What is the max size plane one can fly without bits of paper?

[r6dan]

At some point I would like a big plane!! how big can i go without having to get bits of paper and all that rubbish for it?

[Lindsay Todd]

under 20kg I believe is the figure, worth checking the LMA site, loads of details there. Lots of experience as well if your tinking of going into bigger stuff. Also BMFA site will have guidlines of legal implications.

 

Linds

 

[r6dan]

It wont be till next summer untill I get one so should have a fair few hours more stick time!

[Tim Mackey]

Take a look here.

[Stefan Hafner]

As Lindsay said, its the weight that matters, not the size.  I've got a few larger planes, but they're all under 20 Kg so i don't need any extra paperwork for them, but you do need to take more care when flying them as tims link says, and you will need a good bit more space for flying.  Depending on the style of plane you may well need a longer take off run and landing approach too.

 

Also, everything over 7Kg is required to have a failsafe on the throttle at a very minimum, I always set to go to idle on signal loss, so if the signal returns you still ahve power.  If flying at displays it all become s a lot more complicated, but i'll be needing a lot more practice before i get to that stage

[Phil Claridge]

try a president t240 dan, its big enough but flies like a large trainer. with flaps it will cope with short runways. it will fly on a variety of engines from a 60 2st to a zenoah 38. copes well with high winds as well

[Erfolg]

Only this morning I was re-reading a RCM&E article by Andy Ellison on a jet he was constructing.

 

What impressed was the attention to the overall requirements of a large model, considering systems, that is the duty and requirements of each servo, how it related to the Rx etc. Considering the consequence of failure with respect individual system services and how this would or could be managed.

 

The article high lighted the responsibilities of flying large models, not just achieving the minimal legal requirements to be compliant.

 

It was very apparent that he could articulate views which I struggle to state clearly and simply. Equipment requirements are not good or bad, but dependant on role and duty.

Edited By Erfolg on 04/11/2010 09:55:19

[leccyflyer]

Posted by r6Dan on 03/11/2010 23:02:51:
It wont be till next summer untill I get one so should have a fair few hours more stick time!

 How much stick time do you currently have?

 

As the previous post states large models are not a project to be embarked upon lightly. The responsibilities of flying such models start to become somewhat larger than for an "average" club-sized model.

[Ultymate]

Top Gun if you fly at a club you should check out your clubs rules, a lot these days mine included require a BMFA "B" certificate to fly anything over 7K in weight indeed some clubs will not allow any models over 7K at all. As for the over 20K stuff unless you want to fly at shows and exhibitions it's hardly worth getting involved with all the red tape that goes with it ie inspections by the LMA during the build and requirement to complete I think 6 LMA observed flights for the pilot and model and a log has to be kept of each flight. I'm not rubbishing these requirements in fact I see them as a good thing, I'm just saying for most flyers it's a step too far JMHO 

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Timbo posted a good link earlier but it's worth pointing out the BIG difference when flying a model over 7 kg is that it is subject to far more rigorous Air Law requirements - both regarding operating/ technical requirements and pilot competence.

 

For example, it is ILLEGAL to fly a 7 kg model more than 400 feet above launch height ANYWHERE in the country (and this DOES apply to gliders) without the express permission of an Air Traffic Control unit and at any height in controlled airspace without permission.  How high is 400 feet?  Not very high at all, is the answer - especially with a large model which appears nearer the ground than a small one at the same height.

 

Another example is that there is a LEGAL responsibility to satisfy yourself that both the model and pilot are fit and competent to fly - so if there should be an unfortunate incident that comes to the attention of the CAA it could be that you have to defend your decision to fly, in a court of law.

 

While there is no specific requirement in law to hold a B certificate (or equivalent) there is a school of thought that possession of one goes a long way towards defending a charge of not being competent to operate a larger model so it's well worth considering getting one before you fly a 7 kg model - and you don't even need to be a BMFA member to get one (and there's no charge).

Edited By Martin Harris on 04/11/2010 11:40:02

[r6dan]

I will be doing both my A and B certs as soon as I feel I am ready,TBH I`m not really a believer of having bits of paper to say you can do something,the proof is in the pudding so to speak,but (and this is not aimed at anyone specifically) in the model plane world I have noticed there are a number of busy bodies and rule enforces who love to quote rules and regulations so I think before I get myself such an airplane I would be best to cross the t`s and dot the lower case j`s    

[leccyflyer]

Posted by r6Dan on 04/11/2010 11:49:06:
I will be doing both my A and B certs as soon as I feel I am ready,TBH I`m not really a believer of having bits of paper to say you can do something,the proof is in the pudding so to speak,but (and this is not aimed at anyone specifically) in the model plane world I have noticed there are a number of busy bodies and rule enforces who love to quote rules and regulations so I think before I get myself such an airplane I would be best to cross the t`s and dot the lower case j`s    

 

Those rules and regulations, as they refer to large models are the law of the land.

 

They are not "bits of paper and rubbish like that".

 

If you're not a believer in bits of paper to say you can do something then large models might not be the best sort of thing to get involved in.  As has been explained, in several of the above posts, there are legal requirements to operating models above a certain size.

 

There are, of course, also legal requirements for operating any size of model aircraft and all modellers should be aware of those. They are not particularly onerous, most of them are what folks might describe as "common sense", but they are there for the benefit of all and to safeguard our hobby.

 

They aren't  just "bits of paper and rubbish like that" either.

[Tim Mackey]

Well said leccyflyer .

[r6dan]

Did you not read the bits saying I will be doing both A and B test to conform with any rules or 

did you just skim over those to cause an argument ?

Point proven by the way.....

 

 

Edited By r6Dan on 04/11/2010 12:10:03

Edited By r6Dan on 04/11/2010 12:10:30

[Ultymate]

If you ask questions and get the answers maybe you didn't want to hear it's no good accusing people of being "busy bodies and rule enforcers"  suck it up it's the way it is.

[Tim Mackey]

Well I read the post yes Dan - I think all that leccyflyer is doing is pointing out that a large model ( and 7kg is large ) does require extra vigilance and attention in both build and flying skill. You are very inexperienced in both according to your profile and previous postings, so we are just re-inforcing the information you need to know. It must be said that making remarks about paperwork and all that rubbish comes across as a bit cavalier.

A lot of us dislike rules and regulations and tiresome paperwork abounds in many walks of life - its just the way it is and we have to accept it if we want to play in their gang so to speak

We dont allow arguments here Dan...so dont worry about that...we like to keep things friendly - even when offering "advice"

[Erfolg]

I both agree and totally disagree with Martin.

 

R6Dan needs to seriously consider the implications of flying a model and particular anything large, heavy and or fast.

 

We should not view everything purely from a regulative view point, particularly if they are seen as the boundary which you push right up to. There needs to be consideration of any consequence to what you are doing, even when well within any laws or regulations. Could your actions have unintended consequences, long or short term, even if seen from your own perspective as successful, will others see the situation the same.

 

With respect to bits of paper, I have little time for many, particularly if awarded on a box ticking basis. Are the BMFA certificates award such a basis, I do not know, yet reading some interpretation of the criteria, it can have that feel. I have no problem with proper certificates and qualifications. I am thinking last government, whose values became pervasive, where irrelevant pieces of paper, took precedence over the knowledge and skills of those acquired often in depth, breadth having substance by other routes. I am thinking where a Chemistry degree, is not superior, adequate or relevant  to the that of a gas fitters certificate with respect to gas concentrations in air etc.

[r6dan]

Posted by Erfolg on 04/11/2010 12:18:33:

I both agree and totally disagree with Martin.

 

R6Dan needs to seriously consider the implications of flying a model and particular anything large, heavy and or fast.

 

We should not view everything purely from a regulative view point, particularly if they are seen as the boundary which you push right up to. There needs to be consideration of any consequence to what you are doing, even when well within any laws or regulations. Could your actions have unintended consequences, long or short term, even if seen from your own perspective as successful, will others see the situation the same.

 

With respect to bits of paper, I have little time for many, particularly if awarded on a box ticking basis. Are the BMFA certificates award such a basis, I do not know, yet reading some interpretation of the criteria, it can have that feel. I have no problem with proper certificates and qualifications. I am thinking last government, whose values became pervasive, where irrelevant pieces of paper, took precedence over the knowledge and skills of those acquired often in depth, breadth having substance by other routes. I am thinking where a Chemistry degree, is not superior, adequate or relevant  to the that of a gas fitters certificate with respect to gas concentrations in air etc.

 You put it a lot better than I did,^^ thats kinda what I meant.

And yes Tim I don`t have much stick time,I just am really keen to learn and come accross a bit full on sometimes 

There are a few members of the club I fly at who are examiners and some of the most amazing pilots anyone could ever see and until they say "right Lad I think its time" I won`t be getting anything out of my league 

[leccyflyer]

Posted by r6Dan on 04/11/2010 12:07:51:

Did you not read the bits saying I will be doing both A and B test to conform with any rules or 

did you just skim over those to cause an argument ?

Point proven by the way.....

 

 

Edited By r6Dan on 04/11/2010 12:10:03

Edited By r6Dan on 04/11/2010 12:10:30

 Nope, I didn't skim over anything, I noted that you have not yet taken an "A" test as indicative of the relative level of experience that you currently have.

 

That, coupled with the remark that you made of getting in more stick time before embarking on obtaining the maximum size of model that you would be able to fly without " bits of paper and rubbish" like that, provides an indication of where you are up to in terms of the hobby.

 

Please don't take that the wrong way, but you cannot just blow away and ignore the legal requirements of moving up in model size. The consequences of doing so are potentially devastating.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Erfolg on 04/11/2010 12:18:33:

I both agree and totally disagree with Martin.

 

 You've got me there, Erfolg,

 

What bits do you disagree with?  I don't think I've ever claimed that possession of a B certificate would make anyone a better flyer but the point I was trying to make was that when someone is standing up in court and is asked how they judged themselves sufficiently skillful to fly a large model, instead of a vague reference to x years of undocumented experience, they could state that they have passed a nationally recognised test of competence.

 

The simple answer to the original question is simple - 20 kg-  but the rest of the answers and comments are aimed at giving an enthusiastic but apparently inexperienced pilot some good advice.  Dan, I hope you can accept these bits of advice in better spirit in the future than your response to leccy.

[Erfolg]

Martin

 

I think we probably agree that the BMFA certificate system is not the beginning and end of all. This morning I saw a neighbour pull out of a "T" junction in their car, into the path of another  car, driven by another neighbour on the road with priority, forcing the driver to an emergency stop. Both I presume have licences.

 

I do think testing should be about demonstrating control and being aware of general issues. Not knowing who can use 40Hrz etc. Nor is the landing pattern as stipulated in the BMFA handbook, in descending on which leg etc being followed. Yes there should be a structured approach, but dependant on local conditions and demonstrating you can achieve this. Not adhering to a landing pattern of a small full size aircraft , that is as relevant as the landing pattern of a A480 at Heathrow. In short, all approaches in a club should follow the same concept, not a separate one for a test.

 

Tests should be relevant, not box ticking, recognising that much of the BMFA handbook should be seen as recommendations. In many respects, in my opinion the s statutary regulations and law should be segregated from the BMFA recommended practices. Probably, it would be better to cross reference legal requirements to the BMFA recommendation, as an example, of how to achieving or demonstrate compliance, recognising that this will not necessarily be the only way.

 

I worked in a industry, where site licences were issued. Compliance was demonstrated by piles of paper, that had more than a whiff of bottom protection. Which smacks of I have "B" certificate my Laud. Rather than a critical examination of what you intend doing, what could be the consequences and how will you manage the issues. The latter for me is more important than a certificate and done effectively removes the need to pad your trousers for a court appearance.

 

I am not really adverse to certificates, but believe in true relevance.

 

Why I am looking at a certificate I earned in my youth and my ImechE certificate. Probably time to take then down now, as no longer relevant to my life. 

 

 

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

I agree with a lot of what you say Erfolg. The mere possession of a B cert proves only one thing that on the day you took the test you knew the BMFA handbook and you could fly the set moves reasonably cmpetantly and that your general flying around circuits etc that day didn't frighten the horses! And that's exactly all a driving test pass certificate shows as well - that on that day you knew your highway code, could do the various set piece moves and you general driving seemed competant to the examiner.

 

OK - so we agree and we've got that out of the way. Now, consider the scenario Martin puts forward. You're flying a 7+Kg model and sadly you have a serious mishap. Things get worse - it ends up in court. Some smart alec lawyer is out to make a reputation for himself by establishing that you were not competant to be flying that model. So he asks you "On what grounds did you make the decision that you were competant?"

 

Now you can try to answer this by saying "Ah well I've been doing this a long time"

 

And he'll come straight back with...

 

"Mmmm, have you received any formal instruction in flying model aeroplanes, do you have any formal qualifications as a model pilot?"

 

You answer "no" and, whether we like it or not, his job of makng you look like an bumbling incompetant amatuer in front of that court made up of the general public has just got an awful lot easier.

 

The A and B cert aren't perfect - a long way short - but maybe they are the best we can come up with. As you correctly imply Erfolg, good safe flying is a state of mind that you need to have everyday, not just for the exam. And it requires intelligent adaptation to the conditions. But having the tests is a at least something  - better than nothing. And it could well be your "life-line" in front of a courtroom full of the general public who have no time for, or knowledge of, the finer points of our hobby.

 

BEB

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother on 04/11/2010 18:25:26

Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother on 04/11/2010 18:26:16

[Marko]

 hi dan page 43 onwards BMFA handbook says it all in black n white

 

cheers .........................mark

ps  downloadable pdf file aswell !!!