Drone endangered helicopter, civil aviation alleges
A helicopter pilot who fought a blaze in trees at Pines Beach was shocked to find out when he saw coverage on the TVNZ news that there had been an airborne drone shooting footage in the vicinity.
The drone pilot, Simon Roy Reeve, 38, has gone on trial in the Christchurch District Court on three charges – causing unnecessary endangerment and two charges of flying the drone in controlled airspace on different days without permission.
The hearing before a judge-alone may turn out to be a test case about drone flying rules.
Civil Aviation Authority prosecutor Chris Macklin told Judge Gary MacAskill that the pilot of the helicopter would give evidence at the three-day trial about the risks posed by having a drone operating in the area.
“He will say he only knew that an aircraft had been operated in the area by the defendant when he got home and saw footage on the news. It shocked him,” said Mr Macklin.
Defence counsel Rupert Glover said the drone was used in “sheltered operation” below the tree level where it could not have come into contact with a helicopter because the helicopter could not have safely flown there.
He said the rules were not as clear as they might be and there was doubt about where the boundary of the Christchurch Airport Control Zone actually was.
The trial was told that the drone was a remotely piloted Phantom II helicopter, which weighed about 2kg and had plastic blades.
Mr Macklin said the prosecution related to flights on January 5 and 20, 2015, and the unnecessary endangerment charges related to Reeve flying the drone on January 5.
“The allegation is that his model aircraft was airborne while helicopter fire-fighting operations were taking place,” he said. “The defendant was operating without the consent of Air Traffic Control in an already hazardous environment. It is alleged he caused unnecessary danger to those operating the helicopter.”
He said the drone had operated “tens of metres” away from the helicopter. The footage it shot would be shown to the trial, to show the proximity of the aircraft.
Mr Macklin said Reeve said in a statement that he “wasn’t really aware of the rules as they applied to him”.
That statement was later read to the court. In it, Reeve said he had no aviation experience but had been flying model aircraft for years. He said: “The rules are hard to understand. We don’t think we have done anything wrong.”
Questioning a Civil Aviation witness, Mr Glover asked about whether they were aware that the camera aboard the drone was fitted with a zoom lens at the time.
The trial is continuing.
Category: News
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
Connect
Connect with us via: