PatientPlaya Posted at 2017-3-16 21:46
This probably on of the best websites I have run across for drone rules.

http://www.voanaboa.pt/

Yes it is until you find that for filming and photographing with a drone in Portugal you first have to ask for permission to the Air Force. :-) And the you find that you also have to ask permission to the entities that rule the beaches, and the national parks and reservation (in this last case they never give permission) so you are not allowed to fly in almost 90% of the portuguese territory. :-P

Frits48 Posted at 2017-3-16 14:04
Well, frankly the drone community in general had this coming - as it will elsewhere. I fly responsibly and I can at least understand where they are coming from.
There is one thing I totally oppose in this though: the compulsory attaching name, address and phone number to my drone. That is somewhere between ridiculous and outrageous!!
The last thing I want is, in case of a mishap, to have some hothead on my doorstep who feels that he needs to settle something.

"There is one thing I totally oppose in this though: the compulsory attaching name, address and phone number to my drone. That is somewhere between ridiculous and outrageous!!"


It is also illegal and unenforceable in court...stay tuned for some more info on this   TC can't force you to 'self register' with our private info- it is a Charter violation.  TCanada is also in violation of the Privacy Act in that they are forcing Canadians to more or less store / make available  their private information in a way that Transport Canada cannot protect; even through our data is not stored/maintained by TC in this way, it is unreasonable to mandate us to provide our information in a means that cannot be protected by anyone  (Privacy Act).

I understand the laws but will it be tolerated if a take a family picture at 20' in a class C airspace?

I live in Canada and this is BS

Molar Posted at 2017-3-16 10:17
This also effects remote control airplanes.  I can see MACC putting up some resistance as these regulations will effect a lot of clubs throughout canada

MACC sanctioned events and fields are completely exempt from all interim and upcoming regulations.

randy.sauder Posted at 2017-7-9 21:31
"There is one thing I totally oppose in this though: the compulsory attaching name, address and phone number to my drone. That is somewhere between ridiculous and outrageous!!"

Not to worry.  Our NSA has all your private data stored for you.  

It's a terrible situation in more country in the world. More of this restriction depend from crazy pilots who fly in dangerous situation for people or other. In Italy, specially, government don't think to a market of drones and at responsible fun of people but only at tax tax and tax for have more money for this bureaucratic system.

HedgeTrimmer Posted at 2018-4-4 21:36
Not to worry.  Our NSA has all your private data stored for you.

CreativeMe Posted at 2017-3-16 22:53
I really hate that every country restrict the laws more and more to the extreme. I understand that they care about safety and so do I but seems every country is taking this to far.
The new laws in Canada is pretty rough but they don't beat the Swedish. Here in Sweden you may not fly a drone with a camera on. The only time you may fly a drone with a camera is in your private area but if another area get caught in your image than your private, you gonna have to pay fine. So that's basicly means that you can't even fly over 2m in alltitued but only if you got fences with no se thru. And if you don't have fences you are pretty screwed since it's impossible to avoid getting another area in your footage.It sounds really stupid I know but that actually true.
Why does this law apply to drones? Well the politicans here sees the drone as and security cam, yes security cam. You need a permit to setup a security cam here in Sweden. So why does the drone fall into the security cam law? They see the drone with an camera as an ranking camera controlled by distances. That's really stupid since drone only can be in the air around 30min (Correct me if im wrong) and most of the people won't hover on the same spot for 30min. Another is that they are worried about people are gonna spy on people with the drone. I mean the drone aren't quiet aircrafts and it's nearly impossible to spot person from 90m and if you fly closer the person will notice it. They only scenario where spying with drone will work is big citys with high buildings with flats.

wow... this is extremely restricted.

MWitarsa Posted at 2018-4-5 11:55
wow... this is extremely restricted.

Thankfully, we live in the country with a very sparse population around us, lots of farmers will let you fly their acres, for a few pics of their property. But, i;m getting a little bored shooting cows & fields of wheat,
I do have to watch out for low flying home built aircraft, these guys seem to fly as low as they want to.
I had a fellow buzzing my Phantom & was so close to me i was forced to land until he chugged off into the sunset!

Dumbest thing ever, this guy knows nothing

I also hear you need to have insurance too.

Like all of you, I hate the idea of restrictions and laws. However, if you can be fair minded, perhaps if you looked at the problem from the legislator's point of view. We all know drones do on occasion, fall out of the sky or collide with structures. These are facts and we see them frequently mentioned here. Then of course there are the idiots who just do not think through the implications of their flight.
As a legislator, and not country specific, you have to protect the public, no if's but's or argument. What would your laws look like?

I was going to take Mr Mavic with me to Canada about 18 months ago, but decided it was far to restrictive to fly. Everyone there seemed to be alert and aware of the law. When I was walking around one of the parks, some extrovert character (being polite) flew his Phantom ? up and over the crowd of visitors in the main public area. There were tall trees, buildings, some power lines, low flying sightseeing planes and Wardens...
The got him moments after he cleared the trees.
He went in with the beaming smile and swagger of a new phantom owner, complete with back-pack case and came out sad an dishevelled, no back-pack and an embarrassed wife and child following on behind.
Obviously none of us here on the forum would ever be so reckless, but his actions did put people at risk. Mainly from the low flying planes, which are as plentiful as taxies in a city.
So Mr/Mrs legislator, how do you frame fair laws?