rules, as these rules don't make sense and are not making anything safer. I fly way past the visual distance that I can see the drone...although I would still see a plane or helicopter if it's in the area, but why are they allowed to fly low over my property if I haven't given them permission?
Aircraft pilots are not allowed to fly low over your property.
Aircraft are not meant to decent below 1000ft unless planning to land.
Larger aircraft are not meant to decent below an altitude that allows an alternative landing (there is a formula, usually means several thousand feet is the minimum).
Outside of an emergency, aircraft should not be landing on your land without your permission.
The only exception to all of the above rules are military aircraft.
RNZAF aircraft are governed by the air force legal system and air force regulations. They can fly at speed and treetop level.
Though the RNZAF don’t do it that very often.
@@bmwhockingJust a little correction, minimum altitude is 500 ft, or 1000 ft if flying over a built up area.
Cry baby😢😢😢
@@TheDavestats lol, I'm not crying about anything. I do as I want, but in a safe way as I'm not out to kill anyone.
If you are on your own land and below 450ft do you have the restrictions? I cant see what you are doing would be an issue. Depending on the weight.
In Germany we do not need an observer(spotter) for fpv flying up to a height of 30m.
How amazingly sensible. Is that now standard EU ruling, or something special in Germany?
@Nkkdxn45j It seems to be a special regulation of the German model aircraft association and the horizontal distance is limited to visual range.
@altermannfliegt3927 big improvement on everyone else, though.
ive complied and accuired my trust cert. but havent flown in over a year including several new toys still sitting in thier boxes, thanks bruce for still being here for us
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year Bruce : )
Very nice heads up for those that may have got one over Christmas. I hope those eyes see this quick one.
Thanks for sharing Bruce
Bruce you are truly an inspiration and promoter of safety. Thank you
Belated Merry Christmas & Happy New Year Bruce! Keep up the good work buddy. 😁
Happy holidays Bruce and a safe and happy New Year for you and yours.
Excellent, keep them coming, Bruce.
I'm in Canada and I've completely stopped flying my quads because of all the regulations. Then on top of it all there are people who call the cops when you're just out having a good time in a park away from people. Not worth the hassle anymore.
If you fly sub250g in Canada you have the most relaxed regulations in the developed world. Spare a thought for Kiwis who can't fly *anywhere* without prior permission of the property-owner :-(
@@xjet That sucsk for you guys :( Nothing I own is under 250g though. My 1 meter by 1 meter quad is the most fun to fly. Just the 6S battery weighs like 4lbs. I'll think about your dumb government regulations when I dust my quads off in the basement.
I's it that bad
@@Danieltaylorsoaringnz For someone who wants to remain 100 percent compliant with the regulations it can be quite difficult to negotiate the property permission rule and not being legally allowed to fly a tiny, completely harmless 25g drone using FPV goggles in your own back yard without a visual observer seems ludicrous to me.
Yeah it sucks. If i had known how bad they were when I got back in to it I wouldn’t have. I originally quit because of the need of a license being required back in 2017 or so. Sub 250 drones dont really fly very well
They killed this hobby. I haven't flown my RC for years.
I’m the same, haven’t flown my rc planes for probably three years.
Why screw them you do you
It has been years since I have been looking at drones here, checked the rules many times and they simply feel like they made for you to give up on this hobby. It's quite sad.
Same was given a dji drone as a present, looked at the airshare app, nope not allowed to fly it over my home apparently, looked at flying at the parks, but Council prohibit flying at parks. So really the drone has sat in its case apart from taking it up 20 feet outside my house for a short period of time all the while feeling guilty as hell. Has been a waste of money basically and a wasted present.
@@ryancarper595 I’ve recently brought a DJI drone. There are restrictions to where I can fly it in Perth. There are a couple of parks that are close to home, but they are out of bounds, too close to the airport. I don’t have a problem with that. I had taken it to fly near the ocean, I was very proactive to abide by the rules, (I would land if people or animals were in the vicinity), still had someone have a whinge to me about flying it.
An excellent intro and overview!
👍
FPV flight is like being a bird, where's all their licences?
Good Point
Good one Bruce, have a great New Year when it comes in a couple of days!
Hi Bruce, WoW ! I guess I'm going to Canada, at least with my micros. Great shirt. Hope you and your family had a wonderful Christmas and a great new year.
Trust me, canaduh is not the place to be.
These rules apply as is, for any drone under 25kg, which is an insane size drone. There's a big difference between five sacks of potatoes falling out of the sky on your head, and a 250 gram fpv, which is arguably less dangerous as a hitting cricket ball in the park. The rules are out of hand - they're so ridiculous that it encourages people to break them. I wanted to apply for a commercial license - if you've got the money - nearly $2000, they'll let you do nearly anything. Real Estate agents can fly over other people's property without permission. But the process requires essentially a business case - in my situation I wanted to do mapping, cinematography, time lapses, night flying, all sorts of things, but the commercial license needs you to specify EVERYTHING, and it's like you're applying for each permit individually, as opposed to "I'd like to use the drone and I'm not exactly sure what will apply". Flying over a road? You're toast. After requesting permission, they have to provide closure warnings, shut down the road and close the lanes, then you have to pay for the Ministry of Transport's time etc, it could easily cost thousands. I think to fly over national parks, you have to pay a $400 application fee, and you have to provide advanced notice to people in the area, get signed off from the Department of Conservation(and you pay for their processing time), do risk assessments, you can't take off and land in the same spot more than once etc. They've made it very clear - open for big business, but hobbyists can piss off. 🤑
Give this man $19,000 for summary of the rules. CAA that is 2,000 coffees. That’s six coffees a day for one year or one per day for six years. Bruce you are a treasure to the hobby.
If you are an inexperienced girl, then it is easier to get permission to sail an expensive NZ navy boat onto a reef.
I’m a pilot of manned, transport-category aircraft (ie, airliner types). I know these rules seem mighty restrictive, and indeed some of them are in my opinion, such as needing permission to fly literally anywhere. Definitely there has been some over-cautiousness on the part of the CAA here.
That being said, it’s honestly a little worrying to me sharing the sky with craft operated by people who do not require any licenses or ongoing proficiency assessment. The vast, vast majority of drone operators, professional or recreational, are good people who want to work and play alongside us - but I’ve had enough close calls with light aircraft, lasers and the like that I’m in favour of rules regulating drone activity also.
Sadly, rules have to be written to the lowest common denominator. For every thousand recreational drone operators doing the right thing, there will be one gronk FPV’ing his way down my intake for a laugh - and that’s who the rules are written for.
So to all the drone operators out there, recreational or professional, I’m pleased to share the skies with you. Welcome to the absolute raft of regulations that come with anything in aviation. For what it’s worth, there are literally thousands of pages of rules governing the operations I do daily, so I guess it could be worse? 😅
I agree and can understand why, 10 years ago when drones were new and there was little historical data on which to assess the risks, the regulations were quite restrictive. However, a decade later we have *plenty* of historical data to go on and we can clearly see that drones are not the danger we thought they might have been. The problem is that NZ's regulations have not been updated to reflect the *actual* risk and we're still unreasonably restricting the use of these craft based on unfounded fear.
In respect to the competence of those flying drones I believe the 400ft AGL limit goes a long way towards addressing that -- providing at least a 100 ft vertical separation, especially where DJI drones are involved because this is enforced via the inbuilt geofencing.
However, training, knowledge and competence doesn't necessarily remove the risk. Two of the very few evidenced instances of drones colliding with manned aircraft both involved highly trained and certified operators from within the Royal Canadia Mounted Police. In one instance they flew a large drone into their own helicopter and in another they flew a similarly large drone into a Cessna 172. In both cases the aircraft were damaged but in neither case was anyone killed or injured.
Likewise, there are regular deaths involving trained, qualified and skilled manned aircraf that collide in the skies over our heads but to this day, not one single person has died as the result of the recreational use of multiritor drones anywhere in the world. This speaks to the intrinsic safety of these craft due to their low mass and speed -- something our regulations still ignore (unlike Canada's).
As for that rogue FPVer -- we haven't had such an instance yet -- but plenty of manned aviators have killed themselves or others through reckless decision-making and idiotic behaviour. The reality is that idiots exist in all areas of human activity so none of us should throw stones perhaps.
We need to start licensing birds. They have a far higher risk of going down an intake.
@@jamesstonehouse3448 I appreciate the sarcasm and I do see your point - but to be fair we do actually do quite a lot in the industry to control birds. Nesting colonies are sometimes relocated, habitats created aimed at drawing birds away from airports, and all major airports have a well-realised bird management plan. This includes use of guns or mortars to disperse birds, and regular patrols by airport safety staff. So whilst we can’t regulate birds per se, we do literally everything else we can.
But to your point, you’re absolutely right that aircraft come into contact with birds far more frequently than drones. That being said, I’m far more confident taking a duck or a goose down the intake as the engines have been tested and certified to withstand such an impact and continue operating. There is no such testing that I’m aware of for lumps of plastic and metal that can sometimes be significantly larger and heavier than local bird populations.
You shouldn’t fly under 500 feet, what are you worried about? You sound like some entitled twit with a certificate.
Honestly those who fail to move within reason should be punished. This can be achieved by mandating remoteID for the possibility of identifying those who f up. Why does everything need to be so heavily limited for everyone. Some proper guidelines would be enough IMO.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Years, Xjet!
