Skip to content
August 01, 2014

CAAP looking to limit the use of Drones in PH

In line with the growing popularity of drones in the country, CAAP has recently released a new memorandum that will regulate the use of Drones, or what the agency considers as an Unmanned Aircraft Vehicles or UAVs.

ar-done2

Under the memorandum, drone users will have to secure any of three required certifications (seen below) from CAAP in order fly their drones.

• Flight crew license with a command instrument training.
• Military qualification equivalent to a license
• Air traffic control license.

As if that’s not hard enough, the new memorandum also mandates that UAV controllers must provide CAAP with a detailed description of the drone and what it will be used for.

On top of that, drone enthusiasts will also have to get a passing score on various exams that will measure their proficiency in operating UAVs, as well has having “at least five hours experience operating UAVs outside controlled airspace”.

AR-8

But even after complying to all of these tests, certifications and training, UAV controllers still has to adhere with CAAP’s rules and regulations on where they can fly their drones. The memorandum states that UAVs cannot be flown over crowded places and airports, as well as no-fly zones like the Malacanang Palace, the President’s house, and Military base and training camps.

According to CAAP’s Assistant Director General Captain Beda Badiola, the agency will be strict in implementing these new policies on unauthorized use of drones. UAV owners/operators who failed to adhere to the memorandum will be “fined between Php300,000 to Php500,000 per unauthorized flight depending on the grave of violations.”

{Source}


31 Responses to “CAAP looking to limit the use of Drones in PH”

  1. bibbo says:

    Sa US nga wala pang clear regulations. Pagkakitaan lang nasa isip ng CAAP

  2. Easy E says:

    Any remotely-controlled or autonomous aircraft of any size = drone? Pano na mga researchers?

    • testUser says:

      Capt. Beda Badiola, CAAP-Assistant Director General and head of Flight Standard Inspectorate Service, said the regulation also covered amateur videographers or photographers, researchers, geodetic survey firms and broadcast media.

    • Anony Mouse says:

      @testUser: Kamag-anak po ba niyang si Capt. Badiola yung si Paolo sa ABC5 na napabalitang may video scandal? Baka gusto lang niya gumawa ng bagong issue para malipat ang atensyon mula kay Paolo. =))

  3. Ghosthunter says:

    CAAP is over-reacting to drones. Except for the large ones that have the capacity to carry heavier payloads like a full DSLR camera, a typical drone pose little danger to anyone.

    The requirements are also ridiculous because they are so stringent, you could probably apply as a pilot for an airline once you get your “drone” license.

    • testUser says:

      The CAAP defines a Large UAV as unmanned airship with an envelope capacity greater than 100 cubic meters; a Micro UAV as UAV with a gross weight of 100 grams or less; and Small UAV as neither a large UAV nor a micro UAV.

    • vm
      Twitter: Vincent
      says:

      \\a typical drone pose little danger to anyone. \\

      what if a drone was used to peek in someone’s window? What if a drone crashed and the li-ion battery/gas engine sparked a fire?

      there must be a balance between encouraging the use to reap the benefits of new tech and the possibility of accidents/misuse.

      I’m generally for drones. The daily traffic report and post glenda surveillance can be made cheaper with drones. Imagine if the ampatuan journalists who were massacred had drone cameras

    • Mr says:

      Are you a 12 year old? your logic goes all out in the window. Yeah F0ck right the Airline company is so dense and stupid enough will hire you because you have a Drone license. Pose little danger? yeah I’ll smash my Drone on the top of your head or your face, yes little danger there. Or if you have a car I doubt you do, I will drop it right on front of your windsheild. I agree whatever you’ve written here make sense.

    • Mr says:

      Go Smash your expensive drone into someone’s face!

      Go ahead. I dare you!

      Infantile response = stupid person.

  4. weryou@ says:

    Wut CAAP?!

  5. Yeahright says:

    Government agency heads have the distinct ability of making a fool of themselves just to get them on the headlines… Please captain, you’re piloting a ridiculous and useless ship. Try getting on one that will actually serve the purpose of why you are being paid to sit on your quaint captains’ seat in your not so quaint government office.

  6. anokamo says:

    Dapat may nagpo-proof read man lang ng articles.
    Unang una dapat dinedefine what is CAAP especially sa unang mention nito. I know pede ko naman i-google right? Pero di standard writing kasi eh.
    Eto pa: ‘depending on the GRAVE of violations’ baka ‘GRAVITY’? hehe…
    Di po ako nagmamarunong ah, just being observant. Peace!

    • Zobel says:

      Onga. I’ve never heard of CAAP before. Are they an educational insurance company?

    • Anony Mouse says:

      Koyah, naka-dobol kwowts (“…depending on the grave of violations”) kaya posibleng kapalpakan yun ng CAAP, at hindi ng article writer. Pero graveh nga… Pag binitiwan ko ba yung balloon na bili ng tatay ko sa Luneta, malalagot din ako sa CAAP? Graveh naman… :((

  7. eric jay says:

    in short di gusto nang caap na may nagliliparan na drone. sa reqs. pa lang hanep.

  8. testUser says:

    ang saranggola ay Remotely Controlled Unmanned Aircraft Vehicle diba? kasama po ba yun dito sa memo na to?

  9. vm
    Twitter: Vincent
    says:

    there must be a balance between encouraging the use to reap the benefits of new tech and the possibility of accidents/misuse.

    I’m generally for drones. The daily traffic report and post glenda surveillance can be made cheaper and more efficiently with drones. Imagine if the ampatuan journalists who were massacred had drone cameras that were controlled by distant operators and live streamed on the net

    but there are also dangers like what if it was used to peek inside windows or if one crashed and sparked a fire?

    We need to study the regulations and if too onerous or too lax, fix them. If

  10. Easy E says:

    Yung Baloon Festival ba ay dumaan sa ganitong requirements? Safety lang YATA ang binantayan nila at yung mga piloto ng mga baloon ay lisensyado ba?

    Isa pa, ang mga “tethered unmanned aircraft” kagaya ng mga Saranggola ay hindi naka define sa context na ito.

  11. MrOrange says:

    If you read the article, it’s actually stupid. Because basically all radio controlled vehicles are drones. this includes RC Helicopters sold by ToyStores, Toy Kingdom, SM etc. so basically ANY Radio Controlled flying Toy that has a payload to carry a GoPro or smaller camera is a threat? I find this rule stupid. they may not have ever owned a radio controlled toy before.

    • Ghosthunter says:

      Exactly. Any RC vehicle (airplane, glider, helicopter) can be defined as a “drone” based on CAAP rules. So do we need to get a CAAP license when we buy a toy RC helicopter from TOYS R US?

  12. leeto says:

    Nasa mandate ba ng CAAP ang drones? Di naman vehicle ang drone na pwede masakyan ng tao? CAAP should first look at its powers and charter.

  13. blablabla says:

    Ayaw lang nila ng drones para hindi makita mag kotong ang mga public official

  14. gagawa na lng ako ng sarangola or kite at lalagyan ko ito ng remote control na video or camera he he he ano kaya masasabi ng CAAP!

  15. PrTralala says:

    Next up: CAAP looking to limit the use of kites in PH

  16. unlicomments says:

    Sa CAAP din humihingi ng permit to build two-storey houses around the vicinity of the airport. Sobra sa tagal magprocess-parang may inaantay. Kung di ko pa sinabi na ipapamedia ko sila, hindi pa irerelease permit. What an agency!

    • agree says:

      Yup agree.. Basahin muna un application nito.. Hindi lahat applicable..basta medium size na commercial and large size ang bawal lumipad / need ng license.

  17. Ses says:

    hmmmm another stupid regulations… ganito ba talaga na… hanap ng hanap ng paraan para taasan ang makokolektang pera sa taong bayan? hehehe ganyan kakurakot sa atin talaga no….

  18. Anony Mouse says:

    Eto po ba dahilan kaya sinisita kami ng mga guard & titser pag nagpapalipad kami ng paper airplanes sa iskul playgrounds tuwing recess? :((

  19. Jes says:

    Nangangarap pa lang ako makabili nito. May regulasyon na pala. :)

Leave a Reply

*
*

Written by

This article was written by Ronnie Bulaong, a special features contributor and correspondent for YugaTech. Follow him on Twitter @turonbulaong.

More articles by Ronnie Bulaong :