Personal information
First name
first name
(Required)
Yiming
Last name
last name
(Required)
Teng
Should all RPA be registered?
Select your preferred registration options.
| By RPA None Checkbox: Checked None | By RPA Above a specific size/weight Checkbox: 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: 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: Checked None | By RPA operator Above a specific size/weight Checkbox: Not 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:
Registering RPA will not prevent people from breaching regulations. The way to stop this is to simply educate people at no charge. 99% of breaches are made with automated DJI platforms, by operators which do not know the regulations at all, especially tourists in R405A and B airspace.
Should all RPA users be required to meet training / proficiency criteria?
Select your preferred training and proficiency options.
| Training None Checkbox: Checked None | Training Above a specific size/weight Checkbox: Not 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:
People will not take any test or training if it is at any cost. The only way to do it is for it to be free and online. Shops which sell RPA should be required to have a free training program or a brochure for a place that does
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:
Unticked
Yes
Radio button:
Ticked
No
Please provide your comments:
Geo-fencing technology is very expensive and not suitable for smaller RPA. The best way to stop people flying where they shouldn't is easily accessible information that is accurate and reliable.
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
In circumstances where a clear breach of privacy or regulations has occurred, a larger RPA operated by a licensed counter-drone organisation whether it be volunteer or police force, all are suitable. Explicit verbal permission should be given by casa before any RPA is disabled. The larger RPA shall be equipped to carry a payload of 3kg or more. A net that is connected to the RPA is to be deployed, catching the propellers and the smaller RPA. The larger rpa must be able to transport it to a safe landing area. Before a net is deployed, it must be confirmed that in the case the the net only takes the smaller rpa out of the air, it will cause no property or person damage. Simple and easy way of countering unauthorised flights.
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
CASA should allow testing of heavy lift counter drone RPA on a case by case basis for no or minimal fee in order for prototypes to be easily tested in remote areas
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?
Currently all this debate is sparked by media hype. Testing done by other agencies have pointed out that the risk of damage or injury from an RPA is actually much lower than anyone thought. Take any sport for example. An RPA is safer than all of them. CASA should be required to do testing for each weight class by every 100g below 1kg and every 500g below 4kg and every 1kg below 25kg. For every regulation that is put into place must have a link to practical testing data relevant. This data must not be confidential in any way.
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
CASA need to do testing. Media hype is not a good reason. It is not good enough to put blanket rules when 99% of breaches are done by easily obtainable automated platforms like dji. Usually by tourists as well. This is basically saying, no one is allowed to play sport, until a license is obtained simply because someone accidentally injured another player, as they were not aware of exactly what was allowed in the sport.