Cuban8

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.

This is a totally barmy situation. Ride a pushbike on the road - highway code but no legal requirement to read it.........no test...... go rock climbing, as far as I know, no test........Cut people's hair professionally, sharps, infection risk etc - no test.......buy a chainsaw or any other power tool that could kill or maim - no test..........make tea and sandwiches for a local society - no hygene test........... have and bring up a child, no test (maybe a review on that one 😉). A multitude of others can be thought of easily. On the other had fly a recreational model aircraft or drone ...........and a raft of regs are conjured up for us. Yes, yes, yes......all very easy, doesn't affect us that much, follow the law and so on, but is it all really needed and is the registration scheme as a whole for recreational users actually serving a worthwhile purpose? Cost usually get people's attention, I wonder how that's working out at the moment? It really does all need looking at again at some point - very rarely is anything totally right and effective first time round. We can't have chaos with UAVs flown all over the place as and where people fancy, but to my mind what we have now, certainly how its been implemented, is OTT.

The phone calls have just begun.....................but if I tell you what about I'd have to kill you😁

Go for a five cell Nimh pack. The extra cost and weight penalty are negligable, especially on a Super 60, but the extra reliability is well worth it. As has been said it doesn't have to be huge capacity wise - 1200 to 1500mA/Hr is loads. Buy a decent RX switch and avoid these cheap Futaba/Hitec or whatever 'compatible' cheapies like the plague including the ones with the charging port. They are a lottery as to the quality of what you'll get, accordingly many will say they are fine......not in my experience I'm afraid. One of the forumites recommended one of these https://sussex-model-centre.co.uk/collections/electrical-switches/products/etronix-power-switch a while back when I questioned the quality of a lot of the cheap mechanical RX switches on sale. I've had one for a while now and have full confidence in it. Only slight snag is it's best to disconnect it from the supplying battery at the end of flying - no real hardship if planned for when installing. Most likely case of 'radio failure' is a dud power supply so really make sure what you use is as robust as possible including the charging regime and regular capacity checks. Fit and forget your RX battery is asking for trouble. Even the cheapest four button chargers can check for on-load performance and capacity so you can monitor if your RX pack is becoming tired before it finally goes to sleep.......usually when you're flying! All very easy and non technical to do. Good luck and enjoy the model.

The SC 120FS is not an overly powerful motor so I doubt if it'd be overkill in this model based on my own experience. Had quite a few of PT's models in our club with all manner and sizes of engines depending on what the owner was looking for in terms of performance - if you have the engine available I'd go ahead and use it if I was you. Good luck with the model, you'll be very pleased with it.

Not forgetting the number of (usually older) members who eschew anything to do with on-line anything - if you're lucky, maybe a non-smart phone only but that'll be it. I wonder how many BMFA members are totally off-line and rejoin and manage their membership as we all did 40+ years ago? Not many I guess, but they still need to interact with the modern world of model flying buraucracy albeit at a snail's pace and rely totally on hard copy delivered by the postie? I suppose family and friends or their club will need to step in and help where possible.

All a bit of a joke really but we are where we are.

I know the popular point of view is "it's all dead easy".............. "can't see what the problem is".............."people just making a fuss" etc and from my standpoint I've had no problems with any of the requirements at all. However, not everyone has had the same experience and as the membership administrator for my club I've had at least half a dozen phone calls from various members who are mystified by it all. I had an email from one chap who in no uncertain terms informed me that passing the on-line test was impossible and what should he do? I've worked with them all over the recent months and to the best of my knowledge, all problems have been solved and everyone is good to go.

I can recommend these https://sussex-model-centre.co.uk/products/etronix-li-po-regulator-4-8v-5a-w-casing-20x14x49mm?_pos=1&_psq=4.8v+regulator&_ss=e&_v=1.0 Have had a couple in use for years with no probs at all. I believe they also do 6V and 7.4V versions as well. Easy to find from other uk suppliers.

Ditto.

Welcome back MissingN...... Starting your own club is a very commendable idea and not impossible of course, as all of the 700+ or whatever the figure is, UK clubs, had to be started by someone at some point. However, if the attraction is only to avoid dealing with the admin and usual processes that most clubs have for new members, then that seems to be creating a rod for one's own back IMHO. If you do go down the DIY club route, you'll find that you'll also need to have systems in place to run your club properly, some of which at the moment you might not be aware of. Both of my clubs (one of which I have a hand in running) have quite straightforward processes for joining pretty much along the lines of those that you describe. Forms have to be filled in to enable the clubs to process membership and make people aware of data protection and privacy issues when it comes to retaining personal records as an example. You may well be asked to perform a check flight as a new member so I wouldn't be too put out by being asked to give a quick demo of how you operate. Not sure what you mean by 'tests' unless you mean the BMFA Achievement Scheme which is voluntary, although don't be surprised if clubs require the basic 'A' certificate for the type of model intended to be flown solo. Seems a perfectly reasonable requirement and both of my clubs do require it - has never been a problem and it gives everyone the confidence of knowing that those they're flying with are of a basic standard of ability and flying legally. Clubs do differ in character and what may suit one person will not be any good for another. As for fees...... the days of club memberships costing next to nothing are long gone and BMFA membership rates are steadily on the up as well. Including BMFA my clubs' annual rates are in the region of £150 each with a joining fee for new members. Clubs don't run on thin air and costs for rent and field maintenance etc can run into several thousands of pounds per year. Nothing unusual there as Tom Jones might have said! Good luck and I hope that you get something suitable sorted out.

I was seeking comments, nothing more, certainly not being negative or judgemental, and I thank those that have voiced an opinion. I think the discussion and points raised have been worthwhile. If nothing else it goes to show how the regs are in many instances open to interpretation and individual 'common sense' and as such are pretty much worthless in many instances.

Simply asking for comments on the regulation that states 'It is also a requirement to report any instances of flights which go beyond the visual line of sight of the remote pilot'. I'm not seeking to to be a kill joy or rule book waver - my god, far from it as my posts on the whole ludicrous regulatory environment that we inhabit now thanks to the CAA bears out. The issue is quite simple - I've asked in what I thought was best to be a humourous manner, whether anyone had comments on the models obviously going out of sight for maybe a second or so and therefore BVLOS which is not permitted and should be reported. Perhaps BVLOS is not so straightforward as it's name suggests or the regulation is badly written. Does one's view of a model have to be blocked by terrain or a solid object only? Does cloud or mist not count? What about if your glasses fall off and you can't see? Anyone can see that the models represent virtually zero risk to anyone because of where they are being flown in the middle of nowhere, and if I'd been there I'd have joined in and laughed along with them.

In addition to ACCIDENTS and SERIOUS INCIDENTS, it is a legal requirement to report any OCCURRENCES involving manned aircraft to the CAA. Our Article 16 Authorisation also adds the requirement to report to the CAA any SERIOUS INCIDENTS or other OCCURRENCES which involve; Operating above 400ft Operating less than 50m from uninvolved people Operations at a model flying display It is also a requirement to report any instances of flights which go beyond the visual line of sight of the remote pilot. Comments anyone re the last line above? Asking for a friend.

Wow! A 6 inch new Irwin Record Fitters Vice is six hundred quid. A quick bit of research suggests that they are no longer manufactured in Sheffield but abroad in the East. I'm sure they are excellent bits of kit for the money, but maybe overkill for simple hobby work. Wish I'd 'liberated' the old Record vice that we had in our workshop where I worked before the firm closed down. I reckon it wound up in the skip along with a lot of other good stuff.

Perhaps have another pilot give the model a whizz around and see what happens?