BMFA Achievement schemes

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Well Erf the bottom line is I don't recognise A-cert tests lasting an 1 hour - and I'm pretty sure that will be alien territiory to most others on here. Anyone elae have 1 hour A-cert test at their club folks?

BEB

[Masher]

I don't think you could fly the 'A' that slowly without multiple stalls? When I said 15 mins, that obviously allows time for the obligatory pre-flight safety checks.

[Erfolg]

All I can say that the duration was in that region, yet for the purpose of this discussion it matters little.

Although a 15 minute test is also one I cannot envisage. To take the test properly will take a lot longer than 15 minutes. Firstly confirming the take off and landing pattern for the day. Go through determining the position of the sun, confirmation of wind direction. Undertake a visual and physical inspection of model. Locating the model in the start up area, ensuring that all the equipment is conveniently and safely located. The model secured by an appropriate means. Fuel the model. Switch on process, for radio, tx, check the volts, aerial alignment, then Rx. Check sense of all surfaces and throttle movement and so.

The test itself, check that all surfaces etc are working with motor running. Call on the field, check for permission to go on the field. Place model in allocated start position for the day. Open throttle, climb out steadily, enter a square pattern. Demonstrate a circuit, with 90 degree corners, say clockwise, repeat anti clockwise and so on. All of these processes take some time.

I do contend that for the "A" test to have value, it should not be seen as an easy and quick test of flying ability. For me its greatest attribute is demonstrating a structured approach in preparing to fly a model, and recognising the potential hazards, how they will be managed and finally what the legal aspects of flying a model are. Independent of the actual flight.

Yet what matters with the latest proposals is "why" and how do they "fit" in the existing schemes.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Thankfully the level needed to pass an A is far less complex and stressful than talking about it, just my opinion though

John

[kc]

A tests seem to take about 10 to 15 minutes plus a bit of pre flight checking and the questions. Most clubs keep the air clear whilst A tests take place and they certainly would not want to lose an hours flying each time.

But even if it took an hour it would be worthwhile. Having a national standard for flying safely that any club can accept as a safe minimum for solo flying is highly desirable.

We should all be wondering why the BMFA has suddenly decided on a test for types of models previously not acceptable for a standard test. Reason is very likely they are going to suggest that to the CAA as a minimum qualification for anybody to fly any type of RC.model. Why propose these new tests otherwise?

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

New technology ?

John

[Don Fry]

In fairness an A test is a flying test. All you actually need is an assessment that you are safe. If the machine is airworthy, handled safely in the pits, fine. If the operator breaks one every week in safe ground, not a problem to me.

[kc]

Obviously the A test is more than a test of flying skill it's also a test of whether a pilot knows the regulations that govern flying in Britain.

Anyone who crashes every week is a liability!

[John Lee]

Posted by kc on 21/03/2016 19:03:26:

We should all be wondering why the BMFA has suddenly decided on a test for types of models previously not acceptable for a standard test. Reason is very likely they are going to suggest that to the CAA as a minimum qualification for anybody to fly any type of RC.model. Why propose these new tests otherwise?

I don't buy the conspiracy theory, at least as far as the Basic Proficiency Test is concerned as it may be because I asked for it!

Last year we had two new beginner members who both started with models equipped with the Spektrum SAFE system including the 'Panic mode' recovery. Both progressed very quickly and as a Club who does not insist that you need an A Cert before solo were allowed to go alone on the provision that they were to be reassessed before going solo on an unassisted model or with the SAFE system disabled. This worked very well, being let off the leash enabled them to get in much more flying without having to wait on an instructor. Within 2 months both went on to fly without SAFE and now both are flying Acrowots competently & confidently. One has taken his A Test & the other intends to do so shortly.

As an Examiner keen to see the Achievement Scheme keep up with the times I wrote to the BMFA Achievement Scheme Review Committee last April and my email included this:

"Opinions are divided at present as to how much and when to use the new technology with its different stability modes during training and whether we should clear solo at different stages. EG How much use should we make of the various modes? Should we let members practice solo if they can demonstrate that they are competent with 'Beginner Mode' engaged but require further training before they are let loose in 'Intermediate Mode'? There are a number options in this context and as I say we have a number of different opinions being expressed.

I appreciate of course that candidates cannot take an "A" test even in 'Experienced Mode' as it still has giro assistance even though they may well be fully safe & competent at this stage.

The new technology is here and we may find that some will now use it throughout their modelling career, never flying a model which does not have artificial stability. Others may choose to adopt it later in life as their physical & mental faculties deteriorate to keep them flying, whilst yet more may use it selectively on particular models. But it cannot be ignored......"

[Erfolg]

John

The use of new technology can be ignored.

At present the CAA does not require any form of certificate to fly a model.

The achievement scheme is a BMFA run system

It is up to clubs to decide if they use any of the schemes to determine who can fly unsupervised. At present there is no requirement in the BMFA rules to require a club to use the schemes as a basis for any aspect of regulating a clubs activities.

So where does this take us? I do no know, other than a complication to a system, without any obvious benefit. I cannot see a regulator being impressed by the sheer apparent complexity without a logical rational.

I can see the rational in introducing a 3 part system, where the CAA could be satisfied with the demonstration of the ANO. In a similar way, I can anticipate that the HSE would approve of addressing and the testing of conventional safety.

It may seem I am being very critical, yet is it not reasonable for the BMFA to announce the new structure and the thinking and justifications as to why and perhaps where they think the scheme will take us all.

I do approve of the concept that all the test procedures are now to be made available in booklet form and I would expect that the criteria used by the examiners to be available in a similar manner. In this era, I am guessing that the BMFA is sub dividing the electronic handbook, to make both reading and printing the relevant sections much easier.

I am neither infavour, nor as yet against the new achievement categories, I am awaiting an explanation of why and what will be achieved.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

No you can't ignore new technology, it keeps coming and we best pay attention.

John

[Erfolg]

John

You can ignore technology. By this I mean where the feast is constantly changing and the destination of where it is heading is not clear, it is often prudent to ignore technology until there is a clear picture of the impact..

In this case I would ask, what benefit is there in setting out a test procedure, when it is very possible that what you are testing today, is not relevant tomorrow. Or just as unfortunate a test which does not demonstrate that something is being measured that is useful or relevant.

I can see that some systems remove some aspects of control from the operator, others smooth out conventional controls, yet others make models that would normally be uncontrollable, into a model where normal responses can be expected.

There is one aspect of why sometimes technology is ignored, such as occurs with golf, that is to ensure that the game requires ability and skill to play well. Which i am not advocating

To answer these questions or ideas, it would be useful for us all to know "why", with respect to the new categories, what is it they deliver.

[Andy Symons - BMFA]

Posted by Erfolg on 21/03/2016 20:

I do approve of the concept that all the test procedures are now to be made available in booklet form and I would expect that the criteria used by the examiners to be available in a similar manner.

The test procedures and criteria used by the examiners has always been available in booklet form, its nothing new at all.

We have some, what in effect are very minor changes to the achievement scheme, that simply open the scheme up to some aircraft that were previously excluded and make the asking of certain questions that could have been asked anyway. Very minor changes.

[Erfolg]

Andy

I did obtain a examiners and candidate booklets from a BMFA stand at an exhibition. What I was not clear about if these were readily accessible, say from within the BMFA Handbook or are they of limited distribution.

I did have a handbook, although I did not find it as accessible as I would have liked. I know it easy to appear to just criticise, although my hope that when ever an opportunity occurs, it is taken to produce an improved document. For me this is the production of sections that can conceptually be pulled out, and stand alone on an aspect of the general contents.

I note you have indicated that changes are minimal, as an outsider, there appears to be  significant changes. I imagine that there is a hierarchy of award, or do they all stand alone of equal status. Yet the question that keeps nagging me, what are these new awards meant to achieve, for the individuals who take them and then those who may seem them as relevant to their organisation etc. I certainly want to know more, I may be the only one, yet there could be others.

Edited By Erfolg on 21/03/2016 23:40:34

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Erf all the test guides and the handbook are available on the BMFA website for free down load as PDF's.

BEB

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Surely these are all indications of achievement Erf? That's what they are meant to signify - nothing more. nothing less.

As you stated earlier, some (most?) clubs have chosen to apply A tests as standards for solo flight - the creation of achievement tests for new model types changes nothing...it could be that some clubs will now allow members to fly, for example, stabilised models only if that is the test they have passed - much as taking a driving test with an automatic car limits a driver to automatics only. But that's a matter for individual clubs.

