Slopetrashuk

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 06/12/2014 20:23:36: So, just for clarity Andy, would it your opinion that the ACE's should be able to successfully demonstrate, ie to pass standard, all of the C-tests as well then? BEB Thought I'd clarified that way back on page one post one. .....up to the point where the tests become specialised (the C certificates), or the disciplines are new(Indoor and Multirotors)...... My reason for this is that the C certificates are seldom used (only 17 Aerobatic C's nationally since their inception) and the Jet and Scale C's do require specialised models to fly them. It would not for instance be practical for an Area Chief Examiner to own a Jet model just in case he gets asked to demo a C cert. (though I did). The massive majority of flying tests undertaken are A and B. This is also the same for Area Chief Examiners who will likely do more B certs tests than Examiner tests in their tenure. I am building a schedule for a Slope C cert for instance which may be tested by a silent flight chief examiner who may only fly flat field gliders. There comes a point where pilot ability exceeds that of the Area Chiefs and I believe beyond the B cert should be it. Otherwise it follows logically that our ACE's would be world champions in their chosen area. Not very practical.... New tests such as the brand new multirotor certs and the Indoor certs still to be properly rolled out, do require some support from the key skills examiners to gain a foothold,though i cant imagine them being very popular compared to the Fixed Winged tests. I may be wrong, but at some point when the tests have been around for a while, it may be that we have multirotor chief examiners instead of the tests falling under the Helicopter key skill area as it does now. Andy Edited By Slopetrashuk on 06/12/2014 20:54:15

Hi guys. lots for me to get through here. Been out flying all day with no phone signal. Just a few points for clarity. Both the Area and the National scheme controllers have been consulted and are informed and are watching the debate with interest. I have also had some update from the national controller on the current thinking of the BMFA Achievement Scheme Review Committee. A committee I used to sit on and occassionally chaired. My reasons for posting both here and on FaceBook are not to air dirty laundry but to use the social media to promote a good debate to help me to formulate any proposals I may wish to make through the correct methods using the established BMFA Area system. I understand that there is currently no written requirement for an area chief examiner to be able to demonstrate the tests if required. In my OPINION this is wrong. The bulk of my work over 18 years as an Area Chief Examiner involved demonstration flights. The role is not just one of turn up and conduct a test. I believe this falls under Promote and Maintain the standards of the scheme. Thanks for all the interest.   Andy Edited By Slopetrashuk on 06/12/2014 20:19:03

Just to counter BEB with a little more info. It is a fundamental requirement that the Area Chief Examiners promote the schemes in their area. This is not the role of the area chief instructor. This more often than not, means visiting clubs, lecturing on how to fly the tests and demonstrating on that clubs fields. I did far more of this than conducting examiner tests over my 18 years in the role. Even holding lectures on these topics well off my patch as other clubs local area chief examiners were unable to do so authoritatively. Andy

Some good debate here for both side of the arguments. So I would like to thank you all for that. Just some other questions. 1. Do you think Area Chief Examiners should also be Area Chief instructors or should the two now be divided? 2. Do you think a pre-requisite to reratification of an area chief examiner should be that they have played a key role in the club examiner workshop programme. i.e. flying the demonstration flights or engagement at a similar level. 3. Do you think a rolling 5 year reassessment of an area chief examiner is desireable at whatever level this is deemed to be necessary. 4. Do you think an amnesty should be employed before any retesting takes place or is the opportunity to step aside annually is enough. Thanks Andy

To go back to my original post and the foundations on which the whole of the BMFA training and achievement scheme is built. Demonstration, imitation, recapitulation. Printed right there in the up and away book, aimed at pilots striving to achieve A cert standard. In order to be a club examiner any candidate must also be a B cert holder and have the backing of his club. He will be tested by an area chief examiner. In order to be an area chief examiner (nowadays) the candidate must already have flown an A, flown a B and flown an assesment flight for an area chief examiner. Why then is it OK to have area chief examiners - right at the top of the tree- who themselves for reasons many and various, are no longer able to fly to that standard and demonstrate to candidates of any level, what is required? To clear up my point. I think that you should not hold the position on area chief examiner in a key discipline that you cannot fly to a B cert level. i.e. Silent Flight, Fixed Wing Power or Helicopters. AndyEdited By Slopetrashuk on 05/12/2014 12:54:35

Again, my references to the age of the chief examiners is factual, not a reason for their non-reratifiaction. However, two of those remaining have cited health as a reason they are no longer able to fly to passable B standard in some of the classes they can examine. Again, fact. One no longer flies helicopters and has not done so for many years, yet is a helicopter chief examiner. One cited that he was recently unable to demonstrate the fixed winged certs to a passable standard as he no longer flew fixed wing and had not done so for two years. I respect the result of the ballot and am not seeking re-election, however it perturbs me that all of the remaining chief examiners in the north west area, for one reason or another, cannot demonstrate the tests they can conduct to a passable B cert level. The two that could are no longer area chief examiners. Erfolg, would you support proposals bringing conditions to the re-ratification of area chief examiners which considered their flying ability? Andy Andy

Oh wow! That blurred the issues. Im not so sure myself now. Let me assure you that there is no connection of that sort here. I have carried a torch for the achievement schemes and examiner standards for many years now. Under hypnosis im sure i would only regress to being unhappy having to fly the demos while the other chiefs watched being unable to. Can I ask you, would you support proposals regarding rolling assesments of area chiefs if they were brought? Andy   Edited By Pete B - Moderator on 05/12/2014 09:23:51

Hi John. Conducting examinations is only one of the roles of the Area Chief Examiner. They are also required to promote the achievement schemes in their area. This involves club lectures, demonstrations, assistance where required and if needed intervening in issues regarding examiners testing to a low standard. This requires some ability on their part. At club examiner level the scheme controller issued a letter with last years BMFA affilliation packs for the guidance of clubs in the reratification of their own examiners. This is the text of that letter. Dear Club Secretary, This letter has been included in your annual BMFA re-affiliation pack, to hopefully provide some useful guidance to you and your committee when completing the form to re-ratify your Club Examiners. As you are aware, your Club Examiners were nominated by you, and once appointed, are subject to re-ratification on an annual basis. It’s important that the committee considers each examiner individually and assess their suitability for re-ratification for the coming year. Their re-appointment shouldn’t be automatic; the names of those ratified last year have been included on the form simply to assist the office and should not be taken as any indication of continued suitability. Please delete any that are no longer appropriate and print carefully the details of any additions or corrections. Your decision to re-ratify an examiner should be based on their activities and behaviour throughout the year. It’s surprising how often I’m consulted about poor examiners, but it is important to appreciate that it is you, the Club, that has the power to choose to re-appoint them or not. Here are a few examples of things you might like to consider when you are assessing their suitability; have they been active in testing members (although I accept this is not necessarily a good measure if demand is low!) have they been promoting and encouraging participation in the scheme (at the field and or at club nights), have they been keeping current with developments in the various tests, and have they helped resolve any problems or disputes, have they engaged with examiners at other clubs, have they been setting a good example to your members ? It would be unreasonable to expect them to have done all these things, but at the end of the day there do need to be positive indicators of activity and engagement. Club examiner log books are available from the office and are an excellent means of recording activities. You should not hesitate to remove from the list any individual who has behaved badly and or has set a poor example during the preceding year. Also, I’m aware of clubs where the examiners and instructors get together a few times during the year to review their activities, as well as perhaps training, safety and any associated documentation, all of which provides useful feedback to their committees to aid them in their decision making. I can’t stress enough how important it is for all examiners to keep current. To help with this, all of the achievement scheme documents are now published and circulated via the BMFA web site. The new web site features an ASRC ‘news feed’, which will automatically send any updates and achievement scheme news, such as details of examiner workshops for example, direct to examiners who have subscribed. You should encourage all of your examiners to subscribe to this news feed, which is free. I mention examiner workshops because they are an excellent mechanism to promote consistency within the scheme and help keep examiners current. They are not a new concept, but there is now a national drive for BMFA Areas, via their Area Co-ordinators, to organise at least one in their area on an annual basis. You should encourage your examiners to attend at least one workshop every few years, preferably more frequently and there is no barrier to them attending workshops organised by other Areas, if that’s more convenient. Finally, during your deliberations, it’s worth considering if you have the right number of examiners to meet your needs. There is guidance on this in the handbook, but these are only guidelines and the important thing is that you have sufficient active examiners to support the scheme in your club. There is great value in having examiners present at the field on a regular basis. Not only will their presence promote the achievement scheme, but also good practice as well, both of which are beneficial to us all, and the hobby as a whole. I hope this letter has proved useful, but if you do have any questions and or if you are having any difficulties with which you think I may be able to help, please do not hesitate to get in touch. All of my contact details are available from the BMFA web site. Many thanks and best regards, Duncan R McClure RC PAS Controller You will notice that it does not mention flying. At club level it is common for the examiner to have been an instructor and as such has demonstrated his requirements to the novices so that they can imitate his lead. At area chief examiner level i believe there is also a requirement for the candidate to assess the suitablility of the examiner in order to give some credibility to his example. Demonstrating his flying ability if it is not already appreciated, can underpin this. Andy

