[mjohnson]

Hey Everyone

Calvin suggested a new thread for this so here it is!

Personally I think that TC will have to change the SFOC process as currently it is just too unwieldly for them. It takes a lot of manpower on their side to approve each and every operation. This alone will determine the changes. Fortunately there are a few commercial operators out there and have been operating within the rules and direction of TC. Currently they have a proven positive track record. TC cannot overlook this success by just locking down the airspace for small commercially viable LOS UAS operations.

I myself have thought of starting the SFOC process as there is definately a need for it in my area but as I am retired my wife has the common sense of reining me in by saying "what the he!! do you want to do that for?????".

She's right.

Cheers

MJ

Biggest hurdle for some is the insurance requirement part of the SFOC. Keeps it so you need to be serious about the business to make the investment to get insured then go through the SFOC. I'm in the process of getting a business setup for this with a local photography partner. But taking it slow and steady and trying do it right.

I think we will see changes both in the commercial aspect as well as on the recreational side. Hopefully MAAC will keep up with things and not limit inks too far. There is lots of potential in this area and its better to embrace and support it than try and lock it down due to fear and unknown.

[mjohnson]

Originally Posted by flitelab

Biggest hurdle for some is the insurance requirement part of the SFOC. Keeps it so you need to be serious about the business to make the investment to get insured then go through the SFOC. I'm in the process of getting a business setup for this with a local photography partner. But taking it slow and steady and trying do it right.

I think we will see changes both in the commercial aspect as well as on the recreational side. Hopefully MAAC will keep up with things and not limit inks too far. There is lots of potential in this area and its better to embrace and support it than try and lock it down due to fear and unknown.

+1 on your post Mark. Agreed 100%.

Good luck with your AP venture. As you have said, there is a huge potential for this technology. Good for you by taking it slowly as well. My Grandfather lectured me over and over in investing and he had a very simple plan which was "slow and steady wins the race". That philosophy spills over and holds true with most things in life. It has paid off for me anyway.

Happy New Year!!

MJ

[martinic]

This is such an interesting time for "UAV"s and it is already clear that the regulatory environment is taking a multi-faceted approach.

As a recreational FPV user, my focus is on very lightweight aircraft (<3kg, not 35) flown under 200', not over people or property you could damage if you crash into - but beyond line of sight and without a spotter (under those specific conditions). I am a responsible person and manage risks. If I wanted to fly around people or property, I would consider this a different situation warranting a completely diffferent set of conditions (not FPV, LOS, buffers, spotters, controlled access, insurance, permits, etc.).

From what I've seen, there is movement towards dividing up the regulatory environment for UAV flights based on specific categories. Within the categories, there will be different requirements. Additionally within each category may be a per flight authorization, perhaps with an exception-based approval process for flights which exceed a defined set of parameters. It has been stated that MAAC volunteers are working with Transport Canada and other stakeholders to further define the recreational categories starting with the lowest risk ones and working up. I favour this multi-faceted approach.

What amazes me is just how large the UAV market is and just how small a segement of it that recreational FPV is. I'm really glad that we are represented in some way.

I think on of the challenges with FPV in regards to MAAC is that it may be less than ideal for most people. Many people like to FPV in areas that are interesting to view, not fly circuits over a designated MAAC field time and time again. Granted the "owners permission" element of the MAAC insurance coverage might help with this. I'm just not sure MAAC is the best organization to be in charge of this but time will tell. Multis and fpv seem to be a big departure from what MAAC is today in the hobby. And it seems MAAC has enough issues with managing themselves let alone people country wide.

I think the biggest thing we as a community/industry can do today is use common sense and promote the safe and good uses of the technology so as to set an example to others new coming in. Better we self regulate than have someone dictate the rules where possible.

[CanadianFlyer]

I have a few thoughts on this subject and will express a couple of those if I may.

From how I interpret what I've been told or have read by MAAC committee members. Those directly involved for both the FPV and UAV/UAS discussions with Transport Canada (TC), is several fold. It really is somewhat complex subject depending on where you are coming from, but equally difficult from all sides. I don't pretend to represent nor speak for MAAC. This is just a few of my impressions. I am a MAAC member, but I'm not a member in any of the clubs. I won't really touch on TC here except as a related guide point.

MAAC seems to have a fairly well established relationship with TC. In fact they are much further along in regulation and guidelines than they are in the USA. FPV seems to have a set of guidelines that have pretty much been worked out and are mostly matured now, including the requirement for a basic Amateur radio licence. Those guides can be read on the MAAC website in their document section. They however for some will feel rather limiting and really not much more fun than what model flying in general is like. Same distance limitations is the most noticeable. We don't have to fly only at club fields. No RC has to anyway, for that matter.

MAAC and UAV's guides however? Those are nowhere near as mature for the hobbyist or educational level and not at all for any commercial approaches as I see it. This is where TC has made UAV's, as most would use them, not legal to do in Canada. It is obvious that in this regard, the old approval system is inadequate. My strong impression is that no one will get a commercial cert for the time being or near future. At least not until the regulations have had a significant investigation of all implications/liabilities etc., and then a major re-write. The big Military companies or those working with them are the only exceptions. As a loose group of Canadian UAV users we are not even close or could be in the near future to deal with TC. We would in the very least, need to become something we aren't.

As for the average hobbyist or experimentalist using UAV's. Basically for now it is best to follow the FPV guides to the letter, but with some added modification to avoid conflict with the law. Basically as MAAC is doing. My recommendation is to ensure that at all times, you must have one hand on the stick to take over control immediately at any time and for any reason. I literally mean to keep one hand on the sticks at all times, or risk having a bad day, if attention is drawn toward you. Some people out there just like to file complaints on their neighbours, or anyone for that matter. We normally call them jerks with a cop complex. So for any technically advanced type of UAV especially. Try to keep away from people and keep your head, distances and altitude down, as best you can. Find the airports look up their restriction zones. Not just altitude restrictions, but also depending on what radios you are using for live data transmission etc., may interfere so close. In Ottawa for instance, almost everywhere in the city is to close to the dang airport.

As for MAAc and the rest of Canadians. By far it really is apples and oranges between the two. That is the core of a problem. MAAC has a voice and MAAc is mostly made up of people in clubs. MAAC as an organization has been that way for many years. Change would be very difficult for them for many reasons. I'm not saying MAAC is a bad thing. You certainly don't have to be in a club to be a full member of MAAC. However those of us outside of this organization or even if a member of it should accept that they have a certain culture. There is an awareness in the executive that we exist both inside of MAAC and outside of it, but the rest of the membership is another story.

It is my observation and opinion that because of the general membership especially and some or most of the executive, that the desire to attract us and our views, to be part of an honest and inclusive discussion would have serious difficulties. We simply see this activity quite differently. I want to be very clear here. These differences are honest differences in almost all areas.

One way perhaps that I could express these differences between cultures, is a simple one. It is simply that some people like the structure that clubs and organizations bring to the table. Other people feel better in a less structured environment. They are fine being alone or just sharing their interest with others they meet. There are many extensions of these differences, but I think that encompasses the kernel of it.

So how could these two groups both have a voice or even have discussions? This is a much more difficult question and I don't think there is a practical method. To begin with. MAAC knows how many people they represent and the demographics of their members. MAAC have long established relationships with TC. They are internally well organized in what their agenda is.

As for the rest of us? Well we don't know how many we are, or anything approaching what a traditional organization knows about it's members. Simply because we aren't a club. The 'us' are people that have some shared interest in UAV's, but from there we all approach it differently, for many many reasons. I know MAAC is made up of generally older people and have to make a constant effort to interest and bring in younger blood. That is perhaps a fact, but on our side we just don't know. My guess is that the average age of the 'us' is somewhat younger, although of an age with some disposable income. I hazard to guess at a majority age ranging from the mid 20's-40's (Sadly I'm older than the majority). The importance here is generational and the attitudes toward authority figures and application of what are perceived as outdated regulations, differ from those in MAAC and clubs.

A subset of this is how we tend to be far more accepting of newer technologies and how fast these evolve. The average people in MAAC tend to be used to a more sedate pace of change. Do not get me wrong. The MAAC committees are made up of some very intelligent and courteous people. I unfortunately can't say that many people in a lot of clubs share this attitude. It is no secret that this new and evolving technology is not widely embraced or accepted by the clubs. There has been some movement in FPV acceptance, but not UAV's among the clubs. I think there is wide ignorance in even understanding what UAV's are, let alone having any trust of the technology used. UAV's present a fast changing environment and so for many this confuses them and therefore it also scares them, into a general distrust. As in society, most people simply fear change. This leads to a knee jerk reaction.

TC is another story for another time, so for now keep away from giving them any reason at all to take notice of you.

Well, that is enough of my mouth. There will be many, many challenges. One person cannot expect to make a change. Even a large unrecognized group doesn't stand much hope with TC or MAAC. Even a large number of people that go on ignoring regulations (but safely) should expect to sacrifice many, before change might occur. Just ask Gandhi.

[Max]

Some very wise words there, CanadianFlyer.

[LEE]

In a recent newscast in Airdrie Manitoba I think, the RCMP had a couple of idiots trying to hide in the attic of a two story bar / restaurant. They held all the restaurant patrons inside while they looked for them, and what was flying overhead in perfect stationary position...a hexa or maybe October copter with a big camera on a gimbal. I wonder if a ham licensed FPV operator was at the controls and had clearance form DOT to perform the mission on a public street?
What about radio stations who want to have an eye in the sky and can't afford a full size helicopter or the MNR who are downsizing but still need to do aerial surveying?
There is a huge market coming for FPV, and the rules will be changing quickly as this technology explodes. Anybody want to go into business?

[mjohnson]

Originally Posted by CanadianFlyer

I have a few thoughts on this subject and will express a couple of those if I may.

From how I interpret what I've been told or have read by MAAC committee members. Those directly involved for both the FPV and UAV/UAS discussions with Transport Canada (TC), is several fold. It really is somewhat complex subject depending on where you are coming from, but equally difficult from all sides. I don't pretend to represent nor speak for MAAC. This is just a few of my impressions. I am a MAAC member, but I'm not a member in any of the clubs. I won't really touch on TC here except as a related guide point.

MAAC seems to have a fairly well established relationship with TC. In fact they are much further along in regulation and guidelines than they are in the USA. FPV seems to have a set of guidelines that have pretty much been worked out and are mostly matured now, including the requirement for a basic Amateur radio licence. Those guides can be read on the MAAC website in their document section. They however for some will feel rather limiting and really not much more fun than what model flying in general is like. Same distance limitations is the most noticeable. We don't have to fly only at club fields. No RC has to anyway, for that matter.

MAAC and UAV's guides however? Those are nowhere near as mature for the hobbyist or educational level and not at all for any commercial approaches as I see it. This is where TC has made UAV's, as most would use them, not legal to do in Canada. It is obvious that in this regard, the old approval system is inadequate. My strong impression is that no one will get a commercial cert for the time being or near future. At least not until the regulations have had a significant investigation of all implications/liabilities etc., and then a major re-write. The big Military companies or those working with them are the only exceptions. As a loose group of Canadian UAV users we are not even close or could be in the near future to deal with TC. We would in the very least, need to become something we aren't.

As for the average hobbyist or experimentalist using UAV's. Basically for now it is best to follow the FPV guides to the letter, but with some added modification to avoid conflict with the law. Basically as MAAC is doing. My recommendation is to ensure that at all times, you must have one hand on the stick to take over control immediately at any time and for any reason. I literally mean to keep one hand on the sticks at all times, or risk having a bad day, if attention is drawn toward you. Some people out there just like to file complaints on their neighbours, or anyone for that matter. We normally call them jerks with a cop complex. So for any technically advanced type of UAV especially. Try to keep away from people and keep your head, distances and altitude down, as best you can. Find the airports look up their restriction zones. Not just altitude restrictions, but also depending on what radios you are using for live data transmission etc., may interfere so close. In Ottawa for instance, almost everywhere in the city is to close to the dang airport.

As for MAAc and the rest of Canadians. By far it really is apples and oranges between the two. That is the core of a problem. MAAC has a voice and MAAc is mostly made up of people in clubs. MAAC as an organization has been that way for many years. Change would be very difficult for them for many reasons. I'm not saying MAAC is a bad thing. You certainly don't have to be in a club to be a full member of MAAC. However those of us outside of this organization or even if a member of it should accept that they have a certain culture. There is an awareness in the executive that we exist both inside of MAAC and outside of it, but the rest of the membership is another story.

It is my observation and opinion that because of the general membership especially and some or most of the executive, that the desire to attract us and our views, to be part of an honest and inclusive discussion would have serious difficulties. We simply see this activity quite differently. I want to be very clear here. These differences are honest differences in almost all areas.

One way perhaps that I could express these differences between cultures, is a simple one. It is simply that some people like the structure that clubs and organizations bring to the table. Other people feel better in a less structured environment. They are fine being alone or just sharing their interest with others they meet. There are many extensions of these differences, but I think that encompasses the kernel of it.

So how could these two groups both have a voice or even have discussions? This is a much more difficult question and I don't think there is a practical method. To begin with. MAAC knows how many people they represent and the demographics of their members. MAAC have long established relationships with TC. They are internally well organized in what their agenda is.

As for the rest of us? Well we don't know how many we are, or anything approaching what a traditional organization knows about it's members. Simply because we aren't a club. The 'us' are people that have some shared interest in UAV's, but from there we all approach it differently, for many many reasons. I know MAAC is made up of generally older people and have to make a constant effort to interest and bring in younger blood. That is perhaps a fact, but on our side we just don't know. My guess is that the average age of the 'us' is somewhat younger, although of an age with some disposable income. I hazard to guess at a majority age ranging from the mid 20's-40's (Sadly I'm older than the majority). The importance here is generational and the attitudes toward authority figures and application of what are perceived as outdated regulations, differ from those in MAAC and clubs.

A subset of this is how we tend to be far more accepting of newer technologies and how fast these evolve. The average people in MAAC tend to be used to a more sedate pace of change. Do not get me wrong. The MAAC committees are made up of some very intelligent and courteous people. I unfortunately can't say that many people in a lot of clubs share this attitude. It is no secret that this new and evolving technology is not widely embraced or accepted by the clubs. There has been some movement in FPV acceptance, but not UAV's among the clubs. I think there is wide ignorance in even understanding what UAV's are, let alone having any trust of the technology used. UAV's present a fast changing environment and so for many this confuses them and therefore it also scares them, into a general distrust. As in society, most people simply fear change. This leads to a knee jerk reaction.

TC is another story for another time, so for now keep away from giving them any reason at all to take notice of you.

Well, that is enough of my mouth. There will be many, many challenges. One person cannot expect to make a change. Even a large unrecognized group doesn't stand much hope with TC or MAAC. Even a large number of people that go on ignoring regulations (but safely) should expect to sacrifice many, before change might occur. Just ask Gandhi.

Great post Terry!

You bring up some very interesting points.

Wouldn't be absolutely marvelous to have a TC waiver or exemption for BLOS FPV ops perhaps with a restriction of being under 3kg? I know I would love to have such a thing. However, in my opinion, the only way this is going to happen is for a committee to be struck within MAAC to lobby for it. Some are saying that MAAC has no interest or MAAC does not understand nor want to understand FPV ops but MAAC is an organization made up of volunteers. Why not volunteer to be part of that lobby group? As an independent FPV/UAV group, even if it could be organized, it would have no where near the lobby /political clout that MAAC has with TC. I would then urge every FPV/BLOS advocate to join MAAC and let their voice be heard. As I have said, it is the only way that the rules may change as MAAC has the ear, and is recognised by TC as the voice of our hobby.

I am only referring to recreational endevours, however if the 3kg exemption could be approved I'm sure that it would trickle down to the commercial applications eventually.

Those that choose to ignore the current FPV rules that MAAC has worked so hard in getting TC to recognise are on their own and probably will continue to do so. I really, really hope that these "rogue operators" (not my words but I will use them) will not give our FPV hobby a black eye in the face of TC. It would be a huge setback for the lobby of a BLOS FPV 3kg exemption.

Once again....just my 2 bits worth.

MJ

[CanadianFlyer]

Good points Mr. Johnson

Sorry in my delay to respond. There is a sort of exemption for the under 3kg hobbyist and TC, but it is unofficial and it is addressed to MAAC not so much our group. There is a very simple reason for that and it harkens back to the long term relationship between the two. It can be divided into two parts.

One: Addressed to MAAC unoffcially by TC. Do like you have been doing this last half century. Follow the intent of the existing regulations in regards to safety, height restrictions, proximity to airports, allocated radio Freq. and power etc., etc. The self regulation MAAC has implemented within its organization has been working for many years, so TC has no intention of interfering with the hobby. Don't give TC any reason to interfere and it won't.
Two: This applies to MAAC people and more importantly to us. It is the most important thing. Keep your head down and none of this will get noticed and therefore give reason to force stronger regulations.

TC is not just worried about frequency, height restrictions etc. It is also very worried about liability issues. If you crash into a person, or a building or whatever, then it gets really sticky in regard to not only who is liable. It branches out into who should be setting liability and beyond. If something like that were to happen, then TC will definitely get hauled onto the carpet with questions regarding what regulations are in place etc. In the civil service this is the equivalent to a bomb going off and heads will role. The one cardinal rule in Gov. is, never have anyone (especially a politician) ask questions or demand answers. NEVER be held responsible, for anything. It is a career ender. So if you want the door slammed shut on our hobby, then give TC any reason to be embarrassed and it will happen faster than light speed.

This catastrophic situation almost happened recently on more than one occasion. There is a report in the January MAAC magazine about it. TC has had several reports from small aircraft coming very close to RC aircraft. This wasn't just one isolated incident. It happened in small aircraft regulated airspace and to top it off, in airport restricted airspace. What is not on this article and from what I heard, it was a UAV or FPV that was responsible. However, this may not be the case, simply because some people would love to blame UAVs for this happening. TC has asked strongly to not let this happen and get the word out to everyone. This maybe easy for MAAC among it's members, but much harder for the rest of us that don't have any common channel of communication. So to everyone. Don't do stupid sh$t like this! Please pass this story along to all your friends.

Mr. Johnson. I agree that we should make an effort to join MAAC and get on the committees and/or at least make suggestions to them. It would help our cause. bur you don't have to be a MAAc member to write them with good suggestions or even get in a dialog with them. Of course it would be better if you were a member, but they are open to anything that could help. What we do as individuals does affect them in the long run. Especially if we do something stupid.

All the MAAC committees with their appointed leaders and contact info, are listed on the MAAC website. Look at the FPV and Safety links on this page for the person and the contact info.
http://www.maac.ca/committees/committees_list.php

To best know where we stand, I suggest everyone should at least look over the MAAC website. Goto their section that holds all their rules, regulations and guidlines. Especially Take Note when reading. They are very specific in stating what are rules and what are just guidelines. Don't get confused and upset on what might be in truth just a guideline or suggestion and not a rule or regulation. MAAC is clear in their doc's what are rules and what are just guides. Some people in maac's own clubs, make this mistake and will spout off, when in fact, it isn't anything more than a suggestion about best recommended practice. http://www.maac.ca/e_docs.php Once again I suggest reading areas such as Safety, rule books, FPV, insurance etc. Keep in mind that MAAC have some rules based around and because of their insurance demands. Take into account some rules are because of that, if people want to be insured on maac/club fields or events. So some of those rules may not apply to us.

The big thing in all this long winded story, is that we need a voice. But just as important. We also need to be reminded of our responsibilities if we want to keep as much freedom as possible in our hobby/research. It is just to easy for the big foot of government to squash this activity. I for one, want as much latitude as possible without having to look over my shoulder all the time. That said, I likely won't be following (bending) all the existing TC regulations, simply because they are outdated or over regulated (because of a need to cover all worst case situations). I'll likely make up my own guidelines based on and depending on the situation, or location, with safety considerations as my prime guide. MAAC rules and guidelines are very valuable in setting up your own behaviour. To start. Stay away from people in parks, property, aircraft, flight paths, airports, and be careful how you are broadcasting your video and data as well.