No model Flying in the Cardiff area 3-5 Sep 14

[Dizz]

As is says in the thread title.......please see link for more information:

**LINK**

Pete

[Chris Bott - Moderator]

Wow that is something we've never seen before!

How on earth will they communicate that to all operators of toy planes? and how will they police it?

[Dizz]

Didn't we did have something very similar during the Olympics?

I guess that it will be publicised in the local media: not enough notice for the modelling press I suspect. They have made a start by feeding it to the BMFA and the info hasbeen published on the web site. Not sure what else can be done.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Well, MI5, Special Branch and the police will be able to relax now that any terrorist has been banned from flying his anthrax/semtex/old isotopes laden autonomous quad in the area.

This seems to be the thin edge of a very dangerous wedge to me - how is any additional danger posed by someone flying a conventional model from an established site? I hope the BMFA are doing a lot more behind the scenes than simply publishing advice of the restriction...

P.S. After reading the NATS circular, there might be a possibility for any clubs affected - an application for exemption can be made to the local Chief Constable - perhaps a reasoned approach might bear fruit?

Edited By Martin Harris on 14/08/2014 13:28:08

[The Wright Stuff]

Posted by Dizz on 14/08/2014 12:49:09:

Didn't we did have something very similar during the Olympics?

Yes. Did you see 'James May's Toy Stories' about the R/C glider, which was being filmed at the same time? The original intention was to fly it across the English Channel. The comment broadcast in the show was something witty along the lines of: "unfortunately, we're not allowed to fly it across the channel, because someone is holding a running and jumping competition in Stratford...." Priceless! They flew it to Lundy in the end!

Edited By The Wright Stuff on 14/08/2014 14:13:36

[Olly P]

The establishment of NFZ's are common over this sort of event, and for good reason.

The enforcement will be difficult but, anyone who flies in a 'threat profile' can expect to have a response.

This restriction is in line with the ANO requirements of flying of all descriptions and therefore legally binding - a shame for those affected but understandable given the nature of a NATO summit.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

While I'm sure a terrorist flying a full size plane would be less likely to succeed with a no fly zone, and having a decent radar and visual profile plus either having to fly from further afield or take off from an existing airfield within the zone, the terrorist using a model could launch from anywhere with little chance of being observed - or reported.

Banning all model flying seems pointless and overkill - I haven't met a terrorist yet that faithfully abides by all laws and rules (not that I have knowingly met any at all!).

[Olly P]

Martin - this is not the point.

The idea is to clear the 'air picture' this means that any assets conducting surveillance will know what aurthorised air traffic there is in the area and can ID it, and therefore anything 'other' is suspect and worthy of investigation.

I can't say much more but this is only done for good reason becasue it does actually cost a lot of money to do.

If you wish to discuss more please PM me.

Olly

[Dai Fledermaus]

As I understand it all schools within a 40 miles radius of the Celtic Manor will be opening late and closing early, although those in Newport itself will be unaffected. The police will organise rolling road blocks along the M4. Only commercial flights will be allowed in and out of Cardiff Wales Airport during the summit.

Gaer Park and Cardiff MAC will probably be affected, there is also another club in Barry and another in Llandow close the Airport  and RAF St Athan which will suffer the same rescritions

All police leave will be cancelled and there is so much security fencing around the place, the guy who got the contract for that will be able to retire

Edited By Colin Ashman on 14/08/2014 15:15:54

[Shaunie]

Although it sounds draconian I can see the sense in it for two major reasons.

1. As Olly says the air picture will be clear and they can assume that any small object picked up on the increased radar coverage could be a possible threat without having to look at a list of flying sites/times.

2. Any fast jets can use the area if necessary and are unlikely to end up with FOD due to a Foamy Wot 4 or similar.

What annoys me is its only a load of Politicians we are protecting, who needs them anyway? More trouble than they are worth as far as I'm concerned

[Mowerman]

There were similar restrictions along the route of the Tour de France due to lots of media helicopters following the race.

[Stevem3akm]

Yet more millions wasted,why can't they have their little bash at NATO HQ? Or is that to simple and cheap. Time to go back under the rock again. Steve

[Steve Houghton 1]

Well that affects me but then again it doesn't as I'll be in work anyway. It's a good job the summit isn't being held over the weekend as I would be very annoyed

Steve

A470soaring.blogspot.co.uk

[Depron Daz]

Posted by Olly P on 14/08/2014 14:28:52:

I can't say much more but this is only done for good reason becasue it does actually cost a lot of money to do.

If you wish to discuss more please PM me.

Olly

I sincerely hope that you are not breaching the Official Secrets Act, Olly?

[cymaz]

N.A.T.O

No Aircraft Til Over

[John Privett]

Posted by Dizz on 14/08/2014 12:49:09:

Didn't we did have something very similar during the Olympics?

Yes, and no. The restriction for the Olympics differed in two rather important aspects.

Firstly it only applied to models over 7kg - this one applies to everything. Probably even to a paper dart...

Secondly it covers a significantly larger area. This covers an area consisting of two overlapping circles, each of 20 nautical miles (~37km) radius - ie. about 70km at the narrowest, 90+km at the widest. The Olympic zone was an odd shape, but roughly 70km across at the widest point, and 30km across at its narrowest.

[John Privett]

Posted by Martin Harris on 14/08/2014 13:14:42:

This seems to be the thin edge of a very dangerous wedge to me - how is any additional danger posed by someone flying a conventional model from an established site? I hope the BMFA are doing a lot more behind the scenes than simply publishing advice of the restriction...

My concern too, Martin! What if somebody takes the view that our precious politicians in Westminster, or the royals, warrant the same measures?

A 20nm circle around Westminster wipes out a huge area including around 60 clubs/sites that the BMFA has on their club map. The area reaches almost down to Gatwick in the south, beyond Sevenoaks in the south-east, past Grays in the east, Harlow in the north-east (beyond North weald), to Welwyn Garden City in the north, Slough in the west and to the outskirts of Guildford in the south-west.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

While I can understand Ollie's explanation, a clear air picture could include known model flying sites as the flight pattern shouldn't involve traffic straying more than a few hundred yards from them. What I'm objecting to is the principle of a blanket ban on a legitimate activity.

I wonder how widely the message will get to lone flyers and casual park flyers who are the people most likely to generate unknown traffic? 

I can accept that the CAA has every right to restrict flying of > 7kg models in controlled airspace at any time it sees fit - and they should not be being flown above 400 feet above launch height anywhere else anyway - but normally smaller models are exempt from any legislation except actually endangering aircraft or persons.

Correct me if I'm wildly wrong but I'm only aware of the Olympic ban on > 7kg models in the past - now just 2 years later, another (more stringent) ban has been imposed. The more these restrictions are allowed to go unchallenged, the more likely that more of them will be found to be "necessary" in the future - the wedge may get thicker very quickly...

Now a controversial suggestion...

Has the increased availability of UAV style Multicopters and FPV flying raised the threat profile of model flying?  Perhaps mainstream model flying should look at distancing ourselves from these activities if this is the case?

Edited By Pete B - Moderator on 15/08/2014 08:39:56

[leccyflyer]

Posted by Martin Harris on 15/08/2014 00:52:44:

While I can understand Ollie's explanation, a clear air picture could include known model flying sites as the flight pattern shouldn't involve traffic straying more than a few hundred yards from them. What I'm objecting to is the principle of a blanket ban on a legitimate activity.

I wonder how widely the message will get to lone flyers and casual park flyers who are the people most likely to generate unknown traffic?

I can accept that the CAA has every right to restrict flying of > 7kg models over 400 feet in controlled airspace at any time it sees fit - and they should not be being flown above that height anywhere else anyway but normally smaller models are exempt from any legislation except actually endangering aircraft or persons.

Correct me if I'm wildly wrong but I'm only aware of the Olympic ban on > 7kg models in the past - now just 2 years later, another (more stringent) ban has been imposed. The more these restrictions are allowed to go unchallenged, the more likely that more of them will be found to be "necessary" in the future - the wedge may get thicker very quickly...

Now a controversial suggestion...

Has the increased availability of UAV style Multicopters and FPV flying raised the threat profile of model flying? Perhaps mainstream model flying should look at distancing ourselves from these activities if this is the case?

