Droning on...So What's Your Answer ??

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Been thread after thread as we've all seen, doom and gloom and make em go away we're good boys n girls.

Not going to happen is it ?

Yet every idea/move made to counter it gets scorn poured upon it, so like it says what's your answer ?

John

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Jon H]

We have decided at our club that we will accept drone/multirotor flying on the condition that the are treated like other models. That is they get no special treatment and they follow the rules like everyone else. Each type of model is considered equal and the rules apply to everyone.

We felt this was the only way to keep things fair and was better than most of our other local clubs who have banned them outright.

[Frank Skilbeck]

I've dabbled with a Quad and fixed wing FPV, nobody else in the club is doing this yet, but they've all had the goggles on and some have had a go on the sticks. I even got help getting it out of the tree...............

But went to one club that wouldn't let me fly my Atom auotgyro as they had a blanket ban on all rotorcraft............

[Andy G.]

Personally, I wonder if the whole public drone flying thing is 'bubble' that will soon burst when the next fad comes along, much like CB radio? Obviously quality drones, used properly are here to stay , and I for one have no issues with that, they are a valid part of our hobby and their commercial use is undeniable.

[Masher]

Posted by Jon Harper - Laser Engines on 15/02/2016 00:49:14:

We have decided at our club that we will accept drone/multirotor flying on the condition that the are treated like other models. That is they get no special treatment and they follow the rules like everyone else. Each type of model is considered equal and the rules apply to everyone.

We felt this was the only way to keep things fair and was better than most of our other local clubs who have banned them outright.

Jon, I assume you have rules to prevent fixed wing and multirotor flying simultaneously from the same strip?

[Frank Skilbeck]

Posted by Masher on 15/02/2016 08:18:29:

Posted by Jon Harper - Laser Engines on 15/02/2016 00:49:14:

We have decided at our club that we will accept drone/multirotor flying on the condition that the are treated like other models. That is they get no special treatment and they follow the rules like everyone else. Each type of model is considered equal and the rules apply to everyone.

We felt this was the only way to keep things fair and was better than most of our other local clubs who have banned them outright.

Jon, I assume you have rules to prevent fixed wing and multirotor flying simultaneously from the same strip?

or common sense, much as if somebody was flying a normal heli or doing some aeroplane 3D flying, be considerate to the guys flying regular circuits and get out of the way when they call landing or low flyby.

[Jon H]

Nope, you can fly what you like when you like. Everything is equal and noone is pressurised by having 'heli time' or 'multi rotor time'. From experience at other clubs i know this sort of this causes animosity and we didnt want that.

A few of us at our club also have 8th scale IC model cars and we have little races from time to time. The cars do play second fiddle to any form of flying as we are a flying club not a model car club. But, the operation of the cars or helis or whatever it is comes down to one very simple question. 'hey guys, do you mind if......?'

So, if a heli guy wants the sky to himself for some 3D he says 'guys can i have the sky for a quick thrash about?', if i want to hoon around with my large WWII stuff i say 'Guys do you mind if i give the La7 a blast?'. We do the same with the cars simply asking if we can tie up the runway for 8 minutes (our max duration) to have a race. One of the FPV guys even chases our cars with his drone just for the laugh.

Basically, we all try to get along. If you fly your heli or quad in circuit (as i do) then there is no issue mixing and matching, but sometimes heli guys like to stop and the planes have trouble with this so if that sort of this is desired we just have the heli pilot ask for a few minutes of free time to himself. Our flying hours are long and there is plenty of time for everyone.

[trebor]

Sounds like a nice club

[Don Fry]

I can't see toy drones going away, the little toy helicopters have been about for a long time and what we are seeing is the advance of technical capability. And a niggle of horror stories, real or imagined will continue in the press keeping the "problem" alive. And so it may continue, unless the unthinkable happens.

If it all goes wrong for us I can see a system where weight restrictions apply, and flying is formally restricted to "approved UAV operating sites" for most of what we regard as a proper UAV.

It is simply easier to police approved site restrictions, as it would leave the problem flyers exposed, nowhere to hide. The losers would be many I know, I watched entranced a girl flying off a beach sand dune last year ( glider, not girl), and may all go.

Edited By Donald Fry on 15/02/2016 09:50:13

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Our club is like Jon's - everything is eligible, everything is equal. Like Jon's club ours is an informal arrangement and common sense prevails. This works to be honest because the number of rotory craft are relatively small compared to fixed-wing, if the numbers were more even we might have to consider a more formal arrangement.

Regarding Jon's main point in the OP ie what we should be proposing, I think we have to consider a number of issues:

1. Is there really a problem - or is this a storm in a tea cup stirred up by the media? TBH neither CAA nor EASA seem to perceive a major problem - or they would be acting a lot faster. Such actions as are planned are mainly aimed at commercial operation. True there is a potential danger that we could get "trawled up" with that. But I think both CAA and EASA are aware of that problem and both have made statements to the effect that model flying should not be unduely included in legislation really designed to regulate commercial use.

2. However, we can't afford to be complacent. The informed views of CAA and EASA are one thing, the uninformed views of their political masters something else entirely! To ensure that we are protected my personal opinion is that we must at all costs be seen to be fully engaged with the debate and fully sympathic to any peceived problem. Most important of all, we must be willing to consider in a reasonable and balanced way any moderate, sensible, changes that are proposed. Being engaged in this way is important because only then can we ensure that any changes that are proposed are sensible, workable and don't have a severely detrimental effect on us. This is not a time to "spit our dummy out" and refuse a priori to co-operate with any proposed change! Indeed I personally would go even further, I would like to see us actively proposing changes that the powers that be might welcome. In that way we, at least partially, assume "the driving seat" where our future is concerned and can therefore have a positive influance over anything that does happen.

BEB

[Dave Hopkin]

Both my clubs are happy for people to fly Multirotors

At one of the clubs (which operates in a more structured manned) we have a field usage policy where we treat them much as we do helicopters in that we don't fly fixed wing when helo's/MR are up and visa vesa, the very small MRs can fly in conjunction with fixed wing in a small area in one corner - that club also has a second flying site which is mainly used by FPV/MR because (as of yet) the ground isnt really suitable for anything other than hand launched fixed wing.

The other club we fly FW and MR at the some time as we fly from the centre of a very large open site so MR one side of the pits FW the other

Its not a big issue at any of the clubs, we just get along and share the air

[Jon H]

I am with BEB on this one.

I do not think the drone menace is as big as people claim, however with Amazon wanting to use them for deliveries, and google looking at using solar powered gliders to relay faster mobile internet we will soon find that it is not just hobby flyers who are taking up the sky. This WILL require the greater regulation of any unmanned aircraft and could impact us all. We would also find that a commercial drone accident like the one which almost bashed that skier could impact negatively on us even if the perception of what happened is wrong. To the public a drone is a drone, be it commercial or private it is clearly up to no good. We need to shake this perception asap.

I also still maintain that most people simply do not realise what they are doing is illegal. While it could be argued they should have engaged brain and thought about it before flying somewhere daft, they could also quite rightly say 'i bought it at the toy shop, its only a toy those rules are for big planes'. This is where some sort or registration COULD help, not to spy on people or whatever it is the US are up to, but to get their names and addresses purely as a mechanism for sending them the relevant information for safe operation of their 'toy'. I very much doubt that most law abiding citizens will have any problem with this, and i do not buy in to the somewhat hysterical and self defeating reaction on the other thread where everyone threw up their arms and said 'we are all doomed, dummies will be dummies and this wont stop anything so lets not bother its not our problem'. No it wont stop everyone, yes some people will always think they can get away with whatever they like but i honestly think that a vast majority will be happy to fly within the rules and happy that they have received advice and assistance to get the most from their latest gadget.

If we dont take the bull by the horns someone far less informed will, so i agree with those saying that we need to get in on the ground floor and hold up the 'no chance' sign when someone proposes something daft.

 

 

Edited By Jon Harper - Laser Engines on 15/02/2016 13:49:35

[Andy Green]

We took the decision last year to allow multi rotor flying, and here is the notice we put out on the subject. In spite of the nay sayers thinking we would be over run with 'Drone' flyers our membership actually dropped this year.

My answer was to buy one and have a go.

Andy

[Jon H]

That looks almost identical to what we did. We are now pushing for A's but in essence thats the same policy.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

It's refreshing to see posts that don't distinguish between model types, behave yourself and co operate with each other works for me as well

We have a field where you can fly to your hearts content, and bring no negative publicity towards our hobby, seems counter productive to exclude people to me.

And like others we've had the well documented Heli arguments, only thing that worked was co operation, not that hard really.

But my question was meant, do's anyone have ideas that may help us, or is there a consensus we just say NO to anything put forward ?

John

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Posted by Andy Green on 15/02/2016 13:51:30:

We took the decision last year to allow multi rotor flying, and here is the notice we put out on the subject. In spite of the nay sayers thinking we would be over run with 'Drone' flyers our membership actually dropped this year.

My answer was to buy one and have a go.

Andy

Hi Andy,

obviously its your club and your rules. But just on a point of information article 167 of the ANO does not apply specifically to multirotors - it applies to "small unmanned surviellance aircraft" where the term surveillance applies to any aircraft (rotory or fixed wing) fitted with any form of sensor (not just a camera).

As I say, its obviuosly entirely a matter for your club what rules you have. I only point this out because I have come across, more than once, the idea that art 167 applies generally to flying of multi-rotors or "drones", which, if the MR is not fitted with a camera etc. is not the case, as then only 166 applies as it would to any standard model.

BEB

[Don Fry]

Having experience of legislative change when I was involved in the management of shooting, you do not give an inch. Give an inch, you have the starting position for negotiation, your inch has gone. Normal logic, give and take, does not apply. That is the mindset of the Westminster, the politicians and civil servants combined. They have priorities which do not care if your strange activity survives or not. And remember the BMFA is not alone in trying to put a point of view. There will be other lobbies, for instance the professional "drone" flying school. Nothing like a bit of favourable legislation to improve the bottom line. WHAT, 35000 BFMA losers, against my profit margin, let me think a while which is important. Rant over.

[Andy Green]

Thanks BEB, but in my defense the title of the news item is Club position on multirotors, which should give context to the piece, and there is noting new under the sun, the text you are referring to comes straight from the BMFA website, so maybe it them you need to correct

Andy

[Model Monster]

Our club is positioned under a drone recently purchased by one of our members.

The general consensus is that they are a bit boring to fly but do take excellent aerial shots of the field and are really useful for finding models which have got lost in the rough (they found at least 6 last year).

I'm With Jon H and BEB etc. We will treat them the same as anything else that the members want to fly / play with, providing it doesn't cause any problems or affect plane flying.

Edited By Model Monster on 16/02/2016 10:34:54

[Model Monster]

Another shot, from altitude, showing the main strip, heli practice area (top right) and car racing area.

[Peter Miller]

Like several ther sensible clubs. Fly what you like. when you like, just obey the rules and the rule is "NO FLYING OVER THE PITS."

We have four runways in a Union Jack pattern. Between two of them all the grass is mown. That is the normal helicopter area but they move on the rare occasions that one of those two runways is into wind.

[Darrell Williams 1]

The club I fly at only allows established members to fly and only if they predominantly fly fixed wing. We don't fly mixed multi and planes because we have a small(ish) strip which makes it impractical, there is some fpv going on both fixed wing and multi-rotors but we are predominantly los.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

I appreciate the answers folks and good to see that a models a model for most, and all you require is people behave.

However, given that there's been more words than War n Peace and Lord of the Ring Trilogy combined posted on this subject, I wondered if someone had a solution to the current problem other than say no to anything brought forward ?

Looks to be not, as this is shortest "Drone" thread in a while.

John

[Darrell Williams 1]

I think that the real issue is that 'Drones' as in Multicopters have become to easy to get your hands on this being both the Toy category and the more expensive ones ready to fly. Too many see them who have never tried rc flying before and think that because of the fight assistance that they will be easy to fly. The worst thing is that they have no idea of the rules and regulations pertaining to their use. This is to an extent being remedied but not to the extent that it should be.
There has been an incident recently where people were flying a 'Drone' in the Mach Loop!!! They were also seen to be masking their number plates when some of the photographers up there made them aware in no uncertain terms of the error of their ways!!!
The point is that you are always going to get idiots who either don't care or are unaware of the rules.