Great rules break down, Sir. You'll make a wonderful shill for the CAA some day 😊
That outro with footage of you riding a motocross bike over jumps, while your dji follows you is fantastic! So glad you're picking up the exciting hobby of competetive MotoCross, since RC flying has become too "dangerous" and requires heavy govt regulations. 😂
G'day from the east coast of the US!
Where drones are more terrifying than our ever expanding national debt! 👍
Thank you Bruce!! Merry Christmas 🎄🎁 bud and Happy New year 🥂
Merry Christmas Bruce, keep on with the good work. 🙂
Refreshing video Bruce, very well explained from a very knowledgeable position, cheers and Happy New Year 👍
What are DOC sites, is there a map to identify them?
LOL that was a santa list , five pages of rules is nuts
So glad I live in the UK, things are so more relaxed here. Especial with a drone lighter that 250grams.
Yes, most countries have "lighter" regulations for low-risk craft such as those under 250g. Here in New Zealand however, *every* craft under 15Kg is subject to exactly the same rules -- even a paper aeroplane which is categorised as a "free flight" model and can not be flown within 4Km of an airfield -- I kid you not!
@@xjet Your country is governed by fools.
this is a great video, I'm definitly going to buy an fpv drone in the future once I have enough money to not worry about living and eating.
Happy Christmas Bruce,,, very similar rules here in the UK ( and our governing body is also called the CAA. ( not fit for purpose either) As well as keeping VLOS, we are supposed to know the orientation of our drone AT ALL TIMES, ( useless rule if you’re trying to line a photograph / video up, or altering camera settings manually ) 😉😉
I've got agree the orientation rule here in the UK is pretty useless, if you only take off and fly vertically up to 10m or more, even when you know the direction the drone is facing, it's pretty damn hard to tell looking up from the ground.
As i said in a post above, my opinion is you have far more liberal rules around drone flying in the UK than we do here. I follow the “auditors” and going by their descriptions of where, when and how you can fly a drone it makes the New Zealand rules very restrictive. Here you can’t fly a drone anywhere unless you have someones permission. You can’t fly in public lands, parks or even for that matter, from the roadside on a public road.
What about flying a drone from the beach out over the ocean like spotting fish just beyond the breakers??
Bruce, you are fighting windmills!
Given the amount of wind we've had here recently, that's probably not a bad thing 🙂\
I lost all my drones in a tragic boating accident. I will fly when and where I like. I fly safe, I fly within my limits, I don’t do dangerous stunts. I say bugger the authorities
Theyre toys
Most of them,yes.@@davefoord1259
@@davefoord1259🤣🤣🤣keep up
Kikem square inda nutzz
You sir, have the perfect perspective. Rock on! 👊These regulations need to keep up with reality. It's due to the regulators being so out of touch. Haha he's right though, the kiwi regulators have no common sense.
Good on ya Bruce. Keep up the good work. Best Wishes for 2025
Thanks mate, I'll do my best.
I used to fly a drone around at the paintball field I played at always below tree top Hight. Right next to a large air port. My drone flying would only be an issues AFTER a plane chopped down a few hundred pine trees, and at that point my drone would of been the least of the planes issues.
Its a real shame with the lidar on some drones now days It would be fun to go around New Zealand and look for interesting things.
A very fair summary i recon ! And i really like the Canadian two rules rule ....... Oh for more uncommon sence i will pray ! Awesome job XJet ! ❤😉🙃😎 NZ
I am thinking of going for my part102, would I then have a lot more freedom with my flying. What do you think about the 102 cert and have you any advice for a poor retired guy on the cost of this and ways to save on the outlay? Thanks for your video's and the time and effort you put into this. I agree that the rules are well out of date and need changing. I am originally from the UK were we have much more freedom on how we fly. thank.
A Part 102 can be an expensive undertaking. You might find that joining Model Flying New Zealand and getting your "wings" to be a cheaper and quicker way to gain some extra entitlements under the regulations (such as being able to fly within 4Km of an airport/helipad).
But Bruce there are exceptions to the rules. The one I'll point out is when my farmer neighbor wants to apply chemicals to his orchard with a 600 hp 7,000 lb fixed wing aircraft built by Grumman. He is allowed to be at any altitude necessary to get the job done. I am a 3,000 hr fixed wing, 80 hr (soloed) rotor wing pilot and I know too low when I see it.
99.98% of kiwis don't give a hoot about those rules. Tell CAA to get real.
Beware Karens.
Its almost impossible to follow these regulations wheter its in new zealand or in germany.
They want to have a legal way to get you to pay fines and control you.
@@l3lackoutsMedia Exactly, it's all about money
@@eyespy1415 they don’t care up to the point they lose their house paying legal fees and fines to the CAA.
You’re don’t fuck around with waiving your junk in the face of government agencies that have prosecution powers and lawyers on full time staff.
They can spend as long as they like fighting you in court without it costing them a dime.