Posted by Pete B - Moderator on 04/12/2014 23:03:52: Posted by Erfolg on 04/12/2014 22:23:45: I am not sure if is trying to wind me and others up, although not 70, I wince at the apparent ageism exhibited. Where are the moderators? Out buying more popcorn, Erf..... I think the issue is rather more about ability than age, from what I've read. I'd just like to know whether a secret ballot is a long-standing method of selecting Area Chief Examiners? If so, then so be it - accept it or campaign for change. If it's a new procedure, one has to ask why it has been implemented on this occasion? Pete Pete, there has never before been a secret ballott in the north west area to re-ratify the area chief examiners. I was area secretary for a while and have sat through many many AGM's. It smacked me as being a bit contrived and premeditated. I am happy that the vote was democratic and conducted correctly but would like to know why it was done differently this time. I did ask the chairman who came with prepared ballott papers. His response was that this is how the other areas do it. I subsequently asked a number of other areas who denied this and voted their chief examiners in en bloc as the NW area had always done. I was not at the meeting, nor was Richard. The Area scheme controller asked for reasons behind the vote but says nobody would tell him. I spoke to the chairman but have still received no explanation. The National scheme controller is now involved but I am not seeking re-election. My reasons for posting is to assess opinion around my suggested proposals. Andy

No issues with the democracy. I intend to use it to put forward proposals for change. Please show me an example of ageism in my posts that is not a statement of fact? If the rules for gymnastic judging were built on the principal that the judge had to demonstrate, the gymnast imitate and the judge recapitulate would you agree that it was a fundamental requirement that the judge be able to show what is required? Editorial comment I will leave to the editors. Andy

Posted by Erfolg on 04/12/2014 21:19:51: I just wonder how many Olympic judges can actually undertake the Gymnastic, diving, Ice Skating, ski Jumping and so forth events? Strangely they all seem to know what is required! ....But can they demonstrate it? One of my 'projects' when in the position was to take a club with no qualifications at all through lectures at club nights on the schemes, demonstrations of A certs on the field then A tests a few weeks later, then B cert demo's on the field and further club nights going over the requirements, then B tests on the field, then after 6 months returning to assess B cert holders for examiners and conduct tests for approved instructors (where I played the part of the beginner while they taught me). The club is now self sufficient, but I did an inordinate amount of demo flying to get them there. This earned me a level of respect that I knew what I was talking about and showed them what they had to strive to achieve. Anyone reading the BMFA handbook can ascertain what is required. my OPINION is that Area Chief Examiners should also be able to demonstrate it. Andy

Ahh you broke the commandment "thou shalt not be critical of the BMFA in any way shape or form" then....... Lol. Yes John. Dont have to be quite so careful now though do I. Apologies to David for the asterix's. Forgot they weren't allowed here lol. I dont breeze by often....... Good job I didnt put what he really said!

Hi John. I (we) have been given no reason behind the voting result. There was no debate and no opportunity for us to give our opinion. Just a very apologetic letter from the area scheme controller who did not agree with the decision but had no real option but to enforce it. Andy

Posted by Chris van Schoor on 04/12/2014 18:14:28: Posted by john stones 1 on 04/12/2014 17:23:19: I have no idea what/why the reference to your rcme column means Andy ? it's muddied the water for me, is it possible to expand ? John It seems clear to me from the OP that Andy is a muddied as you are (he refers to "hints" only), so I wonder how he's expected to expand?   Chris Hi lads. A reference was made to my last slope column where I objected to the attitude shown by a volunteer free flight marshall at the Nats towards my son. My point was that not every BMFA volunteer is a good volunteer especially if they have a tendency to use bad language to children within earshot of their fathers.   Andy Edited By David Ashby - RCME on 04/12/2014 19:26:39

Posted by Ultymate on 04/12/2014 17:57:21: Hi Andy, To a degree I see where you're coming from about examiners being able to demonstrate said test but I'd like to take you to task on a couple of points. I know you've been a long standing "servant" of the BMFA and you richly deserve commendation for that, but once you've jumped ship and are swimming you sure as hell aren't going to have any say in how said ship is run.I know like most of our fellow modellers that it's frustrating as hell sometimes dealing with the admin of our hobby but at the end of the day it's run very much on a volunteer ad hoc basis so if the right people don't step up to the plate what's the alternative ? Finally being fast approaching seventy myself I dislike the hint of ageism that creeps into said debate, sad to tar everyone with the same brush. Cheers and enjoy your retirement I'm loving mine Brian Hi Brian (missed you on your patch the other day btw). Not sure what you mean by 'jumped ship'. I am still a fee paying BMFA member, Club delegate and club examiner for fixed wing and silent flight. How is it I now can't have a say in 'how the ship is run?' I have in club candidates for examiner positions and BMFA C certs and no local area chief examiner capable of demonstrating the requirements. While I appreciate the requirement is not in the 'rules' and that the guys still in position could (perhaps) have at one time done so, there has been some degradation with age. One no longer flying at all, two in poor health which has affected their flying and travelling, one newly appointed who told me he had not flown fixed wing for two years. It is a fact that they are of an age, not an issue, which you seemed to infer. New candidates are not coming forwards because there are no vancancies. This is another point I plan to address.   Andy Edited By Slopetrashuk on 04/12/2014 18:34:16 Edited By Slopetrashuk on 04/12/2014 18:35:35

So….. I got a very nice letter from the NW Area of the BMFA telling me that fellow chief examiner Richard Budd and I had not been re-ratified as area chief examiners in the secret ballot. No reason given, and none able to be given in the ensuing telephone calls other than a hint that my RCM&E column might be contributory – but nothing solid.   I'm not really too bothered. I am however a firm believer in an area chief examiner being able to demonstrate the tests he is taking, as I believe was Richard. Over recent times I had expressed this to anyone who would listen, including the other area chief examiners. When I recently discovered that the area had earlier made up another gent who had admitted to me that he could not fly the tests, I nearly resigned, but was persuaded not to by other clubs on my patch who preferred their tests to be undertaken by me. You should perhaps be aware that Richard and I were also the two area chief examiners who undertook to fly the A&B demo’s at our area examiners seminar and also the two youngest area chief examiners in the North West. So, in the first instance my apologies to all the clubs that asked me to stay on, and a final congratulations to all the people I have worked with and tested over my 18 year stint. I trust that they know that if they passed the tests, they properly earned them. Frustrating I know when you can see so many being scattered around at lower standards, but that’s for you guys to fix in your own clubs. So going forwards, the gloves are off. Now I am no longer a BMFA Area Official I perhaps don’t have to be quite so guarded. So…. Here we go. I’m taking a stand against other Area Chief Examiners who I consider are not capable of demonstrating the tests which they are testing up to the point where the tests become specialised (the C certificates), or the disciplines are new(Indoor and Multirotors). My reasoning goes a little like this:. I know you do not have to be a murderer to judge a murder trial, but the founding principles of the whole BMFA achievement scheme and the UP and Away document that outlines its current approved training scheme, are Demonstration, Imitation, Recapitulation. i.e. the instructor demonstrates, the pupil imitates, the instructor recaps until the beginner flies the manoeuvre correctly. It stands to reason then that up to a point (where the models diversify to specialist levels such as aerobatics, jets, scale C certificates) the examiners must be able to demonstrate to candidates or trainees, exactly what it is they require to see. This is not a competition with subjective judges, this is a model flying test. Your driving examiner could I assume, drive when he passed your car test? A good deal of the nationwide Chief Examiners are still first generation volunteers selected from people who stepped forwards when the scheme began. Most of these are now in their 70's or knocking on the door of it and many no longer actively fly. Those that do, often have a significantly lower standard of flying than when they took on the role. That’s just how it is. My opinion, and it is only that, is that if the Chief Examiner cannot Demonstrate and Recapitulate the A&B certificates he is authorised to test, then he should not be testing them. There are younger, more active and more current model pilots who are willing to pick up and run the scheme, if the original examiners stepped aside. It is my intent to lobby the BMFA through the proper democratic channels, to insist on regular reassessments of its standing Area Chief Examiners. Make their full participation at the Area Examiner Seminars compulsory (i.e. demonstrate the tests) and make a requirement of their re-ratification the ability to demonstrate the tests as required when asked. It has been put to me that the requirement to demonstrate is one for an Instructor rather than an examiner. If you were not aware, all Area Chief Examiners also hold the post of Area Chief Instructor. In this instance a demonstrable flying ability is a must. What do you think? Would you support such proposals? Do you think we are due an explanation?   Over to you.... Andy Ellison Edited By Slopetrashuk on 04/12/2014 16:09:08 Edited By David Ashby - RCME on 04/12/2014 18:59:04

