Personal information
First name
first name
(Required)
Tom
Last name
last name
(Required)
Kludass
Should all RPA be registered?
Select your preferred registration options.
| By RPA None Checkbox: Not checked None | By RPA Above a specific size/weight Checkbox: Not checked Above a specific size/weight | By RPA For specific operations Checkbox: Not checked For specific operations | By RPA All RPA Checkbox: Not checked All RPA |
| By RPA owner None Checkbox: Not checked None | By RPA owner Above a specific size/weight Checkbox: Not checked Above a specific size/weight | By RPA owner For specific operations Checkbox: Not checked For specific operations | By RPA owner All RPA Checkbox: Not checked All RPA |
| By RPA operator None Checkbox: Not checked None | By RPA operator Above a specific size/weight Checkbox: Checked Above a specific size/weight | By RPA operator For specific operations Checkbox: Not checked For specific operations | By RPA operator All RPA Checkbox: Not checked All RPA |
Please provide any additional comments:
Given that the current <2kg class includes products from DJI and literally hundreds of other supermarket or hobby sourced products, including these in any form of registration process would be logistically impossible unless it was a process at point of sale. In that case each of those selling points would require an authorised agent to act on CASA's behalf and that would be fraught with mistakes.
Should all RPA users be required to meet training / proficiency criteria?
Select your preferred training and proficiency options.
| Training None Checkbox: Not checked None | Training Above a specific size/weight Checkbox: Checked Above a specific size/weight | Training For specific operations Checkbox: Not checked For specific operations | Training All RPA Checkbox: Not checked All RPA |
| Demonstration of proficiency None Checkbox: Not checked None | Demonstration of proficiency Above a specific size/weight Checkbox: Checked Above a specific size/weight | Demonstration of proficiency For specific operations Checkbox: Not checked For specific operations | Demonstration of proficiency All RPA Checkbox: Not checked All RPA |
Please provide any additional comments:
Given the variety of RPAs in the <2kg category, the cost and performance capabilities, it would be difficult to construct a module that addresses this category and deliver a consistent outcome.
Should the introduction of geo-fencing be mandated?
Should CASA mandate the introduction of geo-fencing options to limit the operation of RPA in certain areas?
Please select one item
Radio button:
Ticked
Yes
Radio button:
Unticked
No
Please provide your comments:
I have a DJI product that is already subject to a NFZ 'barrier', but I can return to the same location with my Blade helicopter and fly anywhere I like. Both have the potential to create a hazard, but at this stage the use of NFZ technology is very subjective.
What should be done about 'counter-drone' technology?
Provide your views on the ways in which counter-drone technologies should be managed and in what circumstances they should be used.
management/scenarios for counter-drone tech
The present geo fencing technology being used by DJI should be sufficient to manage critical infrastructure areas. How that is rolled out across other RPA platforms is the main problem, but the use of some sort of counter drone technology including disabling UAVs in flight is very extreme. The potential for uncontrolled flight causing damage or injury to others, despite being managed by 'experts' is fanciful at best. I guarantee there will be a subset in society upon learning of counter drone technology being available, will take it upon themselves to determine alleged privacy issues and validate their version of taking down a drone as per CASA guidelines/enforcement.
Specify any particular aspects of counter-drone technology or its potential uses to which CASA should be devoting more attention.
CASA attention to c-d use
The only scenario I could envisage would be that of an imminent threat to either security of persons. As mentioned earlier the DJI app software acts as a counter drone form of technology in that it prevents the operator from entering designated restricted areas, the drone will hover and ultimately auto land. There a number of issues with the current software iteration but it is working in a fashion. Given the sheer numbers of UAVs, I cannot see how the previously mentioned software can be rolled out across all the different platforms. As for any dedicated device to 'bring down' a UAV, there are too many possible scenarios, locations and units spread out across the country for a dedicated device to be effective.
Are we doing enough of the right things?
CASA seeks your view on the way in which we are approaching regulation of RPA in Australia today and for the future.
are we doing the right things?
At present I belong to a number of DJI forums, both here and overseas and the safety message is being promoted in the strongest terms and the sites being managed by conscientious admin staff. I suspect that membership of these forums represent a fraction of the RPA owning public and the CASA message is only being promoted by those within the groups. Given the interaction I have with people when flying and their lack of knowledge, I believe CASA could look at broader public knowledge through any of the current mediums, be it TV, FB or the print media. Dedicated fliers understand the rules, the general public don't and this is possibly the cause of certain levels of friction between us and the public. Education is the key, prosecution is a typical lagging indicator.
General comments
Please provide any final comments about CASA's review of RPA operations. You can use the comments box or upload a file submission.
general comments
I believe CASA is heading in the right direction with managing an evolving, yet booming, RPA industry. Consultation such as this submission is already being noted on the forums as being a positive step in seeking out the non hysterical opinions of the majority of people trying to do the right thing.
Having said that, unfortunately we will always have incidences where people are simply doing the wrong thing, either through lack of understanding/education or a deliberate action. If legislation was the key to success, we wouldn't have drink drivers, people being killed on their farm quads, unregistered trail bikes etc.
As has been noted in the introduction to this survey, the industry has the potential to be of enormous benefit to society on a variety of levels, the last thing we recreational fliers want is to go down the road that many US states are going with their ridiculous restrictions. That will create dissent and force a lot of users to be more creative e.g. the current hacking of NFZ/geofencing for the recent DJI software/FW package. I can access this at the moment and fly wherever I want and there is nothing anyone can do about it.
No need to go there with a cooperative approach that is fair, educational and encourages responsible use.
Having said that, unfortunately we will always have incidences where people are simply doing the wrong thing, either through lack of understanding/education or a deliberate action. If legislation was the key to success, we wouldn't have drink drivers, people being killed on their farm quads, unregistered trail bikes etc.
As has been noted in the introduction to this survey, the industry has the potential to be of enormous benefit to society on a variety of levels, the last thing we recreational fliers want is to go down the road that many US states are going with their ridiculous restrictions. That will create dissent and force a lot of users to be more creative e.g. the current hacking of NFZ/geofencing for the recent DJI software/FW package. I can access this at the moment and fly wherever I want and there is nothing anyone can do about it.
No need to go there with a cooperative approach that is fair, educational and encourages responsible use.