RunRyder RC
 10  Topic Subscribe
WATCH
 2 pages [ <<    <     1     ( 2 )    >    >> ] 2375 views POST REPLY
HelicopterAerial Photography and Video › Ring....Ring....Hello...T his is the FAA, Got a minute?
12-12-2004 07:54 PM  13 years agoPost 21
patrickegan

rrKey Veteran

Sacramento, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

We have to get informed and stay involved. Thanks for sharing this info waterskier!

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-12-2004 08:17 PM  13 years agoPost 22
MPA

rrElite Veteran

Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

We have to get informed and stay involved.
All well and good to stay informed, but then you need to act onm the information to get anywhere.

And staying involved is fine but if you all get involved then send mixed signals and have no unified cause then youll be seen as having no cause at all, and in just individiual complaints that wont effect the regulations.

On one hand you are saying that you are not a UAV and should be separated from UAV and handed a more limited set of regulations.
But now your main organisation is hosting UAV forums and UAV news.
You may as well ring up the FAA and say, "we are all UAV so just lump us in with UAV"

You need to do a lot more than just be informed and involved.
You need to second guess the path the regulations are going to lead you all down and decide if its going to kill off the majority of the industry or not.
If it is going to do that then there is only one choice to make, oppose the regulations.
But not just oppose them, offer the better solution that is simpler for the FAA, more financially economical to the FAA to impliment, easier for the FAA to regulate and ensure full compliance across all operators.

You need to ask all the questions like those I put up already, and you cant simply pluck what you assume the FAA will do out of thin air as is the case in replies to it so far..
You need to get the answer from the FAA, on each and every question.
Assume anything at your peril, once the regs are in and you leave the questions till then, the answer will be one you cant do anything about and will have to live with.

At this stage there is nothing offered to the FAA as a better solution or a more sensible one.
All I see from the majority is plea bargaining on your sentence.
Begging to be given leniancy by the court of regulations.

You guys better get yourselves out form behind the 8 ball on these reg's real soon, start formulating an action and a cause and a common aim, and the more suitable alternatives to put to the FAA, or youll just wake up one day to the bad news.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
12-12-2004 09:51 PM  13 years agoPost 23
patrickegan

rrKey Veteran

Sacramento, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

MPA -Are you referring to the UAV news forum on helicam.org?

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-12-2004 11:12 PM  13 years agoPost 24
MPA

rrElite Veteran

Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Yes I am Pat

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
12-13-2004 02:39 AM  13 years agoPost 25
waterskier

rrApprentice

Crosby, Texas

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

First of all....let me just say...... MPA....Take a deep breath, and count to ten..........Can't we all just be friends....

No seriously, I am not in Australia, and can not speak to your regs down there, so don't try to apply my answers to your regs......
All the answers I provided to your questions were just trying to relate the current methodology that the FAA uses on full size opperators to the way they MIGHT implement them on us. During the phone call I had with Michael, I expressed these views with him, and he seemed receptive.
You sound like you are bitter about the situation is Australia, and you might have good reason to be, but I am trying to keep this exchange friendly and profesional.

Thanks for you comments.....I think in this situation, the US can learn much for how thing played out down under, and for that matter, in other parts of the world.......I would love to hear from other in other countries that have delt with their governments on similar issues.......
MPA-please PM me about how I can get a copy or your regs...

Thanks

Greg

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-13-2004 03:53 AM  13 years agoPost 26
MPA

rrElite Veteran

Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

First of all......
My foot
You should start taking this matter seriously and dont trivialise it.
This is not a popularity contest or a pissing competition to see who can slip the toungue in the FAA first.
It's a serious matter that could result in the sudden death of this industry, and this forum, and service providers that sell us the system with it.

If you want to sit around hold hands a sing Kumbiya while the house burns down around you thats up to you but it wont stop me yelling out, "Hey you lot the house is on fire!!!"
And it is.

So youve not read the CASA regulations, and it sounds like youve not read the preliminary FAA regs either.

I suggest you show some consideration to those of us who have done and read all the variations of both countries regs and changes to them along the way, until youve at least done that yourself and are up to speed on it.
And then youll be informed enough to make an educated reply to the questions I posed.
Ill informed replies are not appreciated and wont get this debate anywhere. It just shows a lack of serious consideration for the importance of the matter and the importance of getting all implications answered properly..

http://www.casa.gov.au
Youll find the UAV 101 regs there somewhere.

Cheers

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
12-13-2004 04:22 AM  13 years agoPost 27
MPA

rrElite Veteran

Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Try this

http://rrp.casa.gov.au/casr/101.asp

And here are all the certified operators in Australia
All 5 of them
4 Helicams and one UAV

http://casa.gov.au/casadata/aoc/dis...0&Search=Search

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
12-13-2004 07:23 AM  13 years agoPost 28
waterskier

rrApprentice

Crosby, Texas

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

MPA-
Check out the CASA 101 web site.......A few Questions....
1. Are you certified as a controller?
2. Do you have an operator’s certificate?
3. If the answer to the above is no, does anyone have these documents, and if so how did they attain them.
4. Sounds to me that based on the definition of a small UAV (101.240) most everything everyone in the AP world is operating would qualify as such (less than 100 kilos., or 220 lbs.) correct?
5. Seems to me that when CASA wrote these rules (2001) they did not consider small UAV as being operated as commercial aircraft, based on how they wrote the requirements for a commercial controller and operators certification.

From my quick read of the CASA regs your only stumbling block is 101.270 Requirement for UAV operator’s certificate. If I were you, I would be knocking on doors at the CASA trying to get some relief from this rule, or a new one that relates specifically to small UAV commercial operators.

Just my $.02

Greg

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-13-2004 10:37 AM  13 years agoPost 29
MPA

rrElite Veteran

Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Greg
1. Are you certified as a controller?
2. Do you have an operator’s certificate?
No and No.
Resistance is useless, but I continue to resist
When/If. the regs become workable and sensible maybe then, but till that time I'm not hanging myself on their 101 christmas tree.
3. If the answer to the above is no, does anyone have these documents, and if so how did they attain them.
As far as we know via a process that goes like this.

Each application is dealt with individually.
You submit an application.
After 6 months or so they get you to go to them and show them your operations manual youve written up, your safety manual youve written up that pertain to your operations.
You show them you have an engine kill system controlled by a separate rc freq such as your pan tilt system, cant have it on the primary control channel.

They then scratch their heads for a while an come up with your limitations, where you may or may not operate and when.
Those limits are specific to your certification above the ghenreal regulations covering UAV.
In all by years end you should see a certification to operate a UAV under the certifcation limtations specified and your UAV named on that certification.

There is no standard process.
As mentioned, each case is dealt with individualy.

The stated intention of the head of CASA 101, Mal Walker, is that these regulations where formulated to promote growth in the UAV industry.

This has been the case for abt 2 yrs now.
We have a whopping 4 Helicams and one planker UAV from Aerosonde, that was the origianl UAV that began these regulations we have and we havent had anymore since then.
Aerosonde are now sucking up to the US military to get a contract , one they realise theyll never get from anyone in Aus to use a UAV.
4. Sounds to me that based on the definition of a small UAV (101.240) most everything everyone in the AP world is operating would qualify as such (less than 100 kilos., or 220 lbs.) correct?
The Maximum operating weight for a UAV in small UAV class is 100kg

Heavier than that makes it a Large class UAV, a large class requires an OC and an AOC, Operators certification and Aircraft Operations Certification.
And AOC is like a full size aircraft certification, major.

small UAV requires an OC, Operating Certification, but not an AOC for the craft.
But an OC from small UAV class however still names the craft in it that you can use, it is not like a drivers licence you can operate any UAV.

OC application is the one Ive described above.

However, Model Aircraft are limited to 25Kg.
So if you are using a model aircraft cum small UAV, depending on the use, paid or not, then
Small UAV applies for anything from 25kg(55.12 lb) down to 100gram (3.5 ounce) , that is a Micro UAV

Micro UAV does not require an OC or AOC.

So the short answer to your question is
Any craft over 100grams (3.5 ounce) that recvs any payment or reward for any use of the Model Aircraft over 100grams (3.5 ounce) but not greater than 25kg(55.12 lb) , becomes a small class UAV and requires an operating certification, OC.

But, what determines if you need to be certified in the first instance is in 101.235
Applicability of the Subpart F (subpart F is the UAV regs)

(1) This Subpart applies to:
(a) the operation of a large UAV; and
(b) the operation of a small UAV for purposes other than sport or
recreation.
Note 1 There is no practicable distinction between a small UAV and a model aircraft except that of use — model aircraft are flown only for the sport of flying them.

But then it states

(2) Nothing in this Subpart applies to the operation of a UAV if:
(a) while it is being operated, the person operating it keeps it in
sight; and
(b) it is operated in a way that complies with Subpart G.

This states that you can operate a UAV so long as you operate it in line of site, and that if you do and abide by Model Aircraft regulations in subpart G, then no part of Subpart F for UAV applies to you.

But CASA have decided they dont like this regulation, even though it is passed into law
If you call up CASA they will tell you to ignore 101.235(2)(a)(b) and that you always need to apply Subpart F, and therfore will need certification an any cases, and why, because they say so.
And anyone that does like that can go to buggery.
Forget arguing the point they just resort to threats.

So the line of sight flying part is to be ignore in the regulations.
You should be hoping the FAA doesnt ignore it and includes it.
That way any operater who operated line of sight enabled gear only would not have to apply UAV regs to their model aicraft and therefore not require UAV certification.

But then they may do a CASA and change their mind later
And like CASA, not tell anyone in govt or the senate who passes the regs into law
Our senate did pass 101 into law
A set of air safety laws that CASA are picking and choosing which of the laws to apply and which to ignore themselves, on a whim..
And anyone that does like that can go to buggery.
5. Seems to me that when CASA wrote these rules (2001) they did not consider small UAV as being operated as commercial aircraft, based on how they wrote the requirements for a commercial controller and operators certification.
What CASA did not consider is that this was to be anything more than a PR exercise for the Minister of Transport and Mr Dick Smith.

You know the spin, we are a modern country with new technologies, come and invest in Aus.
Same ol tired poltical con trick to get foreign investment in Aus.

We dont have anymore than 1 UAV, same one we had before CASA regulations, and that UAV is selling itself to the US miltary as hard as it can. The regs, our regs are one huge PR exercise and thats all.

Sell the crusty old tired out institutionalised paper shufflers at CASA as up to date technically conversant Air safety regulators, able to meet the demands of the Modern World.

Note the RRR at CASA, that's regulatory reform.
UAV regs are part of RR, the new look CASA, a feather in there cap.
Step right up and see the new and wonderfull things the spritzy new aviation regulator is doing for our taxes.

New paint on old boards
But dont ask them any hard question like
Where are all the Aussie UAV's.
Requirement for UAV operator’s certificate. If I were you, I would be knocking on doors at the CASA trying to get some relief from this rule, or a new one that relates specifically to small UAV commercial operators.
That's all been tried.
Youd get more releif from your worn out shoe.
And changes to it as an admission that CASA got some things wrong, CASA admit to a wrong? wont ever happen.

Currently we are whistling dixie to see if we get any response from that.

Hope you have better luck with the FAA
So far I see they've cut and paste the nasty parts of the CASA 101 regs into the FAA prlim wordings, so things are not looking so good for ya'll over there if that trend keeps up.

Cheers

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
12-13-2004 02:49 PM  13 years agoPost 30
patrickegan

rrKey Veteran

Sacramento, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

MPA- I have nothing to do with them. (helicam)

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-13-2004 07:20 PM  13 years agoPost 31
MPA

rrElite Veteran

Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Yeah Pat I know

Im just pointing to the options created for yourselves collectively, and then lost in an act of blinding stupidity..

So far the Forum was, up to now, looking like it may have some effect perhaps on the FAA.
But then something odd happened, at first I though someone hijacked the forum.
No not hijacked, UAV jacked.

The forum owner has driven all hope into the ditch and all the hubcaps have flown off your collective cause in one hit.
RAPA turned into CRAPA.

So now youve lost any hope of fighting for RC helicams in RAPA.
You got a whole lot more work on your plate and things are looking worse than before RAPA.

There was nobody else promoting UAV as much till RAPA, now it promotes UAV, at the expense of Helicams who have all signed their names to it.
Youre all now members of a UAV organisation that promotes what will kill off Helicams in short order with regulations designed for UAV.

Designed for UAV and screw rc helicams if they dont like it.
And the regs as they are stated so far will screw Helicams you can be sure of that.

And where are all the UAV, we have lots of Helicams but little UAV to speak of outside the military..
Heres the Joke, the regulations are going to create a civil UAV industry.
And If you beleive that one youll beleive anything.

Youve seen the Australian UAV group Patrick
http://www.aeromech.usyd.edu.au/cgi...ums.cgi?forum=3

And for the last 2 years or more this entire group and all who visit it are yet to pull on UAV out of their hat for all the talk fests they have.

The Forum moderator is a lecturer in the University faculty of Aeronautical engineering.
They get govt money, he also runs UAV talk fest charging huge attendance fees.

the Shephard's UV Asia-Pacific
http://www.uvasiapacific.com/

Runing for a few years now, but no UAV have come of it, just talk.
The Doc is on a nice little earner there.

The UAV industry is like the Global Warming and Environmentalist industry, lots ot talks fests with huge attendance fees, lots of money made here and there from all the spin.
No real substance to any of their spin but no matter, they just blind you with bull5hit.
An entire industry running off the spin cycle.

Where are all the UAV these regulations are designed for.
You could count them on one hand world wide.

Go read all that RAPA UAV news in the RAPA UAV forum,
Find any new UAV in those articles?
Or just more spin from their crystal ball.

The old chestnut they used and abused here in Aus to get their UAV regulations.
Regulations are going to create a civil UAV industry.
Yep, pull the other one it plays Jingle Bells.
We have 1 UAV in the last 2 years.

The 4 others are RC Helicams forced to undergo the UAV regulatory process.

The rest of them gave up or dont advertise and ignore the regulations.

Subsequently we have foreign Helicams coming into this country and operating in major film productions in Aus without any certification and no-one is the wiser, certainly not CASA..

There are more people operating and ignoring the UAV regulations in Aus than there are those who are certified to operate.
All CASA has achieved for all this pandering to UAV spin artists on the take is to force a majority of non compliance.

This whole UAV regulation thing is a big fat joke from arsehole to breakfast time.
Only its not funny.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
12-15-2004 11:28 PM  13 years agoPost 32
waterskier

rrApprentice

Crosby, Texas

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

You Win.....I am tired of talking to YOU about this.......
Fourm Hijacker

Greg

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-16-2004 01:30 AM  13 years agoPost 33
MPA

rrElite Veteran

Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

FAA regs are your worry not mine.

I got my own fish to fry, you asked the question and got a straight answer on each.
You dont like the answer, I cant help that.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
12-16-2004 01:56 AM  13 years agoPost 34
MPA

rrElite Veteran

Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Let me put it this way.

The only thing that mattered to me out of all of it is the Helicams come above everything else.

If people dont see for themselves wasting time on some other agenda to the one that matters, is suicide for Helicams in the US, then they dont stand a chance of getting any better deal than we got in Aus IMV.

Fact is the UAV wave as taken hold and fate is sealed.

Ive come to the conclusion at this stage, again, that no-one in the US cares if Helicams are regulated out of the air in large numbers, so why should I.

I have taken a long break from having anything to say about it till recently and should have listened to my own advice I gave Julian a year ago, which was.
"Forget it, they dont care, so why should we, it only starts arguments."

Fact is
It may suit me financialy for you to guys be regulated out of the air.

When Helicams are out of the air in the US, I may be doing a fair trade in RPV masts, those grounded will need one to continue their RPV business while they await a lenghty certification processes.

But it saddens me that you all accept UAV'dom so willingly without a struggle, and that such a fantastic era of this industry at its peak will cease to be.

Thats life.
I havent got any more to say on the matter.

Cheers
Dave

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
12-17-2004 07:51 PM  13 years agoPost 35
patrickegan

rrKey Veteran

Sacramento, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

"The forum owner has driven all hope into the ditch and all the hubcaps have flown off your collective cause in one hit.
RAPA turned into CRAPA. "

Am I correct in my assumption that helicam/rapa/rcapa . org did another name change?

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-17-2004 10:55 PM  13 years agoPost 36
Paul_Barsamian

rrVeteran

Glenview (North Suburban Chicago)

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I hate to pile on here but I am starting in the helicam business, but not new at all to RC.

Just a thought drawn from my full time job, there are several non profit organizations in my industry that have created "defacto" certifications that are not at all government related. They designed, maintained and proctered by a private non profit org which also serves as a consortium etc.

Why can't we as Helicam professionals start a similar (or build off of RAPA/RCAPA) certification process and then push collectively to get publicity for the certification?

I am a CISSP in my full time job, that means nothing to most of you but if you are a business and looking for help in the subject of information security, this is a qualifier for those seeking professional services etc.

I would be willing to put my efforts in cooperation with others on putting a certification together.

At least if we could get a cert off the ground, it gives the FAA one more thing they have to consider about us before they pass judgement. They may ask to have input into the testing process but it would at least show them (and clientele) that there is a level of competancy that is generally accepted among "experts" for an individual performing work.

Comments/Flames?

Son, before you can soar with the eagles you have to learn to sh** with the chickens

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-18-2004 12:32 AM  13 years agoPost 37
DANNO

rrKey Veteran

St. Petersburg, Florida

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

this sounds like a good idea if we could follow though with it. kinda like hang gliding or skydiving....you dont need an faa license to hang glide but the way the industry works is you have to be certified by a intructor that you know what your doing. the faa has seen that the system works and stays out of it for the most part....atleast thats they way it was several years ago.....

so how to apply this to helicams, and is it too late to show the faa we know what we are doing?

www.skypiximaging.com

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
12-18-2004 05:36 AM  13 years agoPost 38
patrickegan

rrKey Veteran

Sacramento, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

It's not too late we still have time to make our idea know.

Patrick

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
WATCH
 2 pages [ <<    <     1     ( 2 )    >    >> ] 2375 views POST REPLY
HelicopterAerial Photography and Video › Ring....Ring....Hello...T his is the FAA, Got a minute?
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 10  Topic Subscribe

Saturday, April 21 - 1:06 am - Copyright © 2000-2018 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online