Even if you win, you still lose.
Yeh hard out what a joke a
Awesome video m,ate good advise
Happy new year bruce 🫡
Thanks mate... right back at ya!
With the recent drone hysteria in the States, the FAA will, especially after January 20th, add more regulations.
Almost as if the new drones being seen are connected to something like a DJI drone ban.....get a bunch of hysteria going and watch the bills get passed
Wish I'd seen this a few weeks ago before I'd read the rules and found airshare. All I want to do is take some old foamies for a spin at a local park/school. But apparently some of them have become too dangerous to fly since they were last flown (a few years ago). (The council have banned gliders greater than 1.5m.)
Does the Ministry of Education have a policy on school field usage, or is it down to the individual school?
Unfortunately it seems to be down to the individual schools and they are extremely risk-averse these days. Nobody wants to be held responsible if someone gets hurt 😞
My son had a dji drone a couple of years ago. He accidentally put 400m as max height and got a good view of Foxton right out to the coast. 😮😂
One question which I always ask and thought I had a good understanding of. The 120m max altitude this is measured from sea level, correct? Not from take-off/ home point?
120 metre Max is measured from take off point, so you could be 500 metres high on a mountain top and you could legally go up to 620 metres.
Fly below 120 metres (400 feet) above ground level - so it's relative to the current elevation of the drone in respect to the ground below. Not the absolut sea level.
The FAA rules on Remote ID have been rolled out, with widespread incorporation by the hobby drone community. A recent joint statement coming from the FBI, the FAA and a few other entities, about their determination that the drones invading New Jersey, Colorado, Arizona, Oregon and a few military installations are legal fliers, civilian and commercial jets, and a few stars. Nothing new there, but they the FAA admitted in the statement that they had not yet implemented a method for it to be used by local law enforcent agencies, there was no App, and no place to get it. They were pretty vague on what the plan was for making the RID system that they forced on us, at our expense, more than just extra weight, but they have asked for funding to do it.
Yes, I have a video in edit about the big flop that RID has been.
Stop believing nonsense you see on the TV.
Invercargill airport flight path is over city centre
Queens Park Anderson Park everywhere in 4kms
And peeps kinda ruined drone flying cuz of them spying on their neighbours
With regards to DOC and national parks. Is it true that one may fly over DOC land so long as the drone was operated from outside DOC land?
Nope... that's the way it works in other countries but CAA has ceded control of the airspace (only for drones) to whoever owns or manages the land beneath.
Good on Ya Bruce! 👍
It's quite restricting, especially in areas like auckland (lots of controlled airspace, roads owned by AT so not public property) but you can still fly in a lot of public parks.
Look up shielded ops. If you're flying lower than the tallest thing within 100m you're fine, even relatively close to an aerodrome
@@TinyPirate Good point.
I know about Shielded flight but in residential areas there are often no tall trees. or buildings.
@robomobius true. You can try highschools (with permission - on holidays and weekend when there is no sport usually) and if they have any taller buildings you're golden for FPV
@@TinyPirate Haha you're totally right. I'm currently at high school and for the first 2 terms of this year I ran a UAV class where I taught other students the UAV laws and basic quad-copter operation. We did the practical flight on a corner of the field next to some trees which was good because our entire school is quite a ways into protected airspace so shielded was the only option.
It’s crazy coming from an NZ microlight pilot. Microlights have less regulation and are very VERY close to that of a GA weight class and can get up to very similar speeds (130kn cruise).
TL:DR Microlight planes have leas rules than drones or GA planes
This is one thing I absolutely hate about living in this country far too much red tape that usually makes absolutely no sense ! You are very well spoken thank you for all the advice and taking the time to make this video for us Kiwis ;)
merry Christmas and happy new year best wishes to you and your family 👍👍
Thank You!
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year Bruce. How do these regs apply to fixed wing models, slope soaring in particular? I used to fly back in the 90s and basically for slope flying it was "turn up and chuck a model off a hill/cliff", preferably on the windward side (dynamic soaring is the work of the dark lord).
I'm looking at travelling the country quite extensively in retirement and just want to get a handle on the legal ramifications of stopping in the middle of nowhere and throwing a little converted foam chuck glider with 2 micro servos off a hill for a quick flight. Surely if the model was in its original free flight toy configuration there wouldn't be issue (or would there be now days?)
Obviously follow all the safety "guidelines" but elsewise is it a bit "If a r/c glider flies in the high country and nobody sees it... did it really happen?".
Yep, there is no distinction made between traditional fixed-wing RC models and multirotor drones here in NZ. Sadly, the traditional hobby here didn't push back when the regs were proposed a decade ago so everyone's now treated the same.
Your attitude of "if nobody saw anything, did anything actually happen?"is the one used by a lot of people I know. What is it they say? "When it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission then we won't bother asking permission"
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year 🎉
you didnt mention shielded flights within restricted zones(such as near airports)
A separate video is coming on that.
Lol guess my Son isn't getting a Drone in NZ this year.
Lost in paperwork there Bruce😂 they really have no idea there do they.
Is there any update on that possible area you and the boys can fly?
I have a "grassy field" available to me now but summer doesn't start here in NZ for another couple of weeks. It's been really windy for months now and we had driving rain (again) this this week. I think Bill and the boys will likely stay at the airport because of the convenience of a runway) so I'll be flying alone 😕
Well that's great in 1 way for you,but sad in the other,tell them to remove the wheels and belly land😁😁
Summary 3 Bruce rules (which would work worldwide): 1. Don't fly above 400 feet. 2. Don't fly within 4km of an airport or helipad. 3. Don't endanger people or property. Summary CAANZ rules: I lost count, and interest. Kia ora from over the ditch.
In Canada, even the 400ft rule doesn't apply to sub250g drones. After rigorous testing with their much bigger drones and manned aircraft, the RCMP have determined that if their 8Kg drones won't bring down a helcopter or a C172 then the sub250g craft have no chance of doing so :-)
When the rules are that onerous it's mans duty to disobey them....... or something like that...
Am I allowed to fly a sub-250-gram drone on my own property beneath the canopy of my native forest using goggles for control?
So long as you have a visual observer to keep an eye out for hazards.
Hey, is it acceptable to fly over water around rocks and mountains in New Zealand?
So long as you have permission. The problem is that it can be a time-consuming and difficult task to determine who has ownership of the property over which you're flying. Even "public" land isn't owned by the public -- it's owned by a bureaucracy and managed on behalf of the public which is why you need to get DOC's permission by checking if such activities are allowed and/or requesting the necessary permission from them via their website (with accompanying payment).
Been looking for drones like plagueing new jersey. Nil! Those intergalctics must be scared off by our rules, sob...great effort Bruce. Very good advice.
1:45 ... is that Kuredu in the Maldives?
Ok so In Herne Bay Auckland there are three helipads that don’t show on AirShare. Why is this? I presume under the 4km rule I can’t fly anywhere there. Since most Helipads are not marked on AirShare w wild I know where they are?
That's a good question. It's possible that they're private helipads and therefore not "listed" in the AIP (CAA's official list). In that case there may not be a 4Km exclusion zone around them because they likely fall into the same category as farm-airstrips. It might pay to ask the CAA through their website.
@@xjet i do not think there is a distinction, it’s a part 157 determination or it’s not. So can’t fly in Auckland city anywhere by that rule. CAA are not helpful, they want the sky to themselves and see uav’s as a nuisance to got rid.
You’ll be restricted anyway due to Mechanics Bay, Auckland Harbor, and Auckland Hopsital helipads. But to Bruce’s point, if the helipad is not promulgated in the AIP, it does not count in terms of the 4km rule. What Bruce eluded to is that there is a way around this rule, and that is that the flight is shielded, that is:
Below and within 100m horizontal of a manmade or natural structure. The obstacle needs to be of sufficient strength and durability to arrest the flight of the drone in the event of a flyaway and this barrier needs to be between the drone and the airport/ helipad.
What do you do when the local council don't reply back with and answer to asking for permission to fly some where? I have asked several local councils if I can fly at a park or dive a building and the few answers I did get back where apply for 101 and 102. Do I really need to spend all that money to just fly at a park. Thank you for your time. I have been limited to my back yard as I have not had any definitive answer as of yet. I'm located lower edit north island if that helps.
Personally, I would use the contact form on their website (if they have one) to lodge a "service request" (because that provides you with a reference and proof they've received the query) advising them that you intend to fly in a particular location and inviting them to advise you if this would be a problem or a breach of their bylaws. If they don't respond then they have implicitly agreed to allow you to fly and if they do respond then at least you've established a line of communications that you can pursue to find out how to get the required permissions.
But I'm just a cunning old sod who's well-versed in dealing with obstructive councils 🙂
@xjet that is how I seen it. If it was an issue they would have stipulated such. Thank you for your reply. Stay within drone laws and keep contact verification. Thanks.
Dji doesnt require your real ID. Ive been flying at 500m and without permission. Get a faraday box and they cant track it once its inside.
I live just down the road from you in Taupo and I tiki tour around the central north island on my motorcycle and always with my drone. I try to go where there aren't many people when I fly but sometimes there is and the reaction I get is fascination and alot of questions. But yeh common sense and respect for other people are my base rules 🤙
I have a drone and just fly it considerately, have rarely had issues.
Thanks Bruce for speaking out the truth, you said that they are trying to destroy the hobby, you were spot on, so many have quit flying because of all these new bs rules.
