Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

https://gigaom.com/2014/09/12/drone-based-businesses-soar-in-canada-as-faa-grounds-us-entrepreneurs/

by zabalmendi • 12 years ago

91 44 12 years ago

pkaye• 12 years ago

Hopefully they can work out the kinks under the US is ready to adopt it.

nadiaks3• 12 years ago

Here is a link to the original article in the Financial Post (http://bit.ly/1m1lGdi) with the due credit to the original author, Quentin Casey, and the companies mentioned in the article, fluttrbox and Resson Aerospace (which is conveniently not mentioned by this author).

I am the co-founder of fluttrbox(applied YC W15)

biot• 12 years ago

Actual non-Libya URL: http://business.financialpost.com/2014/09/07/canadian-startu...

mkavuma1• 12 years ago

I've actually seen these guys hustling with drones around the montreal area

MichaelApproved• 12 years ago

Reminder that you can see traffic count of bitly links by adding a + to the end of the URL https://bitly.com/1m1lGdi+

43 clicks as of now (10:49PM ET).

ams61103• 12 years ago

Are .ly names out of favor now? Not too long ago they were de rigueur for startups.

andrewstuart2• 12 years ago

The articles may overlap a bit but they're certainly quite different. The submitted article has a lot more content than the one you linked and most of it deals with the state of drone usage in the US rather than the startups in Canada which are using drones.

Also, Resson Aerospace is definitely mentioned in both articles.

Quentin Casey wrote a good article. So did this guy.

nadiaks3• 12 years ago

Not disputing the content of the articles, but rather the fact that this author quotes and uses direct quotes from another with referencing the proper parties.

cosmicvisitor• 12 years ago

and how about privacy, sc* that right

bennesvig• 12 years ago

It's bizarre that it's legal to fly a drone/quadcopter as a hobby, but not if you charge for the services. If there were laws about flying above a certain height or over people in well populated areas, that would make more sense than just banning commercial use.

There are going to be a lot of drone-based businesses soon. I got a DJI Phantom 2 last month and have been amazed at the quality of footage that it can capture with a GoPro. The learning curve is much easier than hand-held stabilizers I've used, like the Glidecam.

evanriley• 12 years ago

I'm hoping its temporary and a better solution can be found soon. I think most of the fear is the sky being filled with commercial drones, which I think can be solved pretty easily.

dragonwriter3• 12 years ago

It's bizarre that it's legal to fly a drone/quadcopter as a hobby, but not if you charge for the services.

It is also legal to have sex as a hobby, but not -- in (most of) the U.S., and much of the rest of the world -- if you charge for the services.

Actually, there are a lot of things that are legal to do if you aren't charging for a service, but illegal, or at least much more tightly regulated, if you are charging for a service.

Wingman4l7• 12 years ago

Brewing beer or wine also comes to mind.

baddox5• 12 years ago

I oppose all those instances.

kourt• 12 years ago

It's very typical to more strictly regulate commercial use of the sky than non-commercial. For human aviators, the progression in licenses is Private Pilot (cannot even charge passengers more than their pro-rata share of expenses), Commercial Pilot (can get paid for banner towing, crop dusting, and aerial photography), and Airline Transport Pilot. Aircraft themselves are subject to increasing regulatory burdens regarding maintenance intervals and documentation depending on whether they are for private use (Part 91), Part 135 (charter), or Part 121 (airline).

In broadcasting, amateur radio operators ("hams") are allowed to use the airwaves much more easily than commercial broadcasters.

Perhaps this principle does not translate perfectly to drone operations, but the general goal seems to be to protect both individual liberty and consumers of for-profit service providers.

(Note that contrary to political rhetoric "government regulation hurts business", the viability of the airline industry depends on safety standards: the market has to be larger than "hardcore daredevils" to justify a fleet of 737's.)

bigiain• 12 years ago

I don't think it's "bizarre" at all - getting paid _fundamentally_ changes things.

Although the "ban commercial use completely" approach is a pretty big hammer to use - as a hobbyist RC pilot who's flown with a camera aboard for some time (http://bigiain.com/Mini-Swift-RC-plane) I've had _many_ requests to take photos/video for other people, many of whom have offered money for it, and almost _all_ of which would require me to make safety compromises that I probably wouldn't choose to make "just doing it for kicks". And the more money on offer, the more tempting it is and the bigger the risks that might get taken.

While _I_ think the risks I take flying that plane in the linked video are reasonable (it weighs ~125g all up, and puts a maximum of about 55W into spinning the prop), I've seen people fly multicopters weighing over 6kg with eight 2000W motors spinning 14inch carbon fiber props in _way_ more public and crowded places than that. I certainly wouldn't choose to do that. And Youtube is full of clips which make me say "Really? You chose to do _that_ _there_? Are you insane?"

I think the "easier learning curve" on things like DJI's gear, coupled with it's accessible price - but _also_ coupled with a bunch of people who either haven't thought through the possible consequences, don't care about the consequences, or who think the money they're making means the risk is worth taking - will inevitably lead to bad decisions being made.

On the more optimistic side, at least _some_ places (here in Australia, for example), it seems like the authorities (CASA in my case) are trying to take account of the differing nature of different "drones", and at least proposing a graduated approach - a sub 500g craft probably isn't going to need to abide by the came rules as a 6kg+ one. (And, if the lower-bound in their current ruleset stays, sub 100g craft will be classified still as "toys" and not covered by these rules.)

baddox5• 12 years ago

many of whom have offered money for it, and almost _all_ of which would require me to make safety compromises that I probably wouldn't choose to make "just doing it for kicks".

And because of that, you're advocating that all commercial drone usage be prohibited? To me, that doesn't follow.

locusm• 12 years ago

Ive heard through a friend of a friend that CASA charges around $5K to certify a quad for flying commercially plus you need to pass your PPL theory exam.

lotsofmangos• 12 years ago

If you will drop your own safety standards for money, that isn't a problem with drones.

notatoad• 12 years ago

if the goal of the commercial use ban is to simply limit the number of things flying around the sky, it makes perfect sense. as soon as you allow drones to be used for commercial purposes, the number of them will skyrocket. a couple of hobbyists flying their toys around isn't going to cause problems, the tacocopter lunch rush could be a big problem.

johan_larson2• 12 years ago

You had me at "tacocopter".

markdown4• 12 years ago

Request: Please don't come and ruin it for the rest of us, like this irresponsible american drone operator potentially did (thankfully there have been no repercussions yet as the authorities haven't seen it).

See the first few seconds of this video: http://vimeo.com/99295619

Flying anywhere near aerodromes is illegal just about everywhere.

thaumaturgy• 12 years ago

You will probably luck out the same as the U.S. -- and every immigrant destination -- has forever. The people that have the talent, ability, and motivation to successfully emigrate from one country to another don't tend to be the dumbest people.

markdown4• 12 years ago

I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing.

This is an american photographer/videographer coming to Fiji for a project (work), who then ignores local law by flying his quadcopter over a moving aircraft on a runway.

He finishes his project after a few days, returns to his home country, and puts his video online. If seen by civil aviation authorities in Fiji, it could lead to tighter regulations for local hobbyists and drone businesses.

spacefight3• 12 years ago

"Flying anywhere near aerodromes is illegal just about everywhere."

This is simply not true. It might be illegal just about everywhere without permission, but there are countries, where you can get permission to drone shoot legally at or near an airport.

One example is Switzerland: http://tinoscherer.ch/air-14-payerne-mera-drone/ http://tinoscherer.ch/project/air-14-remo-masina-bazl-drone/

You're right about the "potentially" in this case.

unclebunkers2• 12 years ago

Do you have more info handy? My immeadiate thought was it was a Fiji promotional video, and approved of. I'd love to read the intrigue on it.

markdown4• 12 years ago

No intrigue.

It's a great video. Beautifully shot. I love it.

I'm just annoyed that the guy who made it broke the law in doing so.

The video is online, so if it ever comes to the attention of the Fiji Civil Aviation Authority, they could come down hard on local (fijian) UAV operators and hobbyists.

Mikeb85• 12 years ago

The key of course is that in Canada, you need a permit to operate it. You can't just fly drones anywhere whenever you want...

Would that shit fly in the US? Needing to apply for a government permit to operate a drone? I know you all are sensitive about perceived 'freedom'. Like how we have gun control, drone permits (and thus restrictions), etc...

baddox5• 12 years ago

Needing to apply for a government permit to operate a drone?

Are you talking about commercial flying? I certainly do not think I should need to apply for a government permit to fly a 15 gram quadcopter that could not cause injury or property damage if I tried.

johan_larson2• 12 years ago

Injury, no. But gross violations of people's privacy, yes.

lnanek2• 12 years ago

Good. I've seen people cut by those drones and it isn't pretty. The manufacturers should have put safety cages around each prop, even if it cut into performance. But since they don't, I think they should be banned.

sounds• 12 years ago

I've been cut when hand-launching a drone. The prop embedded itself in my finger through my fingernail.

I still feel like safety cages and banning drones are not the solution. Proper training and respecting the tool are much more effective.

Drone-based businesses soar in Canada, as FAA grounds US entrepreneurs

Related Stories