Too dangerous to be legal (answering users' questions)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 июл 2024
- My recent videos in which I document how the South Waikato District Council is ghosting me and completely failing to address the issues before them produced a number of common questions in the comments. In this video I attempt to answer some of those questions.
- Why don't I just rejoin Model Flying New Zealand?
- Why don't I just get my wings?
- Why don't I fly elsewhere?
- Why don't I just defy the SWDC's ban and fly anyway?
- Why don't I run for council?
A huge thanks to those who have been supportive in this issue and a reminder that if you haven't emailed the council to ask them what's going on then that would be hugely appreciated. 
Спорт
That council sure is devious and conniving.
This reminds me of the "justice" system where the poor man who is in jail and can't afford the cost of bail would not be a 'threat to society' if he were $5000 wealthier.
It's not about the best interest of the public, personal safety, or protecting property but about generating revenue and ensuring the plebeians are perpetually compliant.
I was at the Oshkosh air show talking to a 80 year old man that had just flew into the show in his private airplane. I thought it was amazing that he could pass all the tests and medical requirements needed to fly these days and then land at the busiest airport in the world. (During the airshow it's the busiest)
I asked him what was his secret. He said his secret was he didn't have a pilots license or a medical. He had not had one since he was in the military which was world war two!
He was a heavy bomber pilot during the war. The red tape for flying became such a hassle that he simply stopped obeying the madness.
He pointed out that a tiny piece of paper with a date on it had no effect on his actual skills. He said the first time you do something wrong they always threatened to take away that tiny piece of paper. He pointed out they can't take what you don't have and nobody ever bothered to ask him. For some reason he felt like passing his secret on to a young kid that day.
He's probably been dead now for many years but that conversation still rings true. He thought we had too many laws and regulations in the 40's. He was right!
I love this story!
Same with the current, "If you pollute more, you pay more for it" legislation for household waste. Which actually boils down to "The more you pay, the more you're allowed to pollute as much as you like"
Many of the things that mentioned at the start are no longer legal in Australia. Advocates and lobbying is required to retain those rights too...
I came here for the Mobula6.
I leave angry, and well informed.
O Bruce you tease, Sir. Still, you're _solidly_ in my list of 10 'gents I desperately want to have a brew with.
Mostly because you'd see the irony that I have a pt.107 certificate, in order to film my company's Christmas Party for the purposes of posting on their Social Media accounts. With my 27g Mobula6 HD (upgrades baaaybeeee!). The small fleet of DJI Mini 4 Pros we bought came _after_ last XMas, so in effect I spent more on my license than the tiny quad itself.
Kill 'em with kindness, and irony, friend.
I hear you. Here in the USA I have a similar situation with my local club.
I can no longer support or respect the AMA and especially Longmont Aircraft Model Association, for lying to me and down right theft!
I’m afraid we both are on the beating end of the stick!😮
The AMA has let us down, looking out for themselves and their own agenda. Where I fly there is no dues, no club and open to the public. Out of respect for the owner of the field, mind you this is not required, us that fly at this field have AMA for just the insurance and give the owner piece of mind just in case.
Oh mate, I feel for you for sure. I live in Tauranga and have been over and flown with you a couple of times, but was a long time ago so you may not remember me. I had a Jet Tiger that relieved the battery and radio gear over the paddock. But anyway I want to know , apart from weather dependent issues, which day is better to come over, sat or sun? I have a club license here in tga, and would love to come catch up to fly with the lads and see and chat to you again, alot has changed in 10 years so to keep my chat off YT I would rather come say hi and even hang out over a cuppa or what not. Thanks for your awesome support for the hobby Bruce, we totally support you all the way
Yes, I remember... happy days! I'm not sure yet exactly what's happening at the field but if/when things get back to normal you're welcome to come on over and enjoy the fun again. You can always drop me an email for more info.
Same with hi power model rocketry in the US. You have to be a member of a rocketry association to be able to buy the motors.
Really sorry about your progressing condition, good luck.
HI Bruce, Appreciate the effort to protect the hobby. My take is that laws are written with the intention of preserving the best interest of everyone. However, as often happens, the issue of the "letter of the law" vs the "spirit of the law" becomes a problem. The CAA showed you that they were prepared to apply the spirit of the law and cite "insufficient evidence" so that the letter of the law does not need to be applied. By posting that video, you forced MFNZ to feel they must apply the letter of the law. If it were me, I would get out there and enjoy the "good" days as much as possible, and if those "authorities" want to take the letter of the law to its ultimate absurd conclusion, we then get to find out how those bully tactics play out in the real world.
