CAA.. enough already! (19 Apr, 2017)

Have your say on today's Aardvark Daily column

CAA.. enough already! (19 Apr, 2017)

Postby aardvark_admin » Wed Apr 19, 2017 10:54 am

This column is archived at: http://aardvark.co.nz/daily/2017/0419.shtml

What the hell is going on?

Is CAA asleep at the wheel?

Will their incompetence or arrogance result in more deaths -- simply because they refuse to hand out a simple educational brochure to tourists entering this country with their drones?

If/when such a tragedy occurs, you can bet that, just as they did with the Carterton balloon incident, CAA refuses to accept any responsibility for not acting in a way that could have averted the disaster that resulted.

Is CAA's performance really good enough?
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2419
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: CAA.. enough already! (19 Apr, 2017)

Postby phill » Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:55 am

i agree with most of your thoughts on caa except i think its just because of their laziness and the inability to think constructively ( perhaps some are ex aircraft engineers .. a strange lot completely devoid of independent thought process when it comes to anything air operated and everything is by the manual by the manual by the manual .. for good reasons )

the interesting bit to me is where the so called safety protocol engaged and caused a bigger problem
i think there should be an override to stop this happening
its not difficult to work out why govts forced drone makers to come up with it
but truly automated AI in a computer so small is always going to cause at least as many problems as it stops

i wonder how many will die trying to retrieve drones from places they were forced to land before something is done to change it

no need to give out orange leaflets just add to it the advice to travelers on the customs docket
they will be cuddling their budget so will not like spending it anywhere they may not have to
User avatar
phill
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:31 pm

Re: CAA.. enough already! (19 Apr, 2017)

Postby aardvark_admin » Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:18 pm

phill wrote:they will be cuddling their budget so will not like spending it anywhere they may not have to

Then why did they give thousands of these brochures to model flying clubs who already know the rules inside and out and aren't likely to be part of the problem group?

I have about a hundred of these things sitting in my studio because they were given to me for our club (of about 20 members).

They also give them to places like Noel Leeming but when you ask at the counter they say "Oh, I don't know where they are, out the back somewhere I guess" which clearly indicates that they're not being passed on to customers.

CAA is typical of a bureaucracy -- it's not the outcome that is important, it's going through the motions and adopting some kind of "process" that can be ticked off to ensure that KPIs are met.

Sigh... some of these people ought to get out into the "real world" (TM) from time to time.
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2419
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: CAA.. enough already! (19 Apr, 2017)

Postby phill » Wed Apr 19, 2017 1:02 pm

yehh well they dont use the basics in personnel management
the first rule of which would be .. know how your employees think and act and task them within those limitations
caa has clearly no experience in making decisions or rules so will embrace whatever some other like bureaucracy has done
knowing then blame can be passed on as usual and the safer and further removed from themselves they seem then the better to follow those ones

its not their fault its the fault of those that gave them the task of making rules for models in the first place
User avatar
phill
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:31 pm

Re: CAA.. enough already! (19 Apr, 2017)

Postby hagfish » Wed Apr 19, 2017 2:11 pm

Perhaps the relative availability of information about drones and driving is an acknowledgement of the relative threats represented by a tourist operating a wee drone, and a tourist operating a campervan.
hagfish
 
Posts: 488
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 10:28 am

Re: CAA.. enough already! (19 Apr, 2017)

Postby Perry » Wed Apr 19, 2017 5:34 pm

The changes came after a sharp rise in UAV incidents. Between 2007 and 2015, the number of incidents rose from 2 to 52.

That looks like some obfuscatory PR.

Bruce: any facts and figures you can tell us about those so-called UAV incidents?
Perry
 
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: CAA.. enough already! (19 Apr, 2017)

Postby aardvark_admin » Wed Apr 19, 2017 7:19 pm

Perry wrote:
The changes came after a sharp rise in UAV incidents. Between 2007 and 2015, the number of incidents rose from 2 to 52.

That looks like some obfuscatory PR.

Bruce: any facts and figures you can tell us about those so-called UAV incidents?

First-up, I just noticed while researching this that caa.govt.nz doesn't work, you *must* use the "www" prefix. WTF? This is 2017, surely they understand that *both* should work? Oh no, that's right, we're talking about a taxpayer-funded bureaucracy, they don't have to understand a damned thing :-(

Firstly, you must understand that CAA tends to "fudge" figures to suit its agendas.

For example, in March/April 2016 edition of Vector magazine (see page 13), CAA boldly and authoritatively claimed that there were 198 incidents involving drones during the 2015 year.

However, when an independent third party vetted the reports, they discovered that a great many of them were duplications and later, on page 25 of the July/August 2016 edition of Vector, CAA was forced to make an embarrassing correction and admit that there were in fact only 121 unique incident reports filed.

Clearly, either CAA doesn't actually do anything but collect and count allegations without any kind of analysis, or they'd simply rather inflate the figures until caught out by an independent third party.

Also, on closer inspection, a very significant proportion of these "incidents" contain statements such as:

    * RPAS operated over private property without consent
    * Concern regarding real-estate photographer
    * Concern regarding RPAS near complainant's house
    * RPAS operation concern
    * Concern that drone was operated over DOC property
    * Alleged illegal drone flight
    * Testing a new battery, there was a popping sound and the motors failed. Settled on to soft grass.
    * Took off from rear of boat and ascended to 20ft while flying away from vessel and towards operating area. After approximately 10 seconds and 0m of horizontal travel the right front propellor came away from the motor causing the aircraft to spiral out of control and plunge into the ocean.

None of these are proven violations of the rules or cases of endangerment and many, many of the listed "incidents" consist solely of these descriptions.

Also, if you look at the minimal number of fines/prosecutions that CAA has brought, it's clear that very, very few of the incidents were valid or of sufficient severity to merit such action.

Hysteria rules!
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2419
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: CAA.. enough already! (19 Apr, 2017)

Postby Perry » Wed Apr 19, 2017 7:27 pm

Thanks.

I guessed as much.

Figures designed to make them look good.
Perry
 
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: CAA.. enough already! (19 Apr, 2017)

Postby phill » Wed Apr 19, 2017 7:55 pm

hmm i wonder if its the moving goal post stat
ie
in year 1 goal posts were 2 meters wide
scorers succeeded in 50 % of kicks from 25 meters
the next year goals were 10 meters wide
most kicks scored a goal
the headlines read

scorers have doubled the goals scored in only one year

clearly a 100% improvement in only one year
grads
give the coach a raise

or in this case so many more things became illegal and known
more things were reported
User avatar
phill
 
Posts: 1037
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:31 pm

Re: CAA.. enough already! (19 Apr, 2017)

Postby RoddyAxn » Thu Apr 20, 2017 7:31 am

C-an't

A-ctivate

A-ttention


CAA
RoddyAxn
 
Posts: 881
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2014 8:07 am

Next

Return to Today's column

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests