Cuban8

Money talks. The CAA's own figures put registrations at over half a million and at over eleven quid a pop that's not small change into their coffers. A nice little regular earner for not a lot of effort or investment from them, and an on-going revenue stream that'll become even more lucrative for them as time goes by. Not something that they'll want to see compromised even in the face of evidence that will, given time, show the ineffectiveness of the registration scheme for recreational users. Moreover, it's anyone's guess as to how many sales there have been in total and are 'off the radar' so to speak. Something like 6000 drone incidents are reported to police annually with very few actually resulting in a 'collar being felt' let alone a prosecution other than for a few very high profile recent cases. Increasing incidents of 'drone deliveries' to prisons are noted. https://www.protectuk.police.uk/threat-risk/threat-analysis/threat-drones-uk Just some food for thought when you cough up your next operator ID fee and perhaps believe it's making an actual positive difference to the safety of the public. We as model flyers do as we are required to do though, despite its questionable worth.

Never heard of them before but based in Taunton, Somerset. Looks to be a cottage industry considering their address given in the returns section of their website. Wish them well - the original TF kits were excellent if a bit on the weighty side if I recall correctly. I like the Warhawk repro short kit. Guess they need to get their name about a bit more

I believe that holding third party insurance for drones and model aircraft is non-compulsory, but it's clearly a bad idea to not have cover and leave oneself open to a potentially ruinous claim in the case of a very serious incident. The BMFA handbook (sec 14.17) makes no mention of compulsory insurance for very large models over 25kg, only regs and inspections as to their airworthiness, which did surprise me.

About the only consumer drone delivery service that's a success. It really does beggar belief.

What I saw at the time as being a huge error, was not capitalising on the fact that North Weald had it very own underground station that could have shuttled thousands of commuters into London after parking their vehicles on a suitable part of the airfield during week days. A win-win situation as seen by many as an opportunity to ease congestion and offer an easier and faster trip directly into Central London and Docklands, plus a nice little earner for the council to invest in the airfield. London Transport were determined to close that section of the Central Line comewhat may and there were concerns about increased local traffic at peak times, so the scheme was never even given a chance to see if it would work. Given the amount of residential development that's taken place nearby and in Harlow recently - which has always been a dormitory town for London - I reckon a trick was missed. At least there is a nice heritage steam railway running on the closed underground line, and NWA itself is still a very busy airfield catering for all sorts of users. Could have been very much worse of course, when one sees the fate of other decomissioned RAF airfields.

Having lived in nearby Loughton for twenty years prior to moving to N.Essex in 2005, we too were regular visitors to North Weald and supported many of the events there at the time. Epping Forest District Council had their faults but I do have to say their air mindedness and support for NWA in the past and to this day is worthy of recognition. The fabulous Fighter Meet Airshows and of course our own Wings and Wheels are much missed, but at least we can say we enjoyed the experiences while we had the chance. I see that the model flying club still operates from the airfield so that is also good to know A shame about the C54, although one can understand the owner's point of view and he's done very well to keep it as long as he has, and thereby given it a fair chance of a future as a whole airframe - it just didn't work out.

Hi DP. Some good info on your model here that might come in use........https://forums.modelflying.co.uk/index.php?/topic/53624-a-first-timers-attempt-at-a-tony-nijhuis-sky-40-for-beginners/#comments Dont lose too much sleep over your firewall settings - I've seen trainers stuffed into the deck and firewalls epoxied back as a 'field repair' without that much finesse and the model was still OK to go. Doesn't mean to say that you can be cavalier with your repair but as long as you wind up with a couple of degrees of right sidethrust and downthrust and you provide a way to tweak the settings with washers or whatever you won't have a problem. Even if you rig the engine (motor) 0-0 as a starting point, the model will still fly and will certainly not be uncontrollable, but will be a tad sensitive to trim changes more so in pitch rather than yaw with this type of model. A nice model for a beginner, I'm sure it'll go well once fettled.