They should be forcing birds to take instruction and abide by rules, too!
Heehee 😆! 🎖️🏆🏅
Damn you unlicensed birds💪🤬🤜🐦! There should be a law against those mooching gravity deniers.
Lol, more birds hit windows vs drones
Must be fitted with ADSB!
I think you hit the nail on the head, Ron, with the intro.
Get into something that the council could see as a threat but that they have no control over.
Thing is Bruce, councils have a different mentality from the rest of the public, even the employees. Many years ago, I worked for our local council here in the U.K. as a carpenter. One day I was sent to the council house to put up several whiteboards in some of the offices. Knocked on one door, goes in and said “ Good morning love, I’ve come to put up a whiteboard.” A quite reasonable request. ( have you spotted my mistake there ?) Yep, I said “ Good morning love”. The lady replied “ Let me stop you there,, First of all, I am not, nor ever will be Your love.” 😮😮. I apologised and asked where she wanted the whiteboard putting up. The upshot was that I was reported and had to attend a half day course on equality. Yep, half a day of what I call, death by powerpoint. Around 3 hrs of PowerPoint presentations, interspersed with coffee, biscuits and a chat about how we should strive to be careful about upsetting th3 fairer sex. ( all whilst being paid too ) This is probably an example of why very little work gets done by councils ( clowncils). Far too interested in being Politically Correct, instead of following social norms. Anyway, keep up the good fight against these bureaucrats. 👍👍👍
As an American, I grew up thinking that that was a common British saying, and mostly polite, like saying, "Miss, or Mam"
After googling, it seems its a regional thing in the U.K.
Obviously she was a) overly woked/me2'd, b) not from the region, c) not a fun date, d) not a fair sex
Yes, quite a normal way to address the fairer sex. This was back in the 90’s , sort of not long after this “politically correct “ shit started. Council soon became very toxic place to work after that, where you either had to really concentrate on what you were going to say next, or had to be dead from the neck upwards to work there. 😂😂@@volitronics
Also the time when job adverts for council jobs started with the “ Ethnic minorities, etc, are underrepresented in our workforce. Applications from these groups will be given first chance at any lucrative money spinning jobs going, irrespective of qualifications” blah, blah, blah. 😂😂😂😂
Noticed you said “tiny whoop” Bruce when acktually 🤪 the official CAA terminology is “25g Death-copter”
Microscopic weapon of mass destruction...
Become the " Ghost -rider- flyer "
haha
nah seriously though, I hope you eventually get to fly as freely as you have always done and continue to produce great vids
I approve this message
Been flying here in the states at ama flying fields for years without a card. Never really been questioned. And I just keep my mouth shut. I don't do events except as a spectator. And I have plenty of fun flying in my back 40. Or other friendly farm fields. The mony grubbers can all go bugger themselves for all I care. It's really quite like the movie Brazil. All this silly regulation and rules is so out of hand that there's really no way they can actually enforce any of it . The modern world has gotten very silly. 😂😅🤪
Been flying RC's for 10 years. Never once have I paid the US's AMA for a membership. Going on with that flow, I also don't fly drones. Once I built my first DLG, I think I'm done with pre-built powered models. There's just something about building a plane over the winter.
I also don't live near any cities so, that's quite freeing.
How many deaths have quadcopters caused in the US over the last year?
How many deaths have non commercial aircraft caused to their passengers (not pilots) and those on the ground over the past year?
How many people flew quads in the US over the past year?
How many people piloted non commercial aircraft in the US last year?
This is just a guess, but I'd imagine that the death per aircraft pilot is WAY higher than death per quadcopter pilot. In fact, I haven't heard of a single quadcopter death.
Just food for thought.
You are quite correct. The hard data clearly shows that the biggest fatal collision risk to manned aviation is not drones... it's other manned aircraft. Yet, despite this irrefutable evidence, flying a 25g tinywhoop FPV requires a spotter to be legal but the pilot of a light aircraft does not require a spotter in the passenger's seat. Nobody has ever died for lack of an FPV spotter but people die very regularly for lack of a spotter in manned aircraft. Now tell me this is about safety.