Happy New Year 👍💪✌
Is there any indication of when or if the CAA will review our rules?
There was a move a year or two ago to update them and there was a public consultation but nothing has happened since. The new Civil Aviation Act comes into effect this year and all that does is provide greater enforcement of the current decade-out-of-date rules. I guess this isn't a priority. I also note that the job of making rules seems to have been handed off to the Ministry of Transport which is kind of crazy because my drones don't transport *anything*. Looks to me like it's a real hot potato that nobody wants to own or do anything about. In the meantime, NZ drone and RC model flyers suffer unreasonable restrictions.
Crazy thing is that you can fly a 135gm DJI Neo as well as a 25kg drone with no licence as long as it's not for commercial use! The only thing you must have is that if the drone is between 15kg and 25kg, someone to certify that it's air worthy.
My drone says now I’m in a low fly zone where I live so limited to 30meters distance rendering it as much as useless yet nothing online about any such Mapua low fly zone a helicopter pilot told I am in (not near any airport or helipad)
I wish that if you were flying close to the roof height (shielded operation), you should still be able to fly your drone within 4km of airport. It's so convenient to use the drone to inspect the roof.
tell me about it, I live just over 1.5K from the nearest airfield
In Canada you can legally fly a sub250g drone (such as the DJI mini series) in such circumstances and I believe Australia is smart enough to realise that you can fly almost right up to the boundary of an airport so long as you're not on the approach or departure paths -- because manned aircraft, even at an airport, aren't supposed to be below 400 feet unless they're actually on approach or departure.
It would also be great if CAA would look at the more than 10 years of historical data we now have that show (as acknowledged by Transport Canada in their rules) that smaller craft (sub250g) pose virtually zero threat to manned aircraft, person or beast. Sadly, CAA is effectively asserting that my 25g drone is just as dangerous as a 14.9Kg octocopter -- because the rules and restrictions for both are identical. Are they really serious about that?
The rules for shielded flight are extremely poorly written, and deceptive - if you parse the language, as long as there's a physical barrier between you and the airport, it actually counts. In my case - there's a huge hospital blocking the helipad. The rules were written with runaway RC planes in mind, not drones.
@@TheAlastairBrown I have also argued that the "physical barrier" could also be distance. If you're flying 2Km away from an airport with a drone that can't fly more than a few hundred metres then distance is surely a physical barrier. CAA were not too receptive to that suggestion though.
@@xjet they are just lazy and afraid of potential problems to cover their arses
Shielded Operations mean you're basically fine as an FPV pilot so long as you have property owner permission.
Oh my, I wonder if PPL holders have to ask for permission to fly over every single property across the country....
No, of course not because, as we know from experience, a tiny drone falling into a grassy field in the middle of nowhere is far more dangerous than a manned aircraft falling into a suburban area with houses, cars and playgrounds below. Sigh! Bureaucrats!
PPL holders and aero clubs have insurance mate, idiots with drones do not
@@foobarf8766 That's because a one tonne Cessna 172 will cause an *awful* lot more damage than a 249g drone if it crashes into your back yard or hits your car (and such things *do* happen).
@@foobarf8766so you’d choose a 300 odd ton, but fully insured Airbus A380 crash onto your neighbourhood rather than an uninsured 250g drone?
Good luck with that mate.
Thank you for this 😝😝😝
Can you fly close to NZ private farm airstrips.
As far as CAA is concerned, only those airfields or a helipads registered with the CAA matter. Check that map on the Airshare website (linked in the description) to see if there are any near you. A small top-dressing strip on a farmer's field is unlikely to be registered so won't matter but it pays to check and be sure.
@ Thanks there is a couple around us in Kaiwaka.
So just to be a little bit nit picky about a couple of points... It's 120m above ground level - so if you are on the top of a mountain like (away from an aerodrome) at 1,470 m then it would be 1,470 m plus 120 m. DJI drones don't limit it to 120m I'm not sure of the full history of it, because I only just got my second drone, in a Boxing day sale, but in the latest firmware update the DJI Fly App allows you to increase the max height past 120m (whether or not you should of course is the point of the video). Also as of Novemember 2024 DOC have made it much easier to get a permit. It's still pretty pricy but for $180 for 1 year you can get a recreational permit for "Green" zone land which covers pretty much anything that isn't "special" in some way - so for example I checked all of the Remutakas, Tararua and Pureora forest are Green, but things like Kapiti Island is "Red".
This video is aimed at someone who's just got a drone so I wanted to keep things as simple as possible so didn't go into detail about AGL etc. As for DOC... having to pay for the right to fly over *public* land is interesting isn't it? Perhaps it's a sign of the future when any use of the public airspace will involve a fee. I also feel for tourists who would have to know this in advance and be sure to lodge their request in sufficient time before their arrival.
Where can you fly? I hear New Jersey is a very popular area these days.
Only for airliners at night (whilst being filmed by the hysterical media) 🙂
From my reading of the UK operational authorisation 16 wording relating to spotters, if one satisfies OA16 generally so it is applicable, I think one could make the argument that in a cordoned off sterile area (like a bit of private property, maybe), below a limited height and for the appropriate craft, spotters could be deemed unnecessary. The wording says "any spotters ...". Well, any is zero upwards, it doesnt imply at least one. Haven't read those rules recently, but that is how it used to be.
When I put this to some important people however, I was told that was not how one was supposed to read it.
Then the sentence structure alone invalidates this rule. Those who come up with those regulations should go back to studying a dictionary.
On the subject of Rules - Do we have any more information (or even opinions) on the Drone show incident in the Orlando US ? My understanding is the company that ran the drones are Extremely strict in keeping with one of the more simpler of rules "NOT OVER PEOPLE" - which particularly makes sense when dealing with hundreds or thousands of drones - where the chance of failure is multiplied Substantially. So it seems odd that these units which were seen simply falling from the sky just went straight down, and managed to Injure people, including some kid that ended up with Open heart surgery...
Oh but wait - that was the 1st story I saw. Subsequently when looking for more info, I found a report showing more ground footage, and they weren't just falling, there were at least 2 or 3 units seen zipping past, and at Great rates of knots. Indeed I would say faster than most commercial DJI drones I have flone.
Ahhh - and the Kid who had open heart surgery...I saw a photo of the kid, he has a cut on his upper lip, and supposedly had damage to one of his heart valves requiring Open Heart Surgery. So - with the size of these drones, and the speed they were travelling, to be honest I would almost believe that to be possible - being a young kid, far less rib cage protection for the heart...
But the photo showed no such surgery - not saying it wasn't a Pre-op photo...but it just makes the mind tick over a little
...and my point being - MEDIA... That's it nuf Said... MEDIA. You can keep fighting the CAA and the Councils Bruce - but Media are the killers of our Sport, Industry and hobby.
That Company will be lucky to get out of this with remaining in business, as much as they have had an Extremely good reputation up to this point. Especially if They, and the FAA find it to be at fault.
This incident is litterally that 1 Dog attack that just happened to be a small kids fault for taunting it...before owning Pitbulls becomes illegal in some states or countries...and/or you have 1 incident and as though it is hyperawareness kicking in the next thing you know Media outlets are shouting "And YET ANOTHER DOG ATTACK" - making us think we should euthanise All Dogs because it is a Plague. F*(&@# Media... @#*& Them all! (oh and include Waikato District Council in there too..!)
Yeah, that was a crazy situation and most of the other people I've spoken to suspect it was a firmware problem. Certainly the drones they're using are probably heavier and faster than they need to be for such applications. A friend of mine manufactures light-show drones in the UK and his are significantly lighter and slower than the ones used in the Orlando incident.
I'm a little wary of the news reports on the condition of the boy who was hit. Remember this is the same news media that was telling us for weeks that the skies over New Jersey was filled with mystery drones just a little while ago. Those mystery drones were simply airliners but even when that was clearly proven, the media kept telling us that they were "unexplained". With this in mind, I remain a little skeptical about the extent of the boy's injuries -- especially when his family immediately started a crowdfunding appeal for donations, even though the drone company's insurance will be covering all the medical bills and costs.
@@xjet Yeah Very good point - saw the crowdfund thing, and yes I still sit in the 50/50 on that - because even if the Company's insurance cover initial treatment, there could be ongoing costs that they don't cover, because "Merika" - Yet yes - on the other hand "Merika" and "I tripped on a Micky D's pickle $100 Million please...!"
One place you'd be safe is out on the water while fishing, (I guess) using the drone camera to catch proof of "the big one that got away" lol. you don't need permission from fisheries, do you ??
lol jumbo jet in your backyard....wow. so tough rules in NZ
They sure are tough. CAA spent THREE MONTHS investigating my flying after they saw that I'd flown a tiny (20g) drone in my own back-yard using FPV goggles without a visual observer. After that extensive investigation they decided that although I *had* broken the visual line of sight rule that "it was not in the public interest to prosecute". I think what they meant was "we would be laughed out of court if we tried". This shows that the rules are decidedly out of date and need updating to reflect the dramatic changes in technology and the virtually zero risk posed by very small drones (as acknowledged by Transport Canada's rules).
I might as well get a RC submarine, it will be easier and avoid the dogs ... and I give up on building an RC rocket... I also wanted to fly an RC glider in the past but it's just finding the time and space back then was just too much.
I think Kiwis, especially the older folks (I'm in my middle age btw) , will be behind in terms of useful tech knowledge like flying drones when the need for it increases, like operating flying drones for electrical pylon safety checks etc...
