MattyB

The world record is still held by Mr Lisenby with his OD Transonic: https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?4298751-New-DS-record-564mph-(907km-hr)#:~:text=Discussion New DS record ...,907km%2Fhr) - RC Groups

Sorry but that isn’t correct, it’s not a world record as per the video description: Steve Welsh joins the 500 MPH club and becomes the 4th fastest in the world. Congratulations Steve! You earned it.

Gorilla polyurethane is the best I’ve ever found but everything tends to pull out eventually especially if you use a Magnet on both sides as I have always done! But I can say confidently that cyano and epoxy are definitely poor as I think they are too inflexible so don’t flex a bit as you pull the two halves apart.

Tbh I can probably build it down to that and even if I couldn’t the chances of a law enforcement officer wandering by at the exact moment my GEV flips up for an unscheduled “flight” is essentially zero given our remote location so I think I will be ok! Whatever weight it comes out at. In fact being heavier I’d supposed to make it more stable in ground effect so building down to a super light weight is probably counter-productive from a stability and safety perspective.

Suffice to say I have no plans to do so, as I let my OpID lapse when it became solo flying was off the menu for a long time.

An excellent and fair post that I fully agree with, but the point Iwas really that flyingFlynn's assertion that "The whole subject of identification and regulation of model fliers is because of a specific problem caused by people flying models in a dangerous manner or endangering full size aircraft, operations at airports (a clear inference to Gatwick) or causing a nuisance at some private site". is not correct as that was far from the sole factor. But tbh this thread is mainly serving the purppose of reminding me that my enforced move into RC yachting and ground effect vehicles (GEVs) is refreshingly free of governmental red tape, and long may that be the case, but the obvious quiz question is that if I build a GEV that "flies at an altitude of 1" or less, Do I have to register as an operator if it's over 250g?!! 🤣

Just put it on your Google Drive in an openly shared folder then post or send him a link: Guidance on how to do this... https://support.google.com/a/users/answer/9310248?hl=en

@FlyinFlynn, here was your original demonstrably incorrect post as proven by the BMFA video I posted - if I am making things up I suggest you inform the BMFA they are in the wrong, and present your evidence that this was all caused by the advent of fpv.

Did you watch Gone Fishing with Paul and Bob and Bert re-enthused? I know I note really fancy fishing as a result and a colleague is going to take me fly fishing on a lake soon in a boat adapted for wheelchair users (not that I regularly use my chair any more, I was just worried T falling off a bench seat when sitting on it for hours oi am really looking forward to this and hoping having a taster should open up a new relaxing hobby I can do given my current physical limitations.

You mean instead of posting un-evidenced opinions ss absolute facts?!! Yes agreed, unfortunately I have seen this blaming of camera multi otors and fpv For the increase in regs by countless line of site only modellers of lengthy experience who have never tried either and therefore don’t see their appeal therefore blaming these parties is far easier and quicker than reading up or watching the bmfa video on why it actually happened, and gives them the satisfying feeling that there isa clear perpetrator to blame that isn’t them or any of the other LOS pilots in the country!

Yes, totally correct, see my post above where Cliff Whittaker confirms exactly this on a 2021 BMFA webcast.

No, the text in red is very much incorrect, and we have been over this so many times on this forum, but this myth contnues to be spread by grumpy modellers who haven't read or understood the challenge hereand the BMFA did an excellent webcast on this that explained it very well, I will post a link in a moment... See Cliff Whitakers section at around 57:30 in this video - where he explains exactly why the new regulations occurred, it was all about integrating BVLOS military and commercial drones safely into the airspace, and nothing to do with incidents such as the Gatwick " Drone" sighting where personally I suspect no recreational drone or other sUAS was ever there.

Though I am sure over time we will also see RXs with built in RID emerge from the manufacturers too.

Once Uk compliant RID units become available they should work with any Rc system s they are totally independent of the Rc control system all they will need is a power supply..

Sorry I am not sure how I ended up tagging you I only meant to tag erfolg as he raised his confusion about the rationale for rid etc! And I do agree after all this time it should be very clear why they want to do things like this it’s all about integrating military and commercial BVLOS drones into the lower airspace where we fly and i has been seen as a necessary control to achieve that for >10 years. Throughout the world whether we agree or not!

Agreed Steve. @Erfolgand @leccyflyer you may want to read the outcomes of Riga here - which I and Steve have posted many times see here for an example from 2022 during previous debates on this topic during and prior to the many regulation consultations: https://eu2015.lv/images/news/2016_03_06_RPAS_Riga_Declaration.pdf

There is no way the authorities would ever allow such a loophole to be exploited, nor is the the BMFA likely to affiliate such a club IMO.

Agreed it does sound unlikely doesn't it - I remember suggesting creating something like this ages ago to "own" and make official slope soaring sites nationally, at a point when it looked like new regs might have meant flying could only occur in specifically allowed locations "owned by a BMFA club".

As per my question of an hour ago, What objective is that - I can't see that stated anywhere in this thread.

Can someone clarify the specific purpose of this initiative? What would be the benefits of creating and being a member of such a club?Is this about reducing the impact of some current or proposed regulations such as remote ID on country BMFA members? TBH I am really enjoying the lack of governmental red tape associated with rc boating, all you really have to consider are any local restrictions associated with the venue you are sailing at.

Ooh what is that emerging from my friends 3d printer?! Don’t tell the wife as I already have two otherboats in the build queue!

Nah an airboat will be far more fun to helm and faster when the rescue arms are not fitted for and with the fpv camera on board I am going to put a “Gentle Ben figure on the foredeck for foreground interest!🤣

Agree with everything Nigel posted - I have seen the BMFA’s recommendation to keep phones away from TXs and back in the car but personally I think that to be far more dangerous than in my pocket wherei can use it should there be a medical emergency! Let’s face it the world is full of phones these days and planes are not falling from the sky en mass! Certainly someone slicing their hands open on a pro must be a whole lot more likely than a mobile phone interfering with a spread spectrum radio system!

So S many of you know I am essentially on an enforced sabbatical from flying this year as the sensation and dexterity in my left hand is still not good enough for me to fly safely unless I am on the buddy box so I have taken up Rc boating instead primarily sailing where there is a refreshing lack of governmental red tape. However I have not completely given up on flying - in the winter my friend in the village who is a3 D printing expert is going to print off a slightly smaller version of one of these, a foiling trimaran printed in lightweight pla: