Recent Updates Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts
Since I killed this blog stone dead with my first post, I’ll take some responsibility and try and bring it back to life.
This link contains doc’s explaining CAA’s view on FPV rules:
The relevant document is this one:
In summary it looks like CAA want this:
- To allow model flying for recreational purposes only under the existing Part 101.
- Create a new rule for all non-recreational operations regardless of weight. All non-recreational operators will need to register with CAA to be assessed.
In general it seems pretty reasonable to me, but there are a couple of areas of concern:
- A hobbyist who takes money for some pictures would be breaking the law. This plays into the hands of the commercial interests lobbying CAA
- How to define ‘non-recreational’ e.g. Youtube income and R&D for a possible commercial product.
- How much will the safety assessment cost – again playing into the hands of the bigger commercial guys. Consider that these rules are being created partly due to an expected increase in the number of these pesky ‘drones’. So there could be a high of demand on CAA for assessments and they have finite resources to do them.
Some food for thought anyway.
I’m new to RC and just wanted to introduce myself.
I’m interested in doing some FPV flying and during my online research I became aware of the uncertainty around the rules and regs, which resulted in me ending up here. I imagine I’m like a lot of people and at some point I’d like to make some long range flights.
A bit of history about my career to date:
I purchased a Belt CP V2 heli from trademe last year and have since graduated to an HK450 heli and now a Sky Surfer (X-UAV version).
I figured the Sky Surfer would be good to learn to fly and build up experience on, and also a good FPV platform. Its just a touch more forgiving that the Helis as well (ahem…)
My plan is to add just video to normal LOS flying initially. Then upgrade to the controller/OSD/RTH etc as I gain some experience.
I have assembled some FPV gear and am starting testing and installing it.
These are the electronic bits that I have, basically the cheapest but well reviewed I could find:
Sony 600 WDR camera (SecurityCamera 2000)
200mW 5.8GHz Rx/Tx (Hobbyking)
7″ LCD In car monitor (Trademe)
Multiwii and Megapirate AIO Flight Controller (Hobbyking)
Minim OSD (Hobbyking)
Neo 6M GPS (Hobbyking)
I got the video stuff working last night. Weather and family permitting I’ll have a first crack at FPV reasonably soon.
Finally I mentioned earlier I’m watching the rules development and discussion with interest. There seems to be a fairly diverse and obtuse mix of CAA Rules, CAA Policy, MFNZ Rules and MFNZ Policy in play at the moment. Its pretty confusing trying to make sense of it so hopefully this site helps to iron it out.
I’ve finished building an H Frame quad–all frame parts were sourced from Bunnings.
I wanted to hide the power feed and escs into the frame itself-I was a bit concerned about heat build up in the closed compartment–so I drilled a hole in the top plate, over the escs–The prop wash cools the interior nicely.
I installed a cc board-9″ props-flashed escs and 2650 nano-tech lipo.
Flys very well, after a lot of tuning and balancing–next step is FPV-which frankly scares the hell out of me. I’am undecided about the FPV cam view–I purchased a gopro2 and added a composite cable to the TX–There’s a lot of mixed feelings about using the gopro as the FPV eye.
Some say dont go there, and others say they have been using the gopro system for years at 720-no pic lag, with no probs.
I would appreciate your thoughts on the issue.
Here’s a vid of the quad during a tuning session in the backyard–Please excuse the intro–it was made for my grandson who asked–“how high can it go”
If you were recommending a set of equipment for a beginner to FPV what would you recommend?
I’d start with:
Fat Shark Dominator goggles with 5.8Ghz video rx
Security Camera 2000 Sony 600TVL Camera
Immersion RC 600mw tx on 5.8ghz
Fat Shark Circular polarised antenna.
jonathanshorer334 and www2pmbconz are discussing. Toggle Comments
Nice positive use of FPV – was on 3 News, quadcopter mustering sheep via FPV
Hey guys, here’s a couple of vids of a days FPV’ing from Flock Hill. Nothing too adventurous just yet as it’s a hell of a walk if sh** hits the fan!
Here are some comments from Mark Wilson on the FY31AP autopilot.Hi Jonathan. I’m pretty pleased with it so far. It pretty much works as advertised and is not that hard to install and configure. I haven’t set up the ground station software yet so it is using default settings for things like hold altitude and orbit radius.
I’ve tested it in some reasonable turbulent and windy conditions and the stabilisation, RTL and circle modes all seemed to cope ok.
I find I am flying most of the time with stabilisation switched on and only turned off for aerobatics. You can really see the change in attitude and effectiveness of stabilisation if you turn it on while the plane is climbing or banking – it just levels out almost instantly.For video recording purposes, i’m sure the stabilisation improves the picture stability.
One very beneficial aspect I have recently realised for using stabilisation when fly FPV is that there is a tendancy when you get to the fringe of reception or momentarily loose video for a bit to try to turn the plane back to where you think you can restore the picture. With an unstabilised plane, this will tend to put it into a somewhat uncontrolled turn that can easily become a spiral dive as long as you are flying blind. I’m pretty sure that’s how I crashed my AXN flying FPV – the last thing I saw was the ground spinning in a dive.
With the stabilisation, you can more safely allow the plane to “fly through” the drop out with the confidence that it will fly straight and level and if the video isn’t restored, hit the RTL to control the turn around. I suspect this is easier said than done to begin with!!
Below is a list of commercial UAS (unmanned aerial systems) operators in New Zealand that I can find at present. Total, 25 so far. I am sure that I am leaving more that a few off the list.
Operators in the Wellington Area below
Operators in the rest of NZ
Also dont forget
Thanks to Jeff for finding out all of this information. Add to it if you can.
Hi guys. A fine still evening last night was ideal for the maiden flights of my new Bixler2.
It flys really really well. In fact it didn’t need any trimming straight off the bench. The 2200KV motor and folding prop work well and provide plenty of power to launch off grass fully loaded. I found it does need full flap on take off from grass with the extra camera weight.
My built in Gopro attachment works well too. I have two battery locations depending on whether the Gopro is mounted or not. With no camera, the battery goes in the nose as usual. With the camera clipped on, the battery goes back under the wing. This results in very little change in CG.
I’ll post some video samples in the next few days.
It’s quite nice flying a ‘straight’ plane again. The old AXN had got a bit out of shape and needed quite a bit of aileron trim just to fly level.
MFNZ met with CAA on 6 Dec to discuss the definition of LOS. CAA have some fundamental conditions to operating FPV aircraft. The basics requirements are that:
1. Operation must not endanger property or people.
2. Models must give way to full size aircraft.
3. Model plane operators must be able to ensure safe separation from full size at all times.
Most model aircraft being flown without the aid of a video link cannot be seen further away than about 750 metres and in most cases, are operated much closer to the pilot. FPV equipment can extend that range considerably but at longer distances, the plane cannot be seen by an observer standing next to the pilot. CAA are content that separation from full size aircraft can be ensured effectively by an observer that can supervise the whole of the operating area and warn the pilot to take evasive action if a full size were to stray into the operating area.
The bad way to test whether an FPV plane is endangering people or property is to have an accident and be taken to court. The good way is to have a flight plan that answers the question, “if I had a failure now, would the plane spear harmlessly into the ground or might it hit something that would send me to jail”
So, the answer is, you can fly as far as your equipment will allow you provided that conditions 1-3 are met.
kneedrag and jonathanshorer334 are discussing. Toggle Comments