Sorry for harping on a bit but if I can give you one bit of advice again, then that's not to spread yourself too thinly over several models whilst training. Select just a couple of reliable models so you have one as a spare and stick to them. Fly your main machine until your're sick of it i.e you know it back to front and inside out. Given our unreliable weather, models that can cope with less than ideal conditions have an advantage. Jumping from model to model and worse still, different types of model as a newcomer rarely works out well in my past experience. Plenty of time for experimentation once you've got loads of stick time in and flying has become second nature to you. Not a position that you'll find yourself in within just a few weeks especially after an extended absence from the field - so expect a load of dull circuit bashing, touch and goes over and over again until it all sinks in and can't come out again after having really seeped into the old grey matter. Don't push things......a crash at this stage will just set you back and teach you nothing. Fantastic workshop, makes my shed and garage look pathetic but we manage with what we've got - hope 2025 gets you up and away without too many setbacks as before - we're all looking forward to seeing you succeed after such an effort so far - TBH I didn't think you'd stick with it, but I'm very happy to have been proven wrong. Best wishes and good luck.

Me too.

If you have a valid ID because you took the test and passed at any time either before or after 30/12/20 then you are good to go. No matter what, if you haven't taken the test you'll need to do so - including those that were incorrectly issued with an ID - now resolved.

Doesn't make the concerns any less legitimate though. I know we are going around in circles a bit with this but to just ignore what's happened is a mistake - there is still stuff coming down the pipe and if we can by negotiation, pursuasion or whatever manage to sidestep it as BMFA members, then that's got to be worthwhile. Remote ID will be the next hobby horse.

The BMFA RCC option for its members is actually a good idea IMHO. Perhaps a precursor to the CAA realising that BMFA members can operate outside of their buraucracy meant for the general publicwhen flying their drones. A forelorn hope I guess, but you never know.

As far as I understand A and Bs on their own don't count at all - if you don't have a flyer ID you'll need to do the test. https://rcc.bmfa.uk/rcc

My 'Top Hat' remark was intended to be tongue in cheek but with the serious point that we as a group of people who are following a legitimate activity as a hobby or purely for recreation, have been sucked into a maelstrom of inappropriate rules and regulation (to say nothing of extra cost) because of outside forces that have come about through no fault of our own. A lot of those rules have no meaning to models flown at most club sites and indeed in many other locations where the hobby has been followed for many years. The alarm bells should have rung much louder as all this was kicking off a number of years ago, as it was found to be unable to define exactly what a model aeroplane was, and therefore your Junior 60 was actually (and absurdly IMHO) classed as a drone and would be lumped in with the legislation to prevent potential drone chaos (allegedly) at airports, sport events and invading people's privacy etc etc. Moreover, the crazy fear of our operations causing problems for widespread 'Drone Deliveries' for consumer products, that we were promised were about to be common place and would be criss crossing the land and possibly over our flying fields on a regular basis, but have actually turned out to be a dream stuck on the drawing board - certainly to remain there for many years to come. Please note the emphasis on consumer goods, and not the good work that commercial drones are doing in various ways and have virtually zero interaction with R/C model flying. Unless one is an anarchist, people are generally happy to comply with rules and regulations that are plainly for the common good and have an obvious benefit (we all agree to drive on the left side of the road in the UK as an example). I don't see much in the way of how our lot has improved from how we operated for decades past TBH. I accept that not complying would mean the end of the hobby, but I don't view going along with a flawed scheme to be much of a 'benefit'. From many conversations with club mates, who through gritted teeth have gone along with all this because they have to, there is still a deep feeling that we've 'been had' and my comments do contain points that have been raised by many others. I do think it's important to talk about this - hopefully, the BMFA in its excellent work in dealing with the CAA on our behalf, are taking note of all points of view within these discussions.

With respect, the CAA could insist that all flyers must wear a top hat 🎩 when operating their drones or model aircraft. Hardly an inconvenience but with very little use or advantage to anyone. I and almost all modellers I speak to also question the usefulness of registration and on line tests.