Drones - cutting through the crap (24 Jun, 2014)

Have your say on today's Aardvark Daily column

Drones - cutting through the crap (24 Jun, 2014)

Postby aardvark_admin » Tue Jun 24, 2014 10:35 am

This column is archived at: http://aardvark.co.nz/daily/2014/0624.shtml

While my SAA work is grounded, I figure I'll use some of my time to educate and inform those who are contemplating the use of "drones" on their farms or for other purposes.

Without some independent, objective advice and information, it's very easy for would-be drone users to spend far more money than they should and end up with a package that won't (legally) do half what was promised. I'm going to fix that.

Any advise from readers? Anyone want me to do a presentation/demo for a group they think may benefit from this?
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5181
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Drones - cutting through the crap (24 Jun, 2014)

Postby Stevesub » Tue Jun 24, 2014 11:52 am

If you are not charging and I can see why you cannot, explain that reason as part of your presentation and ask for donations for "petrol" money. You need to cover costs at least unless you have $$$ to spare which you have said in the past you do not have. It is also time away from when you could be making money on other not so controversial projects.
Stevesub
 
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 5:14 pm

Re: Drones - cutting through the crap (24 Jun, 2014)

Postby Screw » Tue Jun 24, 2014 12:25 pm

Check out Federated Farmers Bruce for a start. They could be interested. Even the Young Farmers too.
Screw
 
Posts: 1296
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 3:52 pm

Re: Drones - cutting through the crap (24 Jun, 2014)

Postby goosemoose » Tue Jun 24, 2014 12:43 pm

I don't see why you can't charge for seminars after all you not piloting a machine for hire or reward. You're working in a consultative capacity. I'd also get in contact with some of the farming rags, NZ farmer (formally Straight Furrow), Farming Weekly etc etc. They'd probably do an article on you and it'd probably garner some interest. I haven't heard of any farmers round here talking about the drone thing but I may drop it in conversation next time I'm having a yarn with 'em. It's pretty hilly round here so I'd suspect most would lose line of sight PDQ.

There was an article in one of the farming mags about a young kid and his old man down Southland talking up the drone thing reckoning they wouldn't have to go into town because drones would deliver everything to them in a few years time. Obviously they don't know too much about the regs and CAA. They'll find out soon enough :twisted: .
goosemoose
 
Posts: 806
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 1:05 pm

Re: Drones - cutting through the crap (24 Jun, 2014)

Postby Kiwiiano » Tue Jun 24, 2014 2:58 pm

Chapter & verse, what is the CAA reg that says you can't provide paid-for seminars on any subject or is it just for aspects of aviation?
~ Kiwiiano
“I'm not a total idiot. Parts of me are missing!”
Kiwiiano
 
Posts: 594
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 5:36 pm

Re: Drones - cutting through the crap (24 Jun, 2014)

Postby aardvark_admin » Tue Jun 24, 2014 3:27 pm

CAA's "policy" is that the defintion of an "RC model" is something that is flown for recreatonal purposes only. To make any form of charge for any type of service which involved the use of an "RC model" immediately turns that model into an "unmanned aerial system" and they have previously stated that UAS can only be used with a "Commercial Operating Authority" -- which can only be issued by CAA.

CAA, in conjunction with MFNZ, have already decided that *all* my RC model flying is "commercial" in nature because (believe it or not) I am developing the SAA system. Strangely enough however, those NZ model fliers who run model-related businesses and design, build, sell or demonstrate RC models for profit are not seen as commercial at all -- so go figure.

I don't want to give CAA any excuse for being more of a bunch of biased dickheads than they already are in respect to my own situation. Remember, they sent me a bill for over $700 for an "exemption" that was not what was promised and was not fit for purpose and subsiquently withdrawn within days of its issuance.

I'd much rather just educate and inform the farming community without opening myself up to any further flak from the dimbulbs at CAA or MFNZ -- although I'm sure they'll find a way to gripe and moan about it.
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5181
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Drones - cutting through the crap (24 Jun, 2014)

Postby GSVNoFixedAbode » Tue Jun 24, 2014 4:24 pm

I'm sure you'd accept Koha for your efforts - that's not income or earnings now, is it? :mrgreen:
GSVNoFixedAbode
 
Posts: 477
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 8:53 am

Re: Drones - cutting through the crap (24 Jun, 2014)

Postby aardvark_admin » Tue Jun 24, 2014 4:29 pm

I expect that the IRD would consider Koha to be income.

Any time you receive a gift that is contingent on providing a product or service, that gift will almost certainly be considered "revenue".

A gift is only truly a gift if it is given without the delivery or expectation of the delivery of a service, product or benefit to the giftor. That's why the donate button on this site says "Remember, this is purely a gift, you'll get nothing other than a warm fuzzy feeling in return" so that any paltry amounts received by this vector are clearly not related to the provision of any goods, services or benefit to those gifting the money.
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5181
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Drones - cutting through the crap (24 Jun, 2014)

Postby Anaru » Tue Jun 24, 2014 5:16 pm

Question, if the airfield is hired out and closed down with all the appropriate measures in place, does the 4 kilometre restriction still apply or is there specific wording to encompass only "active" or "live" airfields?

I wish I was a lawyer so that I could take the CAA to account on your behalf Bruce, the "policies" (rather than actual "laws") that they have are a bit silly though for the most part they're just common sense stuff with a bit of bureaucracy sprinkled around the edges. However, there is a huge amount of ambiguity introduced to an industry which is suppose to be extremely safety conscious. Take for example a rally car that gets airborne; does its momentary "flight" mean that for those brief seconds or milliseconds the CAA could prosecute them if they happened to collide (through some miracle) with a helicopter filming overhead on the grounds that they were flying an unregistered aircraft, an unlicensed driver, etc.? Why don't people who sky dive have to use a radio and learn basic laws, navigation, etc. relative to flight? Why not right? Sky divers have collided with aircraft in the recent past and will probably continue to do so.

Personally I'd just do what you need to do and if push comes to shove they won't have a leg to stand on.
Anaru
 
Posts: 150
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 3:20 am

Re: Drones - cutting through the crap (24 Jun, 2014)

Postby goosemoose » Tue Jun 24, 2014 5:25 pm

aardvark_admin wrote:CAA's "policy" is that the defintion of an "RC model" is something that is flown for recreatonal purposes only. To make any form of charge for any type of service which involved the use of an "RC model" immediately turns that model into an "unmanned aerial system" and they have previously stated that UAS can only be used with a "Commercial Operating Authority" -- which can only be issued by CAA.

CAA, in conjunction with MFNZ, have already decided that *all* my RC model flying is "commercial" in nature because (believe it or not) I am developing the SAA system. Strangely enough however, those NZ model fliers who run model-related businesses and design, build, sell or demonstrate RC models for profit are not seen as commercial at all -- so go figure.

I don't want to give CAA any excuse for being more of a bunch of biased dickheads than they already are in respect to my own situation. Remember, they sent me a bill for over $700 for an "exemption" that was not what was promised and was not fit for purpose and subsiquently withdrawn within days of its issuance.

I'd much rather just educate and inform the farming community without opening myself up to any further flak from the dimbulbs at CAA or MFNZ -- although I'm sure they'll find a way to gripe and moan about it.

Where's CAA's policy on giving talks and receiving renumeration for expressing opinions at meetings or conferences? They don't have one. It's all soley related to flying the damn things, you're not breaking the law etc. For most things you don't have to be a qualified, licensed or sanctioned etc whatever to express an opinion or convey years of experience to people. I'm a HAM and now a lapsed CPL that doesn't stop me giving opinions on these matters that I know a bit about. I don't have the governing bodies coming down on me for my opinions and if they did then the only thing they'd get from me is the finger. You'll be doing exactly the same, expressing opinions. If CAA want to suppress free speech then I'd go straight to the top as now it's become a constitutional matter. You're tying yourself up in knots here.
goosemoose
 
Posts: 806
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 1:05 pm

Next

Return to Today's column

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests