JOHN MOSLEY 2

Just a point to note some people are members of more that one club. Sound to good for club numbers but poor for BMFA. Anyway the increase is a sensible amount and is still good value for money. Just check your car insurance etc to see how insurance us costing more due to the claims made. As modellers if you don't want to pay more be careful how and where you fly, don't fly over cars and road.

Two sessions to complete, they don't make it easy do they. Hope some computer reads it.   Edited By JOHN MOSLEY 2 on 23/08/2018 09:26:53 Edited By JOHN MOSLEY 2 on 23/08/2018 09:27:11

Where will the 2.4Ghz flight line be held? (on the fun fly line)

Posted by Martin Harris on 18/07/2018 11:31:50: Posted by Howard Winwood on 18/07/2018 08:59:14: how do you tell if you are flying above 400ft?, how do the authorities tell? who is going to police it? police do not have resources to tackle phone theft, burglaries or a lot of other crimes, policing drones (model aircraft) is not going to be a priority. remember, the authorities have to PROVE you were flying above 400ft. for most club flyers i doubt it will be a problem anyway. The law will not be concerned with how you tell how high you are flying - it will simply be an offence not to comply. Yes, routine monitoring is unlikely to happen but as others have pointed out, in the dreadful event that your model caused an accident with another aircraft, your insurance could be invalidated and you could be prosecuted for causing death or injury by gross negligence or some similar offence. This is all above and beyond the simple prosecution for breaking the terms of the ANO. Breaking the height limit accidentally at the top of a loop on the odd occasion is unlikely to be detected but should a complaint be raised, I'm sure it isn't beyond the wit of the authorities to measure by triangulation and/or electronic means during any investigation. It would be in every modeller's interest to make every effort to comply with the legislation and implying (intentionally or not) that pilots need not be too bothered about the consequences is, in my opinion, very bad advice to be stating in public. I agree but what has brought these new regulations in force, the law breakers flying mainly unregulated drones, not model aircraft. Its not the police who will be prosecuting law breakers but the CAA. The fall out from the unregulated drones is going to affect everybody drone flyers or model aircraft alike. As I pointed out in my post, slope flyers could be badly affected, by these new regulations. Edited By JOHN MOSLEY 2 on 18/07/2018 11:46:09 Edited By JOHN MOSLEY 2 on 18/07/2018 11:47:31

We all hope that the BMFA is successful in obtaining some form of exemption to the new 400ft rule. But if they don't then its just like all other laws , Seat belt,speeding, mobile phone while driving etc. Ignoring the law is fine until something happens, then the full weight of the law falls onto the offender. Using the term some clubs does not matter it is the pilot in charge who will be prosecuted. The BMFA insurance only covers you providing you are flying legally, so in this case if you are above 400ft with respect to the terrain shape the example drawing shows,then you are in court. Having seen the, I believe revised drawing slope flyers have a real problem. I fly slope on the modelling holidays and for sure once you launch from a cliff top then you are clearly above 400ft relative to the terrain. The sketch in fact shows blue at the right hand side which I believe is water. Edited By JOHN MOSLEY 2 on 18/07/2018 07:03:45

Yep power flyer wedge the throttle wide open and only use the rudder on take off, Mode 2 was good for Smokers who flew planks on the slope (2 Channel on used) Light a cig with the left hand.

I had a Hi Boy did not like it, but others in the club build rudder elevator versions only seemed to fly really well.   Edited By JOHN MOSLEY 2 on 27/06/2018 12:50:17

I use Spektrum telemetry with alarms for receiver voltage and electric flight battery. You soon find weak flight batteries. Think that receiver battery voltage should be mandatory like fail safe. Nimh receiver batteries on power models have been the demise of many models.   Edited By JOHN MOSLEY 2 on 10/06/2018 06:45:29

Looks badly scored bore, interested in what the piston look like. Edited By JOHN MOSLEY 2 on 07/06/2018 18:08:29

That's a good answer and being law abiding I guess we all need an altimeter feed back built into all receivers.

Remember the pilot in charge is held legally responsible. Blaming committee or the guy who took you achievement scheme test, is like blaming the guy who took your driving test with. It only say that on that day you flew and answered the questions correctly. What happens after that is it to the person in charge of the vehicle or aircraft.