How about free style Kite flying ? ; )
I grew up in South Korea, look up how _they_ play with kites. It's scary. "Bangpae yeon"
a mate of mine got on the local council an was told in no uncertain terms don't rock the boat or your out
Never has a truer word been spoken, Thumbs up
with you 100% bruce
im about to order a sub 250 potensic atom even though my vision has been half trashed by a stroke, because of you bruce and your persistance
This reminds me of when I was in business and everyone wanted to be in the local business approval scheme. You didn’t have to provide any real proof that your business was good. All you had to do was pay the admission fee to the approval scheme. Many of the businesses within the scheme became my customers and several of them became bad payers! They remained as members of the scheme as long as they paid their subs !
FPV without a spotter being illegal is the main reason i lost motivation to get a license in the first place. I fly FPV alone on empty field with my 6in. Hobby is not popular where i live. More like rare. I don't know for any friends who could spot for me. In fact I enjoy flying alone alot more. Gives me more confidence and feel of freedom. If i can legally drive car alone without a passenger, i should be legally allowed to fly FPV without a spotter in the middle of nowhere. I have been exercising Non-violent non-compliance since 2015. Drivings license has no renewal fees or retest requirements. Same should be for drone license.
Been planning to grow a youtube channel for a while, just don't wanna fall into alphabet ageny's eyes. Owner of the field said i am very rare guy still active in the hobby. I wonder why 🤔. He said cost. Felt like he avoided to mention regulations.
Anyhow, keep ripping, fly safe and responsible 👍
I have seen a guy flying FPV in a park (in breach of CAA regulations) by himself. He crashed the drone much to my amusement. He went completely in the wrong direction to retreive it. If he had a spotter/friend they could tell him where it when down. That is partly why you are required to have a spotter as FPV fliers can become disoriented. I did think of pointing him in the right direction and advise him about the requirements of flying in a local park but I suspect I would have been abused. Note I didn't report him to CAA; I have better things to do.
You absolutely did the right thing, Bruce.
I don't know what happens... But there are people who think that every rule must be followed, even if the freaking rule is wrong! I honestly can't understand it, looks like they're afraid of freedom, basically.
Anyway, stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
My garden gnome from bunnings is more dangerous and has more brains than our councils. Why I've reverted back too slope and dynamic soaring
I'm not a member of MFNZ and have no intention of joining. MFNZ does not represent the hobby. They poorly represent only their members. They do have an interest in making it difficult for fliers who are non members and others who are independently minded. I approached the local model club and encountered the "Main" reason not to join.
It is not compulsory to be a member of the MFNZ. However the moment you fly something in New Zealand, you come under the rules of the CAA. You cannot get around this. Well you could and go out into international waters ;o) The MFNZ represents its members just as any club or society does. There are benefits of being a member of the MFNZ however in your case, you will always look for reasons not to be a member. As you are not a member, it is likely you don't see the good that the MFNZ does.
perhaps as a member you're unable to see the bad that MFNZ does to those who do not wish to be bound by their restrictions - unless you're happy to place cones + tape then fill out permission slips every time you fly around your garden with a 25g aircraft.@@phileldridge1901
@@phileldridge1901 Hi Phil. I would consider joining MFNZ if it attempted to represent the entire hobby. All I can see from my prospective is a group managing a sinking lid of its own membership. It is doing little to eliminate the barriers to younger potential members. It has become exclusive rather than inclusive. It continues to communicate poorly. It fails to realise that clubs are no longer necessary to learn to either constuct or fly a model.
It continues to rest on its laurels while its membership gets greyer.
Good luck for the future.
My regret is youngsters will not be able to enjoy what i did. Firstly chuck gliders, then rubber power, followed by control line, free flight and radio control. Along the way I learned to enjoy the outdoors, developed an interest in electronics and flight, the very kind of things necessary we want our kids to do to reduce their screen time.
I have only had an automated response from your council at present. Will let you know if I do receive a response Bruce 👍
Cub will fly, Will Not Comply 🇺🇸
This situation in a way defines the struggle of good, honest, law abiding people everywhere struggling with over-reach from oppressive bureaucracy's. Power to the people!
I don't really understand the Ombudsman thing, but is that an option?
You refuse to fly on a bad parkinson's day even though you might want to because of safety reasons, but regardless you're too 'unsafe' to fly?!
Also there's a video from a British driving school where the car takes a hit from a stray golf ball; it puts quite a dent in the boot (trunk). So you can supposedly safely play golf with a heavy solid ball in your garden but not fly a 25g piece of frangable plastic around your property because _that_ would be dangerous? Seriously?
I'm not sure how good NZ barristers are but according to BlackBeltBarrister, Dan Shensmith, if a law can be shown to be unfair it is not enforceable. He has reiterated this on multiple videos. Might be worth talking to a barrister.
Someone could come on my property and be endangered by this “wicked” craft!
😂🤣❤
I did send an email to the 11 council members and I did get a response from Kerry Purdy. However I have no idea how to post that reply on here.
Hello,
I just wrote this simple text (.txt) file on Notepad & copied & pasted it in here.
You can try that with the Councillor's reply.
Stay safe & fly safely.
This cllr Purdy's reply to my email.
Morena Peter
Thank you for your email, I understand the frustration!
I have been communicating with Mr Simpson,but advised him I can’t comment without all the information which I’m sure you can appreciate.
I am actually in India at the moment, which Bruce is aware of, but keeping track of my emails (where reception is good ) for updates.
It’s currently 3.55am and I am wide awake, so email time!
So when I know something Bruce will, I did make that clear to him.
I appreciate your email and wanting to help your friend, I just need to get the correct information my end.
Take care and kindest regards
Kerry
🍌 peel weighs more than a whoop.
Iv'e emailed them as requested, no reply at all. I keep checking my junk folder several times a day but nothing.
A reply from the council Bruce! They said that they have never stopped you flying and quoted what they say is in the letter sent to you and requirements of part 101. I checked part 101 and their quote was wrong, in that they said you needed wings to fly at the airfield. I have replied to state that what I asked them to do was open a dialogue with you, not quote their letter. I also corrected them, to state what part 101 actually says, which is that you can fly at the aerodrome if you are under the supervision of a qualified person (which part 101 states is someone with either a pilot's licence or has wings). I also mentioned the ridiculous forms they expected everyone flying models at the airport to now fill in and that this was totally excessive and unnecessary. I await their next reply. However, having looked over part 101, it appears to me that you do have a problem flying solo anywhere within 4km of the airport, since part 101 only allows this if you either have your wings or are under the supervision of someone who does. That is not a council requirement, but a CAA one. All in the name of "safety", which as you have quite rightly pointed out should have nothing to do with whether you are prepared to pay $100 to MFNZ for wings. Let's hope the council sees sense, but unfortunately, the part 101 rule appears to prevent you flying models on your own anywhere within the 4km radius of the airport unless you have your wings. The people sitting behind desks are just making things more and more difficult.
The CAA rules allow me to fly within 4Km "under direct supervision" and that's how I have been flying at the airfield until their letter. Now, as you've worked out, the council is claiming that CAA require MFNZ membership which is an utter lie that they will not be corrected on. I'm about to drop a video on this so stay tuned!
I no longer “join” clubs… seems as though they all (like your said) are for member benefit not the hobby..and if you in any way disagree with anyone.. they get “butt hurt”…
Sorry Bruce, but I can't like this video or agree with you unless you pay me $100 ! 🤣🤣 ... Seriously, great video Bruce, the power of common sense is lost on authorities.
Best yt intro ever.
Common sense!!!
There has been no such concept as Common Sense for DECADES
Common Sense nowadays is very Un-Common
Xjet, I agree with what you are saying about your parkinsons you have good days and bad days I have the same problem my health is on some days I don't have the strength to sit up and on others I fine trying to fly gets harder and harder. We will still keep going until they have to pry our radios and craft out of our hands.
The lonely voice of reason.........
Does your $100 also enroll you in a secondary insure coverage like the AMA does here in the US? My Home Owners is first in line if I destroy another property, then AMA picks up. If I dont have a home owners, AMA insurance is primary.
i'm in two minds about the spotter regulation, i think its a good idea for a beginner to to fly with a spotter, it takes a lot of attention just to fly at the beginning and having somebody (apart from the question of if my spotter fails to tell me a dog is runing up, who gets the blame? etcetc spotter competency?) to spot for a beginner is a good idea, or if i want to fly fast and a bit wild a spotter is a good idea, but for most places, i can see further than a spotter could and if there is an entrance or path i can't see that its safe, i just dont fly there. its become instinctual for me not to fly past an entrance or pathway somebody could be hammering along on a bike or a dog chasing a ball, i just dont take the risk. a 25g tinywhoop, i'd fly in court and crash into the judge just to prove the point. its like being hit with a packet of crisps.
The spotter rule should simply be: "A visual observer must be used when necessary to ensure safety". That covers all the bases and leaves the choice up to the pilot. If there is an incident involving injury or property damage caused by someone who is not using a spotter then clearly they're in breach of the rule but there are many, many situations where the spotter is unnecessary and, it could be argued, is just an unnecessary extra person in the "area of risk".
MFNZ Has become part of the bureaucracy. They're not advocating for you they're not advocating for model aviation They have become the problem, I encourage you to keep up the fight.
If they don't represent you, sir, why should you be a member? It doesn't make you any less qualified to fly.
Part of the bureaucracy... really... its doesn't make you any less qualified to fly but it does show you are willing to undertake a test to prove your skill levels. The MFNZ does represent its members; Bruce is a special case. Just ask him about the .40 trainer deliberate crash into the tower and then promotes it on RUclips. The tower was not his to crash into. He will say it was safe to do so but was it?
Tell me Phil, how many people were hurt in that crash? How much third party property was damaged? If you watched the videos (yes there was more than one) you would have seen that this was something planned over several weeks and all the necessary safety measures were in place. I think it was a wonderful example of how to manage safety and how balsa versus steel is no contest.
Also.. note that at the time the council referred to the tower as "a valuable piece of public property" yet a few years later they knocked it down, claiming that it was now dangerous due to a lack of maintenance. Surely, if it was as valuable as they say, they wouldn't have neglected it to the point where they felt it necessary to demolish it?
If you've seen some of the jet crashes at our airfield then you should also concede that a carefully controlled crash with all safety factors managed to perfection is a whole lot less risky than a 20Kg turbine powered model falling from the sky at speed with zero control. Yet nobody complains about the latter do they?
Of course I have seen some of the jet crashes; you videoed them ;o) The difference is they are accidents as who wants to right off their $8K jet. Of course crashes get youtube views and help your income. The reality is the large part of your millions of views is thanks to the Jet fliers.
@@phileldridge1901 What is wrong with getting views on RUclips? You make it sound like it's a crime. It's called PROMOTING THE HOBBY -- and I believe MFNZ could do a bit more of it to be honest. MFNZ has a budget for promoting the hobby, I fund all my promotional efforts myself yet seem to reach many times more people. Why is it that MFNZ doesn't embrace this fact and be proud that an NZ YT channel is one of the leading promoters of the hobby in the entire world? Why so critical Phil?
Stop reading between the lines and jumping to the wrong conclusion. Where did I say or even imply its a crime to put videos on RUclips. I think you will agree that it takes alot of time to create videos and MFNZ members volunteer their time, so to maintain a youtube channel would almost be a professional task. The AMA might be able to, but the MFNZ does not have that sort of budget. I'll give you credit, you have refined your videos over the years and do it well. Its just sometimes the subject matter is negative for the hobby. Waving a carrot in front of CAA is not necessarily a good way to deal with CAA.
where did the 5 comments go? its just me and reality-jx6vr and bruce's reply to reality-jx6vr
RUclips has taken to deleting comments seemingly at random. A lot of my own replies and comments on my own videos disappear within seconds of me making them. YT is a trainwreck!
It's a mess.
mine was deleted . i said the word R1fL3 and the word Cr055B0w
@@bren42069 Yep. The Toob has some interesting AI interventions. I mean they can automatically dump any post with the words you refer to - but are NOT able to kill all the Scam Ads that proliferate daily on the platform! 🙄
Also interesting to compare NZ Weapons Laws to those pertaining across the ditch. Many of those depicted here (depends on your State Laws in 1 or 2 cases) require a specific Weapons Licence in Oz.
I had a notification they got my email but that’s it I hope there email at council crashes with the amount they get lol keep going bruce and I know how you feel with your illness I’m the same especially if it’s cold my fingers and thumbs don’t wanna work, G🇬🇧
Richard Ramirez from the FAA showed up while I was flying my drone telling me I needed a visual observer and my first question was.... what for, I have a birds eye view and saw you coming, landed in order to pull my goggles off to find out what the hell you wanted.
Hmm, hand launching your drone and classifying it as a 'blunt throwing knife'?
Your plane can fly at the airfield, just not you. So fly from outside the fence……
That's not the way the rules work here in NZ. You need the expressed permission of the owner of *any* property you fly over. By default, the whole country (except for your own property) is a no-fly zone for drones and RC model aircraft -- they're just that dangerous.
@@xjet Thats rather draconian. How does general aviation function?
@@davidwebb4904 This only applies to unmanned aircraft/drones.
Surprise news, I've had a reply from South Waikato council! From Raewyn. She simply sends a copy of the note you posted earlier. My assumption is that Ron, Bill et al also operate under the same rules, is this correct? One feature I have noticed that seems to be missing from your writings and from the Council's reply is the issue of insurance. In the UK model flyers join the BMFA ( our national body) mainly for the very good insurance cover. Does MFNZ offer as part of the membership package insurance? If this is the case I'm surprised this has not been mentioned in your dealings with the council. I look forward to your response. By the way Raewyn has passed my email to the Mayor, I wonder if he will reply?
I have my own public liability insurance so don't need MFNZ's insurance. Yes, the SWDC has been sending out the BS letter they sent to me but fail to mention that CAA does *NOT* require MFNZ membership and CAA *does* allow someone without wings to fly at/within-4Km of an airfield under supervision. It's the SWDC that has changed this and it has nothing to do with CAA. As I showed in an earlier video, CAA is more than happy for me to fly at the airfield under the provisions of *its* regulations -- it's only the SWDC that adds these extra requirements that I can not comply with. So, it's *effectively* a ban on my flying because they create conditions that are impossible for me to comply with.
@@xjet Hi Bruce me again, can you confirm that Ron, Bill and all the others that fly at Tokaroa are members of M|FNZ and hold a wings qualification do therefore satisfy South Waikato's requirements to fly unsupervised at the Airfield. If this is the case then not allowing you to fly unsupervised at the airfield is not surprising. They are simply indemnifying themselves. Should you be allowed fly unsupervised at the airfield and fly into someones dog and injure it, they would be held responsible despite your insurance. Your years of experience and skill count for nothing. You could of course play the disability card and claim discrimination! For now just accept the fact the council hate you.😀. As far as rule making is concerned making up nonsensical rules surrounding our use of the lower airspace is a worldwide phenomena. Governments are petrified that if they seem not to be enabling the development of drone technology they will be held to account at the ballot box and in losses of donations to party funds. No doubt drone mania will go the same way as canal mania, railway mania the dot com bubble and crypto currency mania. You might need to look up some UK history to understand canal and railway mania!
.
@@MartinDance1 Yep, Ron and others have wings -- Ron is even an official MFNZ Wings Tester, someone who can test others for wings and he has some kind of "large model" authority as well.
All makes sense. This is a global situation.
😁👍
As the saying goes actions speak louder than words…time for a hefty lawsuit against individual members of the council!!
Just in case you did not see it on your last video, I received my reply from the council:
-
Kia ora Mr xxxxx
Please see the below message in regards to your correspondence about Mr Simpson and the Tokoroa Airfield rules.
At no time has the Council prevented Mr Simpson from flying drones. We have simply asked that Mr Simpson do so in accordance with established policy as outlined in our letter to him which stated -
The South Waikato District Council (SWDC) is responsible for all activities carried out at the Tokoroa Airfield and with the Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand (CAA) require specific requirements to be met if a drone/unmanned aircraft is flown at an uncontrolled aerodrome such as the Tokoroa Airfield.
In terms of the CAA, Part 101 rules no person is permitted to operate a drone/unmanned aircraft on or within 4kms of the airfield without the following authorities:
- Aerodrome Operator
- Membership of MFNZ or NZJMA
- Hold a Wings badge or a pilot’s licence to fly a drone/unmanned aircraft.
These requirements are designed to ensure the safety of the public which is Council’s sole concern.
Warm regards,
Raewyn
---
See how deceitful they are? *CAA allows* people to fly at or within 4Km of an airfield without wings or membership of MFNZ so long as they are supervised. This means I could fly within the CAA regulations -- if the council wasn't mandating wings/membership of MFNZ. However, the council has removed that supervision option from *its own requirements* and do not acknowledge that CAA allows for this in CAR 101.205. So, because I don't have wings and membership of MFNZ they *ARE* effectively stopping me from flying. Lies, lies and more lies :-(
@@SeanPoulter It's not the cost of membership that's the problem -- it's the restrictions that it would place on my ability to enjoy the hobby in the safety and convenience of my own property. So long as membership is strictly contingent on following *all* CAA and MFNZ rules, regardless of whether those rules are essential to preserve safety, then I can't be a member. CAA has no problem with me flying a whoop around my house but MFNZ does. How crazy is that?
Simon says dictatorship.
Strap the whoop to the arrow ?