What about private areas, is it legal or not and who has the right if people spaces are interfered with thanks
If you own the land or have the permission of the land-owner and you're more than 4Km from an airfield then you're good to go.
Having been very temped to bat drones out of the sky at the Church of the Good Shepherd and the nearby shoreline of Lake Tekapo thanks to a busload of tourists perhaps they can be seized at the border. 😀 Dangerous and irritating. As a content creator I’ve been tempted but concluded it’s not worth the hassle. Good summary BTW . Are things different for commercial operators ?
Commercial operators are granted more lattitude and excused somewhat from the property permission rule -- however gaining such a certification is expensive.
makes me only want to fly drones in your backyard at this rate (or at least bring some kits over to build with you, you sound cool and i swear i bought a model airplane from someone who looked like you back in like 2008 or 2009 XD
So you cant film city because of the hospital
I come from the Waikato and have been flying (mostly gliders but also drones and microlights) for 50 years and although I know the rules I also know that CAA are very pragmatic in their interpretation of these rules. For example model aircraft are regularly flown at Matamata and Tokoroa airfields, in fact these airfields are the primary sites for flying RC aircraft in the southern and western Waikato. Also thousands of people fly over DoC land without any concerns from DoC or CAA, that land being beach and the tidal area beside them. I really don't see any need to change the laws, if it isn't broke, why fix it?
If you watch videos on this channel from over a year ago you'll see RC model flying at the Tokoroa Airfield.
If you’re targeting overseas viewers or visitors to NZ you might want to clarify what DOC land is. Even as a kiwi the context and way you said it in reference to urban restrictions of heli pads and hospitals it sounded like dockland.
common sense in in the general public is extremely rare.
What if I only have 10 drones and live in the UK? Can I ‘practice’ FPV without a spotter?
Keep up the good work Bruce.
The spotter (visual observer) rule seems common throughout the developed world despite the death toll associated with the recreational use of multirotor drones remaining stubbornly at zero.
The hobby of flying drones is new and exciting
It would be cool to get some moto X footage like you showed But where is the race track in Wanganui ? Right to the airport ! Where is the fishing done ? Right by the airport ! Where is the ski lake ? right by the airport ! and where is 90% of the parks and fields ? you guessed it , with 4 kms of the hospital heli pad. Cheers Bruce
Yep, you're dead right. This was at the Tokoroa motox track which is... right at the end of the runway of the local airfield. Apparently it's okay for one-tonne Cessna 172s to fly a few metres over the heads of motox riders who are jumping several metres into the air -- but it's not safe to fly a drone over the same. Go figure!
A lot of these out of touch rules are the reason why I got a 102
And to think the the DJI Phantom boys done this with their pranks: flying over nude beaches, flying over neighbors yard peeping on the girl laying out, flying into airspace C, B,D or E, etc. Punk kids did this to the hobby. And now look at it.
There are idiots in all fields of human endeavour and drone flying is no different. While it's true that, because they're so easy to fly and require little investment of time and effort to get in the air, the DJI-type drone is more likely to be used by such idiots, I've found that most DJI-type drone flyers are responsible types who don't engage in stupid activities. Remember, there are *millions* of DJI drones out there but only a handful of reported instances of agregious idiocy.
There are rules against this already without even looking into anything specific to flight.
So how do you deal with manned aircraft flying over the areas you mention?
If you are of a mind, a camera with a pretty average 200 mm telephoto lens is going to be as intrusive as a drone camera, if not more.
Are you suggesting that manned aircraft are stopped flying over these areas?
I like the UK stance in that no one owns the air space and therefore civil rights legislation around photography in public comes into play.
As far as nude beaches are concerned, most beaches are public land and therefore anyone can go there. If people want to go nude then let them do it on private land if they don’t want public intrusion.
My understanding of photography rules in public areas in New Zealand, is that our rules are similar to those in the UK, drone flying aside.
@@sojourn6697 I'll take it a step further: how about satellites in orbit that have resolution all the way down to the size of a quarter? Maybe the NSA, CIA, and government are peeping in. The point is, children have ruined the hobby. Okay. That can't be disputed. Untethered children that have been turned loose like a dog on society and now have come to this. Massive rules and fines for preventing actions that could have been avoided by simply having some couth.
this is why i sold mine years ago when they first started bring out rules for them glade i did
I've sent online forms to my local council requesting permission to fly in parks. They have never replied so I've just been flying there. No issues, people come for a look see and a chat. Even let some people have a little turn.
And Who Polices these rules?
The CAA.
Mainly "Karens" -- hence my advice not to annoy the public 🙂 Most CAA investigations and prosecutions are as the result of public complaints.
And never expect either country to update , change, or remove any previously made rule because that would be them having to acknowledge that they have done something wrong or unnecessary and they don't want to be seen as really not having a clue as to what they are doing.