Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CAAS complaint

Collapse

Zenm Tech Pte Ltd

Collapse

Visit Zenmtech at rc.zenmtech.com

X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Originally posted by chiadennis View Post
    Please note that there is another ruling / law by CAAS, no form of aerial photographic/video are allowed in Singapore without the written permission from CAAS.

    Please do a search in Daddhobby forum on these subject, it was discussed before.
    Owners of ARndrone please take note. If want to fly, please don't enable the video record function lest you infringe the law.

    I am surprised on the strict definition. Basically once you take the camera in the air, it's considered aerial. And anything u record is illegal
    Hanger
    Hirobo XRB SR Lama
    Hirobo Quark SRB
    Hirobo Quark SRB SG
    Eflite Blade SR (For Display)
    Blade450 3D
    MSH Mini Protos (SOLD)
    COMPASS 6HV (Combat Fit PES A)

    Plane
    Dynam PBY Catalina 1.4m
    FMS J3 Cub 1.4m
    Artech F14 Tomcat EDF
    HK FLYJET EDF
    Artech Skyfun
    Dynam P51D Mustang
    Parkzone P51

    Tx:
    Futaba 6J 2.4GHz(SOLD)
    Spektrum DX6i
    DX8
    Futaba 9CAP

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by cyberiarvo View Post
      Correct me if im wrong.. Meaning IDA are OK with 5.8 fpv system? I really want to try fpv and im willing to follow on any rules about the size of the aircraft and max distance and place.
      Saw a few guys flying FPV today at West Coast Park. First thing I asked them was are they flying FPV and what freq they were on.

      They mentioned they were flying 5.8Ghz which was wi-fi freq anyway and is not a problem, unlike 1Ghz range which is illegal.

      These guys were commercial flyers and flying something really huge, I didn't ask if they had other permission from CAAS, etc as they only flew for a short while and then packed up.

      So attaching a small video camera on our planes (not FPV, recording) is considered illegal too according to CAAS? This seems pretty ridiculous to me, I'm guessing its not strictly enforced unlike FPV?

      Comment


        #18
        I think it's important to share all here the most likely reason CAAS/IDA is so adamant on scouring the land for the 1080Mhz source. It is clear that it is not so much about FPV style of rc flying this episode but the specific frequency source itself they are hunting.

        1080Mhz frequency is close to 1090Mhz, which is used by commercial aircraft to auto-report flight navigation status information to ground controllers and each other and is growing to be the main tracking/reporting system used worldwide. This aviation system is known to be the ADB-S system.

        Interference with commercial air navigation impacts real lives of the numerous passengers in the skies above us, with the potential to cause a catastrophe. This risk has to be removed for obvious reasons to benefit the general community.

        900Mhz and 1.2Ghz high power transceivers are the likely culprits for this frequency, and yes if for RC world, FPV is the one type of flying which optionally uses these frequencies.

        My 2cents

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by Cycross View Post
          I think it's important to share all here the most likely reason CAAS/IDA is so adamant on scouring the land for the 1080Mhz source. It is clear that it is not so much about FPV style of rc flying this episode but the specific frequency source itself they are hunting.

          1080Mhz frequency is close to 1090Mhz, which is used by commercial aircraft to auto-report flight navigation status information to ground controllers and each other and is growing to be the main tracking/reporting system used worldwide. This aviation system is known to be the ADB-S system.

          Interference with commercial air navigation impacts real lives of the numerous passengers in the skies above us, with the potential to cause a catastrophe. This risk has to be removed for obvious reasons to benefit the general community.

          900Mhz and 1.2Ghz high power transceivers are the likely culprits for this frequency, and yes if for RC world, FPV is the one type of flying which optionally uses these frequencies.

          My 2cents
          +1

          OP did say, though, that the complaint originated from CAAS because of interference with their 1090 MHz radar.

          Manned aircraft have right of way, and that includes everything that makes manned flight safe. Simple.

          I'd add that IDA's responsibility includes managing the radio spectrum as a resource - it is a finite spectrum and the frequencies therein have been allocated to various needs. Even if manned flight was not involved, unauthorised use of a radio frequency allocated for something else does actually empower IDA to crack down on your rear end.

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by jtchoy View Post
            Saw a few guys flying FPV today at West Coast Park. First thing I asked them was are they flying FPV and what freq they were on.

            They mentioned they were flying 5.8Ghz which was wi-fi freq anyway and is not a problem, unlike 1Ghz range which is illegal.

            These guys were commercial flyers and flying something really huge, I didn't ask if they had other permission from CAAS, etc as they only flew for a short while and then packed up.

            So attaching a small video camera on our planes (not FPV, recording) is considered illegal too according to CAAS? This seems pretty ridiculous to me, I'm guessing its not strictly enforced unlike FPV?
            This is exactly what I had mentioned. Their definition is not very clear. So who cares, I will still go 5.8GHz with my gopro. My interpretation of aerial photography is to fly so damn high and taking hi res images, which is not our intention. Of course not flouting the air-dome rules (5km radius , 12th storey height etc)

            I have seen the spectrum allocation before. Don't understand it then and don't understand it now. I'm just a layman. Be honest with yourself, does it clear your doubt about the equipment you are intending to use? Don't think so. And not to mention many of those rules were drafted years back, hopefully the new ones will make more sense.

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by tdlucas View Post
              This is exactly what I had mentioned. Their definition is not very clear. So who cares, I will still go 5.8GHz with my gopro. My interpretation of aerial photography is to fly so damn high and taking hi res images, which is not our intention. Of course not flouting the air-dome rules (5km radius , 12th storey height etc)

              I have seen the spectrum allocation before. Don't understand it then and don't understand it now. I'm just a layman. Be honest with yourself, does it clear your doubt about the equipment you are intending to use? Don't think so. And not to mention many of those rules were drafted years back, hopefully the new ones will make more sense.
              My understanding is that it's not that the definition is unclear. It is just broadly drafted and so captures photography from RC aircraft as well. I don't like it any more than you do, and I highly doubt the rules will be redrafted to make more sense.

              Spectrum allocation is complicated because of the many things it has to take into account. I believe the 2.4 and 5.8 GHz bands have a general exemption from IDA, subject to range and power regulations. No idea if our equipment complies with those. It actually used to be simpler (if a bit more inconvenient) - you go to the post office and pay for the licence to use your transmitter. Of course, in those days it took you months to build your plane from a bunch of sticks and a rolled up plan .

              Incidentally, in the case of most regulatory offences like the sort envisioned here, your intention is irrelevant. Only your act is. Welcome to the modern world! You probably committed a crime this week and didn't even know it .

              Comment


                #22
                Originally posted by rayonnair View Post
                You probably committed a crime this week and didn't even know it .
                shhh...I watched Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter 1080p last night!

                Comment


                  #23
                  Hi all,

                  was the affected area around the west side of singapore? My club in NTU received similar emails from IDA... but our club has no FPY flyer running on 1ghz and available at this time...

                  i'm suspecting it is one of the research students (masters, ph.d) running their projects with no heed to local r.c rules and guidelines... (seen a few-btw)

                  do let me know so i can feed back to the respective schools about this.
                  DUCT DUCT DUCT GO!!!!

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X