Trouble Bruce is when you have bloody “Jobsworth” in the chair you’re up agin the wall! Sounds a bit like the government here in the UK! Hopefully next year when there’s an election we’ll have the B@3t@rds out! Keep up the fight and never ever give up! 👍👍
In regards to your video 'I really need your assistance' ANYBODY that asks a Government or local Government body for information on any subject pursuant to their administration of such, is then bound by the Official Information Act : To supply that person within 20 working days of receipt of such request. There is a small window on the time frame but in this case I would say NONE,. Failure for the council to comply puts them in breach of the Act, and your first visit is to the Ombudsman !
Its unreal the stupidity of some local governments. We have flown how many years without any safety issues?
Remember The only true way of being safe, is to pay money to a Organization or government. Everything else is not important. You don't even need to know how to fly. 😂
The laws in New Zealand are pretty 'dodgy'......when it comes to 'speciality licences' like your 'wings' or my [basic] agrichem handlers licence....must be updated for (in my case $635.00) every 5 years in your case every year...yet model flying causes how many deaths and injuries in a year??? and agrichems cause how many deaths and injuries in a year.....yet last year there were nearly 400 deaths on the roads in New Zealand with over 33,500 injuries at a cost of over 600 million dollars....yet you can get a drivers licence at 17 and never be retested again until you lose your licence at age 80 odd...if the government was really concerned about health and safety...there would be a [minimum] of 25 open book multi choice questions from the road code every time you 'renew' your drivers licence. It's an unfair system.
They can’t touch in cyberspace! I know it’s not the same as actual flying but at least you’ll keep your skills up.
I think it’s ridiculous what they’re doing.
I have just posted Cllr Kerry Purdy's reply to my email in my earlier post. He is still the only one who has replied.
As Mr Bumble would say.
"The law is an ass"
Had a reply Bruce…
What about a simple rubber band powered, free flight, model plane waying say 300 g?
Is that also covered by the “rules”.
In emailed the Mayor
Don't you get insurance when you pay the 100dollars to the club?
Yes, but I've always carried my own public liability insurance anyway.
Surely MFNZ get you insurance. If not where do you get insurance from???
I have a public liability policy so MFNZ's coverage is unimportant.
Paying to keep an otherwise unchecked qualification is the Australian way - keep paying and the govt will leave you alone (for a time). Sounds and works a lot like extortion.
Hi Bruce, I got a reply!
Kia ora Mr Finn
Please see the below message regarding your correspondence concerning Tokoroa Airfield:
At no time has the Council prevented Mr Simpson from flying drones. We have simply asked that Mr Simpson do so in accordance with established policy as outlined in our letter to him which stated -
The South Waikato District Council (SWDC) is responsible for all activities carried out at the Tokoroa Airfield and with the Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand (CAA) require specific requirements to be met if a drone/unmanned aircraft is flown at an uncontrolled aerodrome such as the Tokoroa Airfield.
In terms of the CAA, Part 101 rules no person is permitted to operate a drone/unmanned aircraft on or within 4kms of the airfield without the following authorities:
Aerodrome Operator
Membership of MFNZ or NZJMA
Hold a Wings badge or a pilot’s licence to fly a drone/unmanned aircraft.
These requirements are designed to ensure the safety of the public which is Council’s sole concern.
Your message has also been passed on to the Chief Executive.
Warm regards,
Raewyn
There must be a nerd here that could write an algorithm or something that could remove the "wobble" from his thumbs so he could have more air time.
I've tried winding up the expo and increasing the dead-band but that just makes things worse after a certain amount. Much easier just to pick my days.
So it remains illegal virtually everywhere to fly a tiny drone FPV, even if it's physically incapable of damaging or hurting anything, on the grounds it's a principle of safety.
Yet Amazon and the pizza drones will be allowed to fly FPV, the reasoning apparently being they'll be given permission, even though they are capable of causing danger.
It's circular.
Forget the guns, knives, etc. We have several golf courses, literally bordering an international airport where golf balls are flying 100+ feet in the air, yet several blocks south there's a park where it's technically illegal to fly a tiny whoop below tree level because there's a 0 ft flight ceiling in the UAS facility map. Golf balls closer to the airport are heavier and flying higher than any reasonable tiny whoop will ever go, yet flying below the trees further away at a park is one Karen's phone call away from hefty FAA fines.
Why not have the best of both hobbies?
Give the crown the middle finger
Yes. Paintball can just reduce intelligence. Technical stuff can't.
If you put a receiver and a servo with an airfoil on a throwing knife I think it might be the most dangerous weapon mankind has ever invented.
File a hefty lawsuit against the individual members of the council, set up a go fund me and I will support you in it. I think you will be surprised how many people will support you in it. Joseph Daulton, Durango , Colorado
Wonderful work keep it up.
Muggles and people in hobby amd a guy named Tim totaly disreguard my rantings when i try to explain to them how insidious the rules here are and they are just the start.
If i did your whoop around the house excersize inwould have to have more than one observer, radios or a megalhone between us, a 107 licence. A registered whoop. And remote id.
Before soneone says no its under 250 and its hobby. Well faa would call that commerical flight and would therefore not be exmpt. So better mount a gps bluetooth module and second battery on my 65mm whoop. And study for the $150 test that i have to drive two hours to take. I woild oay you to come here and represent me to my local board onnother matters. I love the way you argue your points and stand up for reason while still beong more than reasonable with safety
Fly on brother.
I need to look back into your radio receiver since a visual situatiinal awareness isnt enough for the local helicopter shop that shows up in my airspace out of nowhere.
I'm also unclear as to the purpose of an observer, is he/she going to share the gaol cell with you when you bring down the airbus 380 and 680 passengers with your humming bird sized drone that was flying at less than 500 feet around your house?
I will repeat myself again. NONE of us can follow the rules as they are written . WE ALL break them the second we leave the ground. It does NOT matter what you fly or where you fly or what group you belong to or what location you fly in and it does not matter if you have a Part 107 certificate or passed a TRUST test or took a aviation examination and passed with flying colors, IF you fly RC anything and fly safe and responsible, you BREAK the letter of the rules they claim you must follow.
AND
in fact if you are a manned aviator IF you fly responsible and safe you are NOT following the letter of the rules .
Learn to read and you will see many of the absurd terms in those rules that you know you can not follow and be safe and secure and do it right.
These rules are made by very inept people who have little to no knowledge of aviation outside of their own mindless wonder. Why they refuse to allow those WHO KNOW to be a part of that rule making process .
Ur Welcome
If NZ's Aircrat Reultions are anthing Lke her in the USA wen within 5 Statute Miles of an Airport Acrft are required to be atPatternAltiue nd most are 1000' AGL. Over a oel airfeild Becuse it is a OPEN AIR ASSEMBL of PEOPLE. Acraft are to be 100' Above te Hhest Within 2000' of the Aiecraft.
If they want to require "wings", then you should just have to show that you've passed the test at some point, not have paid to be current.
Maybe the CAA have to be seen to gradually outlaw model flying by their masters but their hearts not really in it, and that's why their implementation of and their laws seem so half-arsed.
Make a law so blatantly ridiculous and/or unenforceable and most people will ignore it, that's why they are not bothered about you flying around your property even though you have purposely set out to challenge them.
I wonder what percentage of model flyers that have been reported for breaking their rules have actually been held to account.
love the Intro.....👍
Can't you bypass the local council and escalate it by contacting your member of Parliament?
New Zealand has no government at the moment. We've just had an election (last month) and the various parties are still negotiating a coalition agreement -- each making sure they get whatever they can for themselves -- oh, and if there's anything left over, voters might also be considered.
@@xjet That's democracy for you 🙂
I had forgotten the stupid rule that forced you to stop paying them.
Same he in the USAbascal te AMA card is INSURANCEAll beit Piss Poor Insurace.
stupid rules for a toy is exactly why I stopped flying... havent picked up my taranis in nearly 2 years.
Same reason I don't waste money for ama ins..had it for 10 plus years never an accident. Now I fly from my yard cause no club can allow me to fly even though I flew for years before with no questions. Now I'm not in the,click,so I'm shoed away. Money and regulations are gonna ruin the hobby as your showing.
You may not have had an accident in 10 years but accidents do happen, Now just imagine a Ferrari was driving past and you broke the windscreen by flying into it. Lots of money methinks...
@phileldridge1901 ama wouldn't matter the guy would have car insurance to cover that ama wouldn't do crap for you..Maybe add more lighting at the ama headquarters where if you fly foam you get to fly on a hill by trees and a house..freaking nuts..I went there and was very disappointed in how they run things..
It seems to me (living in UK) that you are very much over regulated. I have been looking at a comparison between UK and New Zealand, generally the land mass is in the same ball park 269 square Km for NZ 209 square KM for UK, population about 5 million for NZ 67 m for UK so if the population evenly spread over the whole area (I know they're not) then you are 17 times more likely to be hit by a model aircraft/drone in the UK than in NZ yet the rules are much less onerous in UK.
Emailed. No response. Maybe there is a lot of inbreeding in South Waikato District Council?