Finally, a good article on "drone journalism"

ABC News Australia has a thorough piece on the state of "drone journalism", which gives some good examples and cuts through the sort of silliness that characterized some earlier reports, such as those featuring Occupy Wall Street types flying a Parrot AR.Drone inside.

It includes an important quote from Matt Waite, who runs the Drone Journalism Lab at the University of Nebraska

Despite America's love affair with new technology, Professor Waite says the rate of take-up of drone journalism is still very slow - for one single reason.

"Here in the US the law doesn't allow it - plain and simple," he said.

"The rules right now in the US are basically this: nothing over 400 feet, nothing out of sight, nothing near people and no commercial purposes.

"If it were (just) the first three, drone journalism would have a fighting chance. The commercial restrictions are the hardest to overcome."

Sounds like Professor Waite, at least, is taking a realistic and responsible approach.

[Thanks to Gary Mortimer/sUAS News for the link]

Same as in the states, model aricraft, only for non-commercial use is allowed without SFOC and needed if used commercially or for research. The whole regulation is available here:

While the CARs do not define “recreational purposes” a dictionary definition of recreation is “not for work – done for pleasure or relaxation”. Model aircraft enthusiasts fly their aircraft as a pastime, an unpaid diversion, as an activity that “diverts, amuses, or stimulates”. Section 602.45 of the CARswas put in place to allow sporting enthusiasts to operate model aircraft for personal enjoyment but not for monetary gain or other form of hire and reward. The Aeronautics Act defines hire and reward as:

“any payment, consideration, gratuity or benefit, directly or indirectly charged, demanded, received or collected by any person for the use of an aircraft”.

Equipping model aircraft with a payload does not, in itself, make the model a UAV, however, once the model aircraft is launched for any reason other than recreational purposes, it is an unmanned air vehicle.

You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!

Join diydrones

Comments

Douglas D. February 22, 2012 at 8:11am

I'm so happy I could do a back flip!!!!@Bradley J Carr, you don't know how much that link Has improved my family's spirit and life. Maybe now I can start making a real standard in rc/uav for the hobbyist. Its going to be a good day:)
Rob_Lefebvre February 22, 2012 at 8:11am

Poorly written, unless the author thinks that 3 years is "soon" for a guy who lost his source of income.
Bradley J Carr February 22, 2012 at 7:16am

in the link that I am adding below. This one states that using drones for commercial use is good to go now. And maybe I am way off base with this.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/18/technology/drones-with-an-eye-on-...
Rob_Lefebvre February 22, 2012 at 6:21am

@Eagle, what does this mean?

For sure here in Canada, it is a mess....

Droppers are falling all over the place.

@Ellison, just out of curiosity, do you know how hard it is to get an SFOC?

@Jordan, a pretty vague comment. Care to list some reasons why?
George February 21, 2012 at 10:47pm

Great article, I hope it gets the same exposure as the bad articles.

I note and quote from the article:

".....Civil Aviation Safety Authority spokesman Peter Gibson. CASA has been grappling with these complexities for some time and he says it is "just months away from completing a comprehensive overhaul of the rules".

Should be interesting, I must get out from under my rock, it's the first I've heard about any comprehensive changes, and I'm looking forward to seeing some common-sense legislation which I hope gives the hobbyist a fair go while still considering needs of the fast emerging commercial market.

Well done Jusmedia and the ABC for portraying a professional light on the drone subject.
jordan stocker February 21, 2012 at 10:31pm

rubbish article... they did not check their facts before posting it
Ellison Chan February 21, 2012 at 8:44pm
Same as in the states, model aricraft, only for non-commercial use is allowed without SFOC and needed if used commercially or for research. The whole regulation is available here:
While the CARs do not define “recreational purposes” a dictionary definition of recreation is “not for work – done for pleasure or relaxation”. Model aircraft enthusiasts fly their aircraft as a pastime, an unpaid diversion, as an activity that “diverts, amuses, or stimulates”. Section 602.45 of the CARswas put in place to allow sporting enthusiasts to operate model aircraft for personal enjoyment but not for monetary gain or other form of hire and reward. The Aeronautics Act defines hire and reward as:

“any payment, consideration, gratuity or benefit, directly or indirectly charged, demanded, received or collected by any person for the use of an aircraft”.

Equipping model aircraft with a payload does not, in itself, make the model a UAV, however, once the model aircraft is launched for any reason other than recreational purposes, it is an unmanned air vehicle.
pare.ron February 21, 2012 at 8:30pm

Does anyone know the laws on drones in Canada ?
Martin Szymanski February 21, 2012 at 8:16pm

Personally regarding media I like fair and balanced. Tough it can be skewed one side to the other at times.
Juan Soler February 21, 2012 at 8:13pm

The Chinese are already light years ahead of us...in fostering innovation and new industries. Just ask all the Australian innovators that could not get anyone to listen (let alone provide venture capital) who are now living in China.

of 6

This reply was deleted.