Do you think some sort of registration system would protect the hobby from rogue flyers?

[Piers Bowlan]

I do understand your point BEB, you made it very clearly too. The trouble is I simply do not agree with it! I don't think registering will differentiate us from them, apart from being registered of course. This will mean nothing the next time an incident occurs when a UAV breaks the ANO in a high profile way (eg. airmiss with an airliner, accident at a sporting event, a terrorist attack using a UAV), The cry will go up 'something must be done' and another knee jerk reaction will take place. Personally I don't think being registered will make any difference with the powers that be. Already the EASA proposals do not differentiate between model flyers and drone fliers, either MR or fixed wing, whether carrying a camera or not. They do not differentiate period, which is where the problem lies.

As soon as some people fit a camera to a MR, helicopter or fixed wing model they feel the need to take pictures of buildings, bridges or other structures or alternatively overfly crowds thereby endangering them. In other words break the ANO. This is why the legislation is proposed. The problem (as I see it ) lies in the carriage of a camera recording device or video telemetry in the hands of amateurs. These people do need to be registered and perhaps take air law exams too in a similar way that professional MR/UAV operators like yourself are. This would not be popular with responsible FPVers but neither will what has been proposed by EASA at the present time and what has been proposed will apply to all model flyers.

[Eric Strefford]

Anyone remember when we used to be registered i.e. had to buy license for our radios why not just apply that? License number to be shown on all models, when anyone purchases a radio must include their license number to retailer in to complete purchase, radio licensing authority to have a list of retailers and importers however small and do spot checks.

[Erfolg]

Eric

I do remember and had a licence, which i have mentioned a few posts back.

My point then was, that paying for our licence did not a jot for us. Along come CB operators, whose transmissions were illegal in the UK,, some with so called "Burners" and the GPO did nothing, diddley squat, nowt. In the end rather than do anything, the licencing requirement was withdrawn.

[Tony Harrison 2]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 14/02/2016 13:13:11:

But isn't that the desired result? I'd be quite happy for the government and the media to view us a tiny minority of eccentrics of no significance and therefore leave us alone and not seek to interfere in what they don't understand. Its when they think we are danger and a problem because they lump us with the irresponsible and criminal that we are in jeopardy. In my view registration puts us in a "no problem with them so we don't have to be interested in them" box, and leaves the bad boys outside in the cold, the focus of everyone's undesired attention - just as they are with firearms. I'd call that "a result" from our perspective!

BEB

No, I take it for granted that as others have suggested, r/c model aircraft would be legislated for en masse, without attempts at fine (and sometimes impossible) distinctions between specialists or criminals using drones on the one hand, and hobbyists flying models for fun on the other. This would follow the pattern set by the firearms legislation model I've referred to: everyone is subject to firearms controls, universally, and I think it would be far too much to hope for to imagine that r/c hobbyists might be excluded from any new regulation. When I said our image might be that of harmless cranks or hobbyist eccentrics, I meant we would be perceived as having no political/electoral clout - so any protests from us would be ignored as insigificant by the powers that be...

rgds Tony

[graeme jones]

The BBC is running a story today about an airliner that returned to Heathrow shortly after takeoff because a laser had been shone into the cockpit by some idiot sat safely on the ground. There were apparently more than 1400 such incidents reported last year. Not accidents or near-misses, deliberate acts of incredible stupidity. So, using the logic of some of the previous posts, should there be a National Register of Lasers, to "distance the legitimate users from the rogue element"?

Graeme

Edited By graeme jones on 15/02/2016 08:35:21

[Erfolg]

The pilots association is calling for the UK law to be changed to carrying? a laser to be an offence of being in possession of an offensive weapon.

Again, we are in an area of proportionality and practicality.

What sane person cannot see the position of any body whose well being is threatened by a rash act of another. That is without considering the safety issues to others who consequently can be affected.

The other side of the coin, many of us have lasers for a whole range of uses. When working, i had a low powered laser used as a pointer in presentations. After retirement, I purchased two lasers for use in building works, that I became involved with, these were used for establishing horizontal lines and as a targeting tool. The legitimate use of these devices is now vast, from survey to measuring tasks.

We can now expect a increase in reporting real and suspect incidents, as interested parties press for action.

Again, there is a problem, a workable solution is not as easy to establish.

 

Edited By Erfolg on 15/02/2016 13:03:43

Edited By Erfolg on 15/02/2016 13:04:06

[Piers Bowlan]

The sort of laser levels used in the building trade that you and I own Erfolg are nothing like the high power lasers that are being used to target aircraft in flight so I don't think they are calling for a blanket ban. I was targeted by some fool with a laser after departing LHR one evening a year or so ago. The flight deck was filled with a bright green light which was very distracting. I don't think there would be a problem finding a workable solution. If you have a laser bolted to your stepcraft CNC cutter in your workshop = no problem. If you are apprehended by the 'boys in blue' with a very high power laser in your pocket = you're nicked, unless you have a very good explanation!

A 23 year old got 12 months in custody for pointing his laser at a police helicopter recently. A few more cases like this and perhaps these low-lifes will think better of it.

Edited By Piers Bowlan on 15/02/2016 13:58:45

[Two Six]

A comment on the poll on registration:

The problem with registration is, its all part of a TOTALITARIAN TIP-TOE TO A FASCIST DICTATORSHIP where you need a permit for EVERYTHING.

There will be somebody, probably the police who will check to see if your registered. Great more reasons for people to come to Police attention and get scanned through the database!

If your not registered then what happens? Potentially you might get fined, prosecuted, get your model and radio taken and your tools taken away and destroyed? Do you get banned from flying? For how long? Who knows you might even Tasered or shot.

OOOh yeah I want some of THAT..NOT

Registration sucks. It won't stop ass-hats flying dangerously, they won't even know they have to register and if they do know they won't bother to do it because they are Ass-Hats. This legislation is being introduced on the back of Main Stream Media Fear Porn. Its a solution to a made up problem.

If you want it, your building your own prison, bit by bit.

Edited By Two Six on 19/02/2016 21:24:04

[ChrisB]

As most have said, registration wouldn't solve a perceived problem. Everyone who drives a car should be registered but that doesn't stop people from driving without the required authorisations. Flying would be the same.

The majority fly at established sites and in a responsible manner, its only the minority who don't, they are, of course, the issue!

[Old Geezer]

2 6 - you really need to get some counselling for your paranoia. 😳

If registration became compulsory - I would support sanctions against non-compliance, in the same way that someone's car can be taken off them if they are found to be driving without tax and/or insurance. Anything to protect our hobby from being identified with the activities of the irresponsible and antisocial. (And I would include anyone flying model aircraft without 3rd Party Insurance as being irresponsible!)

[Erfolg]

Dear Mr Scriven

Registration does not necessarily imply insurance cover.

Lack of insurance cover has to date not been a significant issue with respect to flying models (I am a BMFA member).

Historically when there was a requirement to have a licence to operate a transmitter on the 27 band, there was no evidence of any notable actions to prosecute those without a licence. Particularly when the 27 band was being used en-mass by CB operators, illegally.

[kc]

We should be taking a pre emptive step just in case there is any legislation proposed.. The BMFA, LMA etc should issue a Model Pilot Licence to us with our membership documents if we have an A certificate or higher and are insured. The licence then states what we are qualified to fly solo. Then this would distinguish us from the uninsured & unqualified rest if the government want to make any legislation. It would go a long way to persuading the government to base any requirements on BMFA  etc qualifications..

As it stands now do you have any document in your possesion when flying that would convince a policeman or official that you are a qualified and insured pilot? The current BMFA membership card would not mean much to any official.

Edited By kc on 03/03/2016 11:27:32

[Erfolg]

KC

I am far from convinced that what you are suggesting would do any good at all.

I see no need for insurance for many fliers of model aircraft.

BEB has been at pains to highlight that the current legislation does not discriminate between the humble cardboard model bought in a toy shop, a chuck glider and a model of the type flown by the LMA. Would you need a licence to fly a BMFA dart? Is it really necessary for the small 27 foam park flier, that struggles to get to 3 meters high, that if it hits you, does all the damage of a falling leave in Autumn.

Above all, you do not capitulate. You try and understand what the issues are with respect to the regulator and politicians and EU. Then you respond in a way that is constructive. Second guessing will almost always end in over regulation.

I am not sure that the principle attack is principally coming from groups who dislike models and are over egging the scale and nature of any problem, rather than there really being a safety issue. It could suit other groups such as Amazon having their own agenda. The claims need care full examination before we just accept the problem as presented.

[gangster]

My point then was, that paying for our licence did not a jot for us. Along come CB operators, whose transmissions were illegal in the UK,, some with so called "Burners" and the GPO did nothing, diddley squat, nowt. In the end rather than do anything, the licencing requirement was withdrawn.

Such a licence served no purpose at all,and was prohibitive ly expensive to manage

The GPO at that time were acting as agents for the Home Office part of a new Conservative Government who were actually pro free communications. Little support was was forthcoming from the Government departments including the Police and the Home Office. The sheer resource required to deal with illegal CB would have been collossal. The workload just looking after protected services went up 20 fold.

But there is an interesting comparison between the CB craze and the drone crase. After the initial terrific growth of CB it died out, and surely any other craze does the same.

As for requiring registration, well what to fly a toy aeroplane?, we could grow more like the old Communist countrys every day with that sort of legislation.

Yes I did say "toy aeroplane", lets stop being arrogantly superior. That is exactly what we are doing.

I will get my tin hat.

[Erfolg]

I totally agree Gangster our models in most cases are toys, mere playthings. Not necessary, operated for pleasure. Even the LMA type modes.

Therein is a major weakness, Commercial aircraft can point to satisfying peoples desires to travel, contributing to the economy by importing and exporting of goods.

Amazon will get a hearing again from a commercial perspective with there proposed use of drones.

Military, farmers, plus the utilities can point to the positive contribution by ensuring safety and cost effective surveys and reconnaissance.

Even light aircraft can put a public benefit argument of sorts.

In our case, rather than dismiss the toy trade and sales outlets such as Debnams or maybe Hamelys, we have a common cause in that model planes provide a lot of pleasure across a wide community and ages.

Before the BMFA does anything, it does need to know what the issues really are, who are our friends and enemies. As like it or not, some will not be our best buddies. Do not let ourselves become self deluded that full size aviation, is automatically our best buddies. I could be that our self interests do not necessarily align in all areas and that partners today, can often be tomorrows adversaries.

[kc]

No, we should do something now so if anything happens that we can say it was not a 'licenced' model pilot who caused the problem! Otherwise we will be tarred with the same brush.

If we can say that solo flyers are A certiificate holders who are required to know the regulations, are insured and fly within the regulations then we can differntiate our flying from yobs with toys.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

To borrow NE1's phrase from the LMS threads AAAARRRGGH,

John........ be glad when whatever's coming gets here Dept

[Erfolg]

There is no requirement for a licence kc.

If there were, the charges will still be made, dependant on what ever the issue is seen to be.

All operators of aircraft are required to know which part of the regulatory framework applies to them, irrespective of a "A" or other certificate, or non at all. Without identifying the individual, how can you be certain that the person does not have a"A" or "B" certificate.

If the regulations change to require any form of certificate, then any incident would automatically be portrayed as the model world is irresponsible, flouting regulations.

I would doubt that any democratic government would insist on just the BMFA being the registering body. The days of the closed shop have gone, I would imagine that any such attempt would break some EU regulation or Human Right. Rightly so.

I am beginning to doubt that there are so many yobs out there, as is being suggested. Still even one or two are a major problem to all. Registration will not deal with them. Although I can see the need to deal with the problem.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Not read it but, drone busters

And if you read carefully you'll see the words "illegal drones"

Edited By john stones 1 on 03/03/2016 20:16:46

[eflightray]

No.

It's like having a driving licence and assuming all licence holders will always obey the law and regulations, have insurance etc, and always drive with great care, they do, don't they ?.

I've known some club members, (who were also BMFA members), who I rated as pretty awful and irresponsible fliers.

Registration/licencing means very little, and idiots will always be idiots. It could even put beginners off from wanting to get into the hobby, the next generation of modelers.

Look at the number of what appear to be clubs posting their crashes on Youtube, (with all the laughter in the background ). It just shows how even some club members can give the hobby an irresponsible attitude to safety.

Just enjoy the hobby while you can, it will probably go on for years and years, (at least until everything is done on a computer, tablet, phone, and from an armchair  .

Ray.

[Fun Flyer]

This is a much better solution than registration! I want one.

**LINK**

[John Stainforth]

I have no problem with a registration system, and have already registered my models in the USA. It is cheap and quick there. The AMA are trying to get the FAA to agree to a system whereby AMA membership provides automatic government registration.

[Ernie]

Hi Guys, I see that there's an interesting program re. all this on Radio 4 at 4 o'clock this evening. 'Law in Action'

ernie

[Owdlad]

I suppose this topic puts me in the catagory of ROGUE FLYER.

I have a distinct lack of enthusiasm to join a club because to be politically correct .......the type of charecters clubs attract.

I fully support the Bmfa as our national body therfore I support it by being a member.

I have permission of the landowner to fly anywhere on his land (crop dependant) for the price of a good bottle of malt each year, I also keep an eye on his land and report anything untoward.

I fly when I want, don't upset the neighbours, I'm mindfulof dog walkers, walkers and horse riders and have a good rapport with them who in general stop and have a chat and take intrest in my models.

But most inportantly I keep the NOISE DOWN.

Rogue flyer I ain't......I just like to enjoy my pastime without upsetting others.

Owdlad

 

Edited By Owdlad on 08/03/2016 14:30:29

[Ian Jones]

I suppose this topic puts me in the catagory of ROGUE FLYER.

No Owdlad I don't think it does, if all rogue flyers behaved the same as you there wouldn't be any "Rogue Flyers".

Edited By Ian Jones on 08/03/2016 18:54:04