Hi Steve. The designer of the Aresti Jim Hammond also designed most of the RCRCM catalouge before they parted company on bad grounds. As a new design from a new manufacturer it is fair to point out that the Aresti does not currently have any stable mates but I share your concerns over the perceived weakness of the boom. Andy Ellison

Gents, at the last do of the year Reg was quite animated about some rule changes. he was talking about no tuned pipes, slots for 3D and a whole host of other stuff. Any developments that we need to know to avoid disappointment on the day? Andy

Some of our novice fliers have been having great results with the E-Flite Apprentice. The safe technology and 'panic' button has its benefits but be careful of it becomming a crutch. The model is not eligible to be used for the BMFA A certificate with this technology operable. If you prefer something a little more traditional, the Seagull E-Pioneer is a good steady trainer but involves some minimal building. Andy Ellison

David. Andy Ellison's gliding column is exemplary once again this month. Why oh why oh why do you keep putting full page advertisements in the middle of it. Surely he should remain uninterrupted.

Robert. There are no arrangements at the areas you are looking at. The NT want everybody to enjoy their sites responsibly. Gliders only though remember. Not even electric assist on calm days. Andy

You may have been reading in this issue about my clubs Dawn Till Dusk fundraising event. I am sad to sad that our friend Colin has succumbed to his Cancer and died on Wednesday night with his family by his side. Colin is the third aeromodelling friend I have lost to this disease in the last year alone. The proceeds from the article in the magazine will be donated to the clubs Cancer Research Just Giving account. I hope you enjoyed my story. Andy Ellison

Try here: http://www.highpeakmac.org.uk/ or here: http://www.dpmac.co.uk/ Andy

Hi Robert. Yes the current info is very vague. Neither organisations website is up to much. There are two types of agreement that the NT use. One is for BMFA Affiliated Clubs the other is for non affiliated clubs. There is no agreement for individual fliers. By and large the NT want everybody to use their sites and enjoy themselves when doing so. Some of their sites however have a controlling club - often formed at the request of the NT because local enforcement is deemed to be required. Ivingho for example sees a lot of public access, the Mynd has specific area that cant be used at certain times of year. There are no agreements I know of on the derbyshire hills though the paragliders may beg to differ. A conglomeration of clubs such as Leek, Oldham, Sheffield etc held meetings many years ago with the NT but the agreements were never followed up and are all 'unofficial'. Where exactly are you headed? And which sites do you intend to fly? Andy

Ian, these are generally the NT sites were an agreement in in place. The comments refer to the local agreements. Take the Mynd for instance where the Long Mynd Soaring Association have an agreement with the NT but have 'seasonal restrictions' because of ground nesting birds. Andy