I've been searching through the forum looking for information on insurance, specifically public liability, and have found some interesting information but nothing specific. I hate to bring up the topic but I'd like to do some aerial video of buildings and various public attractions in my area. I make it a point to fly when venues are closed and use flight paths that don't go over people etc. I did have a 'fly away' incident at a flying field once that ended up crashing on a public road and that experience haunts me. It was only by luck that it didn't hit a car or person. I can only imagine the damage that it could have done.
Since then I've tightened things up and haven't had any incidents but it seems to me that flying these machines without some sort of insurance is a bit like driving a car without insurance. You can get away with it, but who would want to given the risk in today's litigious environment? Not to mention simply being responsible for one's own actions.
I notice that the MAAA here in Australia provides member insurance and I have recently joined a club but that only covers you at official venues and events. I noticed in a post on this site a statement by a US member that said, "AMA for recreational UAVs? $58 per year for $2 million liability anywhere and unlimited number of vehicles" and that sounds great.
So, is this something others are concerned about or am I just being paranoid? Is there any affordable public liability insurance in Australia that I should be looking at?
Replies
I fly at parks a lot and I am also worried about insurance. The problems is this on MOP044
"The operators of such devices shall maintain control without the assistance of
onboard autopilots or navigation systems that would allow for autonomous flight except as
covered by MOP067 Self Guided Model Aircraft. The operators of Radio Control devices
shall maintain visual contact with the device during the entire flight operation. “"
and this from MOP067:
"
6.1 For any model to operate under MAAA insurance it has to be operated totally within
all MAAA procedures includes these requirements.
6.2 All aircraft operated under this policy have to be for sport and pleasure only and
any commercial or commercially related operations are specifically excluded. The
latter are required by CASA to operate under CASR 1998 Part 101 Sub Part F.
6.3 Turbine powered aircraft (either gas or electric) are not permitted to operate under
this Clause 6 but may operate under Clause 7.
6.4 The takeoff weight for both rotary and fixed wing aircraft to shall be limited to 5
Kgms.
6.5 The power plant in both rotary and fixed wing aircraft shall be limited to 0.61 cu in
two stroke, 0.91 cu in four stroke or a 1500 Watt electric motor.
6.6 Local independent inspection is required prior to the first flight of a new SGMA. This
inspection is to be carried out by a Gold Wing qualified pilot for the type of aircraft
being flown and preferably from the club where the first flight is to take place.
Specific attention shall be given
to the method of reversion to full manual control.
6.7 The aircraft shall complete 3 flights, of at least 5 minute duration each, in full
manual control without damage or significant adjustment before any self guided
element is enabled.
6.8 The first flight of an SGMA under self guided control is to be supervised by a Gold
Wing qualified pilot, for the type of aircraft being flown.
6.9 The Pilot in Command shall be a current Affiliate Member and hold a minimum of
Bronze Wings for the type of aircraft being flown. In the event that the flight profile
of the SGMA includes characteristics of both fixed and rotary wing aircraft then the
pilot shall hold both fixed and helicopter bronze wings.
6.10 The Pilot in Command shall be responsible for the safety of the flight.
Now quadcoptors cannot fly without self guidance so how can they demonstrate manual control? There is no mention of quads in the helicoptor section.
Maybe the MAAA needs to be updated a bit.
You might want to get in touch with one of the commercially licensed operators in Australia to see what insurance cover they have. Whilst they operate after being licensed by CASA they would still need insurance to cover their public liability.
Similar to you, I belong to one of the Local RC clubs and my MAAA registration only covers me at the two local fields I fly at. Although both are well away from the suburbs. Our heli field is in the country side and perfect for testing the arducopter. Just have to watch out for cows and kangaroos. I am near your area by the way.
Whist the technology is well advanced, I still class the arducopter as experimental. Besides all the insurance in the world is not going to stop the incident. It concerns me what a 4-8kg model would do to the roof of a car or building structure falling out of control from 50-100 feet.
Also are a couple of local copmmanies which specialise in multicopters and I have found them quick helpful including information on UAV flight safety. e.g Droidworkx and Aerobot to name two.
Hope this helps.