Drone discussion paper - Review of RPAS operations (DP 1708OS) - Civil Aviation Safety Authority

Response 98198701

Personal information

First name

(Required)

Mike

Last name

(Required)

Brown

Should all RPA be registered?

Select your preferred registration options.

	None	Above a specific size/weight	For specific operations	All RPA
By RPA Please select all that apply	None None	Above a specific size/weight Above a specific size/weight	For specific operations For specific operations	All RPA All RPA
By RPA owner Please select all that apply	None None	Above a specific size/weight Above a specific size/weight	For specific operations For specific operations	All RPA Ticked All RPA
By RPA operator Please select all that apply	None None	Above a specific size/weight Above a specific size/weight	For specific operations For specific operations	All RPA All RPA

Should all RPA users be required to meet training / proficiency criteria?

Select your preferred training and proficiency options.

	None	Above a specific size/weight	For specific operations	All RPA
Training Please select all that apply	None None	Above a specific size/weight Above a specific size/weight	For specific operations For specific operations	All RPA Ticked All RPA
Demonstration of proficiency Please select all that apply	None None	Above a specific size/weight Above a specific size/weight	For specific operations For specific operations	All RPA Ticked All RPA

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

Yes

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.

Technology will fast outpace regulations. Responsible drone manufactures could implement transponders linked to registered owners. Any act causing a drone to lose control will be dangerous and messy to implement. There are already smart apps that can track commercial aircraft so this type of drone transponder will allow anyone to trace the owner of a rogue aircraft using a smart app. Those deliberately wanting to break the law will of course disable or circumvent such technology. Laws and regulations are really guidelines for law biding people. Those that flaunt the law will always do as they please.
The use of counter-drone technology should be used in high risk such as prisons and airports etc for people that are deliberately acting outside the law.

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.

CASA I feel is acting responsibly to ensure safe integration of this new technology by consulting various operational sectors through discussion papers such as this. It seems that internationally many countries are having difficulty finding a middle ground for safe integration of what is a growing industry that has huge benefits. Any regulation that becomes too difficult or expensive will see many drone operators acting outside of these regulations anyway, defeating the whole purpose. Education is far better at informing those that want to be responsible but it will never reach 100% success.
Education through social media is far reaching and very effective as most drone users are connected through some forum to trouble shoot or simply brag. When an operator is found doing the wrong thing it quickly goes viral bringing condemnation and ridicule by most members on these forums. The small percentage that are ignorant or don't care will slowly decrease through education. The much smaller group that will always act irresponsibly should of course should feel the full impact of the law and the example publicised widely for greater educational impact.