Edited By Martin Harris on 15/08/2014 01:18:37

Edited By Martin Harris on 15/08/2014 01:26:02

Yes, yes it has and that has been pointed out no small number of times in the past. Those activities, if model flying does not distance itself and maintain clear blue water between model flying and such activities are quite likely to lead to severe curtailment of model flying -in the manner that has been seen in this announcement.

[Terry Walters]

Posted by cymaz on 14/08/2014 19:15:15:

N.A.T.O

No Aircraft Til Over

LOL!!

How about NATO = No Aeromodeller Terrorist Opportunity

Come on people - this is a justified and necessary temporary blip in model flying freedom. More serious long term havoc is created by neighbours of clubs complaining about our activities. Lets accept that this is something which is necessary because as we know RC aircraft could used to attempt to commit atrocities. This way the 'authorities' are actually protecting our future. If one terrorist was sucessful then you can bet that there would likely be a blanket ban on all RC flying overnight. Let's welcome a sensible precaution which will affect those in the area for a short time only and applaud what security is being taken..

Anyone thinking of taking a soarer to the summit?

Terry

[Steve Houghton 1]

Well I know of one slope soaring friend who will say, "stuff em" and fly anyway. The chances of him getting caught flying in the more remote areas that we do are minimal. He's got more chance of being pulled over for using a phone whilst driving, and we all know how likely that is!

Steve

A470soaring.blogspot.co.uk

[Braddock, VC]

Once again a small proportion of whinging modellers has the capability of doing lasting damage to the reputation of the whole.

Compared with the inconvenience to people actually trying to get to work through the organised shambles the police will create the upset to modelling will be insignificant.

Incidentally the story doing the rounds down there is Barack O'Bama is living offshore in a USN Warship through the event and one bright spark has asked if every time he feels the need to answer the call of nature will his chopper fly him out to the ship then back again.

BTW the Celtic Manor, well worthy of the description of a carbuncle on the nose of Newport, is a golf resort, wonder if the pres will wile away a round or two?

[Pete B]

Terry's summed it up really well - it's three days midweek, for goodness sake!

John, I think that's a rather hysterical bit of scare-mongering - as I'm sure you know full well..... TBH, I'm surprised - you normally tend to make rational, well-considered posts....

As far as your friend is concerned, Steve, I hope you don't mind me lumping him in with the idiots in the US who are trumpeting on about flying their quads where they like regardless of the FAA, and who are being shouted down by the majority of sensible, adult modellers....

Yes, the chances of an RPV being used to cause an incident are probably vanishingly small, although viable. Unfortunately, that possibility means that the authorities really have no choice but to apply a blanket ban for a short period. They're going to be stretched enough covering more likely scenarios without having to chase around checking boy's toys....

Suck it up, folks - the hobby has developed to a point where the potential is of consequence now.....

Pete

[GrahamC]

Its only three days...

And as for those who say "stuff em and fly anyway...." 2.4g / 35mhz jamming equipment is surely not beyond the wit of those responsible for national security.

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

I think the prospect of "no fly zones" around large areas is very very unlikley.

Take a look at the sectional aviation map for the UK - and you will find that there are already a large number of no fly zones - they are mainly around sensitive installations such as nuclear power stations, some are around particular residences of prominent individuals - royal residences, Chequers etc., some are military I suspect. They are all currently in place and have been for some time. The vast majority of them are 2nm radius. They idea of long term 20nm no-fly zones is simply not part of the picture. They are only enforced for short period around specific events. such as the Olympics and this summit.

So, yes its a minor inconvenience, a bit of a pain. But in my view its no more than that. Recently the Open was held just half a mile from where I live - and yes there was enormous disruption to local residents' lives - we couldn't access certain roads we were constantly stopped and our permits to enter certain roads checked, we had our one way system reversed, our lovely prom was taken away and turned into a bus park, a simple journey to the local shops became a major expedition into very heavy traffic etc., etc. And all that for a game! But hey, its only for a week one year in six - so we put on a smile and put up with it! I think a NATO summit (especially in the current international climate) justifies a very small disruption to local flyers habits - don't you?

So, I'm afraid its time to act like mature adults, accept the situation and put the dummy back in! It'll probably rain anyway so you won't be missing much!

BEB