BMFA National Flying Centre

[cymaz]

[Piers Bowlan]

Personally I think the BMFA should throw all their resources behind opposing the EASA's 'prototype' regulations governing RPAS (remotely piloted airborne Systems) and put their aspirations for a national flying centre on hold. If the legislation becomes law then the BMFA won't need a national flying centre as model flying will become a thing of the past. If they have to go to court over it they will need all the cash they can muster. They need to get their priorities straight.

[Peter Jenkins]

Piers and others who think that the BMFA is not doing enough on this matter, do read Dave Phipps' note in which you will see that there is a move to form a pan-European Model grouping to try and influence the EASA proposals. The BMFA is playing a role in this. The FAI will also be part of this group. It would appear that the folks drafting these regulations have rather lost sight of the fact that they will do nothing to prevent terrorists or criminals mounting attacks. As Dave has pointed out, EASA has a record of screwing up legislation that subsequently takes years to correct.

Let's hope that if the worst happens that we will be far enough down the Brexit route for HMG to refuse to implement any ludicrous EASA regs. The full size sport aviation folk may also wish to get involved since they could end up having to cope with "Drones" infringing their airspace.

[ChrisB]

Just had a look through the planning application. Looks very positive and as a planner, it covers all the necessary elements.

One question I have is flying area vs ownership and if the use of the flying area changes.

Also have the LA noise team given approval? Planning is one thing, environmental health noise is another.

Overall a good site in a central location near A1, M1 and A46.

Well done to all involved.

[Piers Bowlan]

Thanks Peter, that is reassuring. As a full size Aviator I have first hand experience of the complication, bureaucracy and cost brought about by EASA both to professional and sport aviation. One of the charms of our hobby is it's freedom from legislation, apart from what is in the ANO, which is based on common sense. Long may that continue.

[MattyB]

Overview of the new location - if you go to the Google maps site and zoom in you can just about see the tracks on the grass where the horses moved about(!), so I guess those areas are the potential flying locations.

[Keith Lomax]

The site consists of the two green fields either side of the red pin, plus the brown one immediately North of these two. It is estimated that we will be able to have three RC flightlines (one in each field), control line circles to the western boundary, and the western green field lends itself to thermal soaring. (obviously not all in use at the same time).

[Colin Leighfield]

I absolutely support the principle of not excluding or marginalising members of the model flying fraternity in the various disciplines. We need to stick together and support singular qualified representation, which whatever our niggles might be is the BMFA.

The problem is probably most obvious with the association of FPV with unlimited range, whether in fixed wing or helicopter and rotary drone form. This might be leading us to restrictions to range within visual sight, which is sensible anyway and unavoidable with non-FPV flying, and height restrictions that we have now anyway.

A big expansion of commercial drone operation at low altitudes might lead to a registration of flying sites and restrictions on flying anywhere else. If commonsense prevails we should be able to continue without any real change to what we are doing now, but the extra bureaucracy will increase pressure on clubs as well as BMFA if it is recognised as the responsible body. Just some speculation, I'll wait now to hear from BMFA on the way this progresses.

[Colin Bernard]

This site looks promising and is certainly in a more accessible location being close to the A1 and M1 although I appreciate that those from the further counties may disagree on accessiblity.

It will be interesting to see how this develops. Not seen any figures yet so hope the funding is kept independent of fees as promised.

By the way we seem to have two threads mixed here with comments about the EASA ruling confusing things. Suggest they are moved to the EASA ruling thread.

[Colin Leighfield]

Colin, quite right, I thought I was in the other one! Sorry. Having said that, I like the look of this proposal. It ticks the right boxes for me. Good luck to BMFA in getting the right deal for us.

[Gary Manuel]

I assume that the site includes the actual buildings (Buckminster Lodge), otherwise that is a possible source of noise complaint in the future. Can anyone confirm?

[John F]

On the report it was stated that model flying was demonstrated and there are no noise issues and the existing buildings are available for development.  The powerpoint document goes further to state that the existing buildings will all be refurbished.

Edited By John F on 13/09/2016 14:46:59

[Keiran Arnold]

Yes the buildings are included in the site. Mind you they are a bit shabby. I would say that some ground work will be needed to provide a good surface for model flying. There are also a couple of good pubs and a nice tea room close by.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Wants to be a good cuppa on site never mind close by

[MattyB]

Guys, I just found the link to Powerpoint summary of current status... interesting reading. Selected highlights...

 

Recap on current position

• Previous study work identified a significant land purchase as problematic in both expenditure and process

• Long Term leasing investigated as a lower risk and more cost effective alternative to a land purchase

• Buckminster Lodge identified, researched and proposed to Council as a potential way forward

• No current plan to close Leicester office which will remain as BMFA Membership Services Centre

 

Buckminster Lodge

• Scores well on the selection matrix

• Owned by a forward thinking and supportive landowner

• Agreement for long term lease, 35 years with ongoing options

• Presents strong potential for development in accordance with agreed project objectives

 

Time Line - Buckminster Lodge

• Aug 2015 – Estate Manager visited R/C Power Nationals at Barkston resulted in positive recommendation to landowner

• Sept 2015 - Initial meetings and discussions with landowner revealed a willingness to work with the BMFA

• Feb 2016 - Flying demonstration of various model types (some large) staged for land owner with positive response

• Apr 2016 Consultation with adjacent landowner positive

• May 2016 - Approval by Full Council to proceed conditional on critical ‘Gating Factors’ being achieved

• Jun 2016 – After further discussions an outline project plan provided to land owner with positive response

• June 2016 (end) - Planning permission for change of use submitted to local authority

• July 2016 - meetings with planning authority generally positive but requested a few amendments to plans

• Aug 2016 - Heads of (Lease) Terms agreed with landowner and between solicitors

• 9th Sept 2016 - Planning permission granted, confirmation and pre use stipulations not onerous

• Sept 2016 - Final lease terms in process with solicitors

 

About the Lease

• 35 year repairing and insuring lease

• Break clause in our favour every 4th anniversary with 6 month prior notice

• Rent review on 4th anniversary, in line with market rate but excluding improvements made by BMFA

• Protected, opted ‘into’ the Landlord and Tenant Act gives option to extend at end of lease

 

Income and Revenue Sources

Income to the centre will be derived from multiple sources e.g.

• Revenue from model flying activities

• Revenue from non flying activities

• Income from sponsorship

• Revenue from concessions and sales

• Donations

• Sponsorship from Insurance brokers and others sponsors.

• Model Flying competitions/scheduled events

• Training Courses

• Sport Flying users

• Model Flying Public Display/Show Days

• Camp site revenue

• Meetings venue

• Catering/concession outlet, gift shop sales

• Site use for non-model flying activities by other organizations

• Donations/bequests

 

Some Important Points

• Ongoing expenditure will be proportional

• After initial development further expenditure will be governed by usage and available funding

• At a basic level, the project falls largely within our existing financial capability

• The phrase “cutting our cloth” is very apt to the further development of the National Centre

 

The Project Aspect

• A primary contractor will be appointed to deliver key elements of project with responsibility for CDM 2015 compliance (Construction Design Management)

• Overseen by Architects and Buckminster Lodge management

• Overall co-ordination through BMFA project team

Edited By MattyB on 13/09/2016 16:59:54

[MattyB]

Site Works - Phase 1

• Remove concrete, stockpile/crush for future use

• Renew all surface drainage around buildings

• Rework main entrance and access road in line with planning conditions

• Create hard standing for car parking

• Provide initial toilet facilities

Phase 2

• Full refurbishment of house to accommodate BMFA facilities

• Refurbish/upgrade indoor manège as events area

• Refurbish/upgrade grooms quarters (adjacent to indoor manège)

• Provide permanent toilet/shower facilities for visitors and camping

 

Current/imminent work streams

• Appointment of main contractor

• Establish financial responsibilities against works schedule

• Establish detail on initial phases of work

• Publicise and promote project (invitation open and press days)

• Fundraise to develop specific areas

 

Summary

• Project gaining momentum and support

• Donations/bequests already received

• Significant interest in making site bookings

• Project due to commence in line with directive from May Full Council

 

Plan Targets

Limited use of site from early 2017 onwards

Target Official opening Spring 2017

…..of course all subject to weather conditions over the winter 2016-17

Edited By MattyB on 13/09/2016 16:58:54

[Erfolg]

There are a number of issues which will be of interest many, I would think that these relate to some of the anticipated income streams.

I am sure that the BMFA will want have and be able to demonstrate clearly that there is segregation of money that relates to the insurance scheme and donations from the insurer or the broker from that of the NFC. That is these belong to the BMFA general income and not the NFC.

I am sure that the same will occur with other advertisers etc. That there is clear segregation, such that it can be shown that the income is solely related to events and so on, at the NFC and cannot be misconstrued as a diverted payment.

It is always a pity from my perspective that the sites are always the wrong side of the M1. As this is an issue for many in the west of the UK. Particularly when in Northern England and the West Country.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Cheers Matty

Looks o.k to me and some interesting bits in the income and revenue sources, look forward to having some more detail on it.

[Dave Hopkin]

BMFA Announcement (what Matty posed above)

**LINK**

[John F]

Posted by Erfolg on 13/09/2016 18:39:40:

There are a number of issues which will be of interest many, I would think that these relate to some of the anticipated income streams.

I am sure that the BMFA will want have and be able to demonstrate clearly that there is segregation of money that relates to the insurance scheme and donations from the insurer or the broker from that of the NFC. That is these belong to the BMFA general income and not the NFC.

I am sure that the same will occur with other advertisers etc. That there is clear segregation, such that it can be shown that the income is solely related to events and so on, at the NFC and cannot be misconstrued as a diverted payment.

It is always a pity from my perspective that the sites are always the wrong side of the M1. As this is an issue for many in the west of the UK. Particularly when in Northern England and the West Country.

They have already surpassed your previous concerns and shown that they really do know what it is they need to do and now you're raising concern over income streams! It is interesting to note that you're calling them "issues".

I am sure that they, as so far proven, know what they are doing and accounts would be published in exactly the same way they are now and the BMFA execs are well aware of where their money goes. Their financial management, I am sure you would agree, is quite astute. They would not allow the NFC to start to suck the general coffers dry.

With regards to location; there will always be many who cannot attend weekly as it is not on their doorstep but it could host annual competitions, exhibitions and even the Nats, many of which I am sure you attend now elsewhere, on the wrong side of the A1.

This is always going to be an issue, with a single National Centre for anything you care to mention will always attract derision from those living less than a reasonable commute away, that's just life.

[Peter Jenkins]

As ever, some folk will never be satisfied with the way the BMFA works and will look to criticise them at every turn. However, I think that events have shown there is a significant element within the BMFA management fold who have both the knowledge and expertise to take on this challenge without sinking the Association. Of course it is always useful to question the decisions that are being taken in our name but this decision looks like it will achieve the aim of having a National Centre, albeit we don't own the land but it is hosted by a supportive landlord and well away from any potential noise or environmental complaints.

We should congratulate all of those on the project team for getting this across the line. I for one, look forward to the development of the nascent ideas that gave birth to the project. We should all aim to support the project team's efforts. The decision has been taken, now we have to get on and support the project.

[Cuban8]

At 43 acres the site seems rather small to me, given that my club field is 23 acres and that seems busy with anything more than four 'planes up at a time (max of 6).

it was mentioned that the Nats could be held at the new site - on 43 acres ?...........it's going to be a very different meeting if that's the intention.

[bert baker]

Posted by Cuban8 on 14/09/2016 11:02:34:

At 43 acres the site seems rather small to me, given that my club field is 23 acres and that seems busy with anything more than four 'planes up at a time (max of 6).

it was mentioned that the Nats could be held at the new site - on 43 acres ?...........it's going to be a very different meeting if that's the intention.

Perhaps tent and caravan sharing will be promoted.

[Nigel Dell]

Posted by Cuban8 on 14/09/2016 11:02:34:

At 43 acres the site seems rather small to me, given that my club field is 23 acres and that seems busy with anything more than four 'planes up at a time (max of 6).

it was mentioned that the Nats could be held at the new site - on 43 acres ?...........it's going to be a very different meeting if that's the intention.

I rather think you are right there C8 but the way things are going with MOD sites at the moment it may have to be the way of the future which is a shame because it will fragment the disciplines, I always enjoyed the walk round the Control line as well as the RC areas but the silent flight has been separate for a longtime now.

Still not too sure on the whole idea neither for or against at the moment but I think maybe for future meetings it may be a wise move as long as the figures stack up which to be fair they would have to.

Only time will tell I guess.

 

 

Edited By Nigel Dell on 14/09/2016 12:18:11

Edited By Nigel Dell on 14/09/2016 12:18:36

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

There are fields all around this place be optimistic, who knows where/what it'll evolve into.