And the rules become more and more restrictive to the ones who follow them by the book.

Time for TC to hit hard those who think the sky is their limit.

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/11/14/porter-plane-in-near...

Views: 176

Replies to This Discussion

It seems so blatantly obvious (that only government bureaucrats could fail to grasp it):

If you tighten, and tighten, and tighten the rules, without any meaningful progress on the means to track down the people responsible for incidents like this, you're guaranteeing more of these, not fewer.

I told TC this in my input on the Notice of Proposed Amendments (to the drone regulations). I believe it went right over their heads.

My own flying field, out in the farmland, has to offer discounts to members who have to drive more than 60km to reach a place they're allowed to fly. In Canada, a country about as empty as they come.

My very responsible attempts to get permission to fly in a municipal park (in about 6 different municipalities), even offering proof of liability insurance, and offering to commit in writing to not fly if another human being was even present in the park, were brushed off, uniformly.

Meanwhile, there are more people flying in the park beside my club field than the field itself. Flying big helicopters, jet turbines, you name it. Flying up into the clouds, over major intersections, 10 feet over the heads of school kids playing sports in the park, etc. There's now about a 50% chance that when I go to the trouble of trecking out to my club field, I'm going to spend half my time in angry confrontation instead of flying.

I, myself, have been sorely tempted to say 'f@ck it' - find an empty, open space, and just go for it.' And I'm so 'responsible and conscientious', it hurts.

Perhaps what we'll need eventually is some sort of Go Fund Me type campaign to cover the cost of fines for anyone who actually gets caught refusing to bow to the accelerating regulatory nonsense. My guess is - hardly anyone.

Shaking my head.

Rant over.

George

One the other TC didn't have fund to enforce the regulations. Will we have to wait for a disaster to happen for the federal government to do something?

And for the parks, now the MAAC cover members in public park !!! ( http://www.maac.ca/en/committees_details.php?committee_id=31 ) so why people bother to go on a MAAC field ?

Yes, MAAC insurance covers public parks, Bertrand. But not if flying is prohibited by the landowner. If so, and you just fly, and hit someone, you're ruined (not to mention the person you hit). That's why I checked first.

One of the people I've confronted so far responded with - 'why should I pay to fly at your field when I can fly right here for free?'. 

As far as TC lacking resources, I'm sure you're right. But my point is - whoever nearly brought down a passenger airliner at 9000 feet, on approach to an airport in the centre of the biggest city in the country, was already breaking a list of rules probably as long as my arm. If TC can't even hold such people to account - and I concede it's early, but when have they ever caught such people? - then they have no business tightening restrictions on everyone else. No business at all. Zero.

All they have, then, is 'power and authority', and in that case, they're provoking defiance, and they share responsibility for the consequences.

George

Bertrand Duchiron said:

One the other TC didn't have fund to enforce the regulations. Will we have to wait for a disaster to happen for the federal government to do something?

And for the parks, now the MAAC cover members in public park !!! ( http://www.maac.ca/en/committees_details.php?committee_id=31 ) so why people bother to go on a MAAC field ?

Looks like even the authorities don't buy the 'drone' angle:

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/11/23/porter-close-call-re...

“The description and size of the object does not match any known commercial or consumer available unmanned aerial vehicle”

RSS

© 2017   Created by Chris Anderson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service