Key messages from Transport Canada re: flying model aircraft:
- Max altitude: 300 feet
- No FPV allowed for model aircraft. Unaided line-of-sight control is required.
- No night flying.
I would encourage everyone to read both of these Transport Canada guidance documents, especially the first one re: model aircraft. Cheers!Andy HofferSecretary-Treasurer, TEMACTransport Canada
Civil Aviation
Online Reference Centre / Centre de référence en ligneRecently Issued Documents/ Documents récemment publiésThe following documents have recently been posted to the Transport Canada Civil Aviation website:
CAR 600 Series - General Operating and Flight Rules Title: General Safety Practices – Model Aircraft and Unmanned Air Vehicle Systems
Number: AC 600-002
Issue (Effective Date): 01 (2014-11-27)
Link: http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/opssvs/managementservices-referencecentre-acs-600-2135.html (http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/opssvs/managementservices-referencecentre-acs-600-2135.html)
Title: Guidance Material for Operating Unmanned Air Vehicle Systems under an Exemption
Number: AC 600-004
Issue (Effective Date): 01 (2014-11-27)
Link: http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/opssvs/ac-600-004-2136.html (http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/opssvs/ac-600-004-2136.html)
A list of documents issued during
the past 60 days is available at:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/opssvs/managementservices-referencecentre-recent-114.htm (http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/opssvs/managementservices-referencecentre-recent-114.htm)
Ordering of Transport Canada Publications and Forms
Visit our online forms catalogue: http://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/Corp-Serv-Gen/5/Forms-Formulaires/English.aspx (http://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/Corp-Serv-Gen/5/Forms-Formulaires/English.aspx)
What??!!!! No Lasers!!!!
Nanny State!!! ;D
I think it is important to add some commentary to Andy's post before we consider anything drastic, such as requesting the relocation of Markham airport.
These circulars appear to be in response to recent incursions of UAV's with general and commercial aviation. A careful read of TC's Advisory Circular (AC) No. 600-002 makes it very clear on what the regulation is pertaining to model aircraft. It is repeated here with highlights for emphasis:
"No person shall fly a model aircraft or a kite or launch a model rocket or a rocket of a type used in a fireworks display into cloud or in a manner that is or is likely to be hazardous to aviation safety (Canadian Aviation Regulations, Section 602.45)."
That is pretty straightforward.
The Safety Considerations listed in Section 4.2 are referred to as "best practices" to provide guidance. In other words, these are not hard core regulations by Act. If they were, then several of the flying fields in the GTA would be in jeopardy. The Board is reviewing the documents but expects no impact on current practices as long as we continue to observe MAAC and TEMAC operating procedures and safety practices at Rogo Field.
(For those interested, TEMAC field is located outside the Buttonville control zone and below Pearson's terminal control area which begins at 3,500' above sea level overhead the field. The field is in Class G airspace. Markham airport/aerodrome, located about 2.5NM southeast of TEMAC, does not have a control zone.)
A comment from MAAC on this matter can be found here:
http://www.maac.ca/view_news.php?itm=554 (http://www.maac.ca/view_news.php?itm=554)
Safe flying!!
Graham
So lasers are cool then? sweet!
Don't be so happy yet, Mike, it also says you need to get an SFOC to conduct flight training - you may be out of of a job... :D ;D :D
Section 4.1 (3):
"You should use your model aircraft for recreational purposes only (e.g. hobby and personal enjoyment). If you are using it for other purposes (i.e. flight training, inspection or academia purposes, etc), section 5.0 below is applicable as is the requirement for an SFOC".
The 300' limit is extremely restrictive, if true this would effectively end all glider flying in Canada, and probably pattern and IMAC as well.
The oldest form of model flying, free flight, would become impossible.
But as long as we are flying model aircraft these are only "guidlines" for "best practices", and not the rule of law.
Hopefully MAAC will offer some guidance on this.
Pat MacKenzie
I have, in anticipation of these new regulations regarding the use of UAV's for commercial use, sent a lengthy letter to the minister of transport herself, the Honourable Ms. Lisa Raitt, by the time the new rules (which are a godsend to those seeking to use them for commercial use), have been published, i was shocked to see that a key recommendation i have sent, has appeared in the rules for exemption for SFOC's, verbatim. This must mean either that particular rule i recommended was already on the boards, or, Transport Canada listens, and i am told they do from them themselves. After reading the rules for exemption, i did notice a flaw, one that may just render the entire exemption for SFOC's null and void anyway, im sure everyone else noticed it too, the cut and dry prohibition of FPV during flight.
For several reasons, i am sure that those advising our Transport minister, are not necessarily well informed on FPV systems, which resulted in a second lengthy email from me.
lets not scream NO FPV! (those who oppose it), before understanding its importance during commercial use especially, there are many types of FPV systems, but the one that people tend to know about most is the goggle variety, which does in fact, not allow the pilot to see his craft, upon hearing this, decision makers up top also become blind, it sounds so dangerous doesn't it! but are we being haste? i assure you YES! we are. Yes the use of goggles does blind you to the world around you, and just a importantly, to the physical status of your craft and what it is doing, especially if using a gimbal, because a gimbal numbs you to the motions of your craft which are important in detecting a problem. By this i mean, if you are looking through goggles, and utilizing a steady gimbal, everything looks rock steady regardless of what your craft is doing, it may be gyrating abnormally or twitching and jerking around as the can when flight controllers go awry, and you would be oblivious to this telltale sign of trouble, whats more, most Uav's speak to you by way of LED signals as to their overall status and health, which again, using goggles you would not know.
For these reasons and others, i cannot recommend the use of goggles to anyone seeking to use FPV, but a total ban? i challenge anyone, including Transport Canada, to argue against their use with me, as i mentioned there are several types of FPV systems, and perhaps more popular than goggles, are Monitors, small LCD screens around 7" or so that are usually placed atop tripods or on your TX, which display a live view through the POV of your camera. This POV is vital,crucial, in being able to successfully, safely complete an aerial shoot, "safely" you may ask?...we've all heard of OSD's (on screen displays), they are little devices about the size of a toonie, which when wired into your UAV, relay a treasure trove of absolutely vital information to your monitor, much more so than what can be relayed by blinking LED's. Information such as altitude,orientation,distance from home point, the exact number of satellites you are locked on to ( which FYI is vital for the craft to know where it is in 3 dimensional space), and i can go on about other vital parameters which they relay. And all this, while still being able to monitor your craft by eye, i bet i can tell you whether i am at 275 ft or 300, can you?
These parameters are what help close the gap between the extremely complicated machine at your fingertips, which you hope is working and interpreting all the data being sent to its flight controller properly, and being able to eaves drop on some of that information which may just aid you in making a decision on whether to abort the flight or not. besides the fact that without the use of an FPV device you might as well scrap your aerial photography plans anyway, how do you compose a video or aim that camera for a shot, without being able to see the frame? lol did they miss this? no doubt, and i haven't even touched on new systems using a heads up display approach where your screen is projected onto transparent glasses, giving you full sight of your craft while seeing the video and data.
i was testing an FPV system out for a friend who had access to a couple of models, using his craft, and an LCD screen, we were out in the field, the parameters from the craft were overlaid on the screen, i was noticing that his flight controller was detecting 10 satellites pretty steadily , which is real good, triangulation works better with more satellites, as clouds rolled in though, that number began to drop, 10...9...8 down to 6 then back up again to 10, this went back and forth for a few min but as the clouds thickened the number stayed between 5 and 8, at which point i decided to terminate the test, you don't want to fly when sat number dive too low because fight controllers greatly depend on them for return to home and other features. And being able to know orientation to a few degrees at a distance is super handy, if you're 300FT out, you cant tell if your small UAV has the shakes which can be a precursor to failure. What i mean to say by all this is that when used properly, FPV is an enormous help, and an greatly assist in making the difference between a "what just happened" situation and a "my battery is low and i'm loosing satellite lock, better land" situation. i bet, that as model RC airplane pilots, you would, as i, love to know if your ESC is acting up, or one of your servo's is grinding before you do that last circuit, how many times have we stood over our wrecks wondering...gee what happened?
i can go on and bore the stink out of you all, but frankly its getting late and i want to chew on the latest edition of Rotor Drone monthly lol, have fun out there everyone! its cold as heck for flying but i did today anyway.
Easy tiger... this is for Commercial purposes.. Not 'Model" airplanes...
I'm reading it as a minimum of 300' altitude over people, structures or buildings.
Marc
- Maintain below a safe altitude (300 feet (90 metres)) and a safe horizontal distance (minimum 100 feet (30 metres)) from people, structures or buildings.
I read this as keep your model aircraft "below 300 feet" and "100 feet away (horizontal distance) from people, structures or buildings". Andy
Related article from The Economist:
http://www.economist.com/news/technology-quarterly/21635326-after-starting-their-career-armed-forces-drones-are-now-entering-civilian
I wrote a big message with lots of details and points but posted a photo with it that was too big... Damn it im not doing it again!
Contacting the ministry of transportation LOL really? get over yourself.(oh did I just say that? Yes Yes I did!)
These legislations are to protect you from scab commercial pilots out flying without insurance in populated areas without the knowledge to realize that they are jeopardizing the hobby and peoples lives with there "Im a freaking super hero" goggles on. They think or try to convince themselves that they have situational awareness but its the biggest pile of BS being sold!!
None of these rules will affect TEMAC and I have doubts even the glider guys will notice any changes. This is being put into place so that the Gov can go after jerk offs that risk it for everyone. Line of sight is line of sight and THAT is the rule as it stands. If you cant look at two screens at the same time thank good golly you don't chew gum!
This might be a rant where Im a jerk and to be frank I could give two shakes of a lambs tail. Sometimes Im a jerk and this might just be one of those times. I work in this industry full time and have the permits.
Cool shot Ed - did you take that?
Pat MacKenzie
Yes Pat I did. Too bad I can't post the full image quality.
Multi rotors need not apply
Somebody has pent up anger lol, I can back up everything I say, Edward , may just be surprised!
As a site admin I'm going to lock this topic with the hope that a timeout might make everyone return to their egg nog and in the spirit of which ever holiday you celebrate go back to picking on images of Simon instead of whatever was going on here...
I'll help Mike.......
Thank you Mike.
In light of the depth of concern and possible misunderstanding of the interpretation of the bulletins I have arranged for some expert help. The January Pilot's Meeting will be attended by Zoltan Pittner, Chairman, MAAC FPV Committee, Brad Egan, MAAC Zone Director, Doug Anderson, Chairman, MAAC Safety Committee and Michael Rogozinsky, MAAC Deputy Zone Director. They are prepared to answer all questions and update us with the latest information.
My personal opinion, based on various contacts with principles involved in negotiations, is that our modeling activities will not be affected to any extent. Transport Canada has an excellent relationship with MAAC and holds MAAC and its Safety Guidelines in very high regard.
High flown rhetoric and misinformed opinions will do nothing to help our side of the coin so I would urge all to wait the final version is released by Transport Canada. The final version will include adjustments negotiated by MAAC on your behalf.
Jack.