I believe that the current reorganisation of the Achievement Scheme paperwork is simply aimed at collating all the information into a common document/location. I suspect this is actually what you're advocating?

[Dave Hopkin]

The creation of tests with models or technology that is not permitted in the standard A Test brings inclusion to a growing number of flyers using "park fly" models - most of these are too light for the A test and have some form of stabilisation on them - While some of these flyers will in time gravitate to larger more tradition club style models many have no desire to or do not have the facilities to store large models - Now they can be included

Afraid the times and technology marches on a pace and the A test leaves an ever growing number of flyers outside it

Tempus Fugit summat rotten

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

You keep asking Why Erf

So how about telling us Why not ?

John

[Erfolg]

Why, is often the starting point, knowing why, enables you at a later date to access if you are achieving what you intended. Understanding what you initially intended, also can help in reassessment if the original goal is still relevant, also if worthwhile changes could be useful. This should answer you "why not" John.

If you consider the rather mundane sequence of "O Level", "A Level" and degree you can see the progressive nature of a typical educational qualification.

In this era there are typically a range of certificates, that may have some specialist remit such as IOSH (which I held) and a few others, I also had a folder full of useless certificates that mean nothing, other than i had a few days out, perhaps took a superficial exam that nobody took seriously.

Then you look at the BMFA structure as it was. a "A" and "B" cert, for a range of aircraft types

There is also the question of the structure of each individual scheme,.

Although i do not actually know, the original purpose of the "A" test . I assume it was to establish the concept of a minimum level of competency to fly a model aircraft. The aim possibly having two components, Sufficient hand eye, an judgemental skills to operate the model and then a component that addressed the issues of safe ground operation and some understanding of Legal restrictions.

The "B" I would assume is about flying skills above the average.

You may take the view does it matter that there a few others.

At present i would argue it might. It might in that it is possible to suggest principally to the regulators, that the BMFA "A" certificate is very relevant, in that it clearly tests the candidates knowledge of the ANO and to the HSE, that the BMFA supports safe working practises.

A whole raft of schemes without the clear understanding of what they represent will dilute the message with a whole raft of bodies. To many schemes, can allow some to suggest the multiplicity of schemes are not coherent. Showing little differentiation or purpose between the various schemes.

At present, as a group potentially we have a problem with image, where to many a sub set of irresponsible drone operators are part of our movement.

I see all of these issues to some extent being relevant, it is on this basis i seek assurance, that the new groupings are more than it seemed like a good idea.

Dave has put some ideas forward as to why. I really expected the BMFA to have immediately responded with a mission statement, as to what they seek to achieve and where they are going with this whole subject

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

I'm sorry Erf, I can follow the BMFA's thinking but you've got me puzzled.

John

[Erfolg]

What is the thinking John? That is all i am asking

[Masher]

Well you did ask John!

UNSUBSCRIBED

[John Lee]

The purpose of the Achievement scheme has been in the BMFA Handbook for the last 30 years, it was and remains:

"The main aim of the R/C Achievement Schemes is to encourage model flyers to reach a given standard of flying ability and safety and to prove that standard to an Examiner. There are two grades;

(a) The ‘A’ Certificate which may be equated to a ‘safe solo' standard of flying.

(b) The ‘B’ Certificate which is designed to recognise a more advanced pilot’s increased ability and knowledge and a demonstrated high level of safety."

 

Much ado........

Edited By John Lee on 22/03/2016 22:21:33

[Erfolg]

So how do these other categories fit in?

The "A" and "B" can be guessed at, their attributes seem obvious, clear cut, no duplication,

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Erfolg on 22/03/2016 20:14:21:

You may take the view does it matter that there a few others.

At present i would argue it might. It might in that it is possible to suggest principally to the regulators, that the BMFA "A" certificate is very relevant, in that it clearly tests the candidates knowledge of the ANO and to the HSE, that the BMFA supports safe working practises.

A whole raft of schemes without the clear understanding of what they represent will dilute the message with a whole raft of bodies. To many schemes, can allow some to suggest the multiplicity of schemes are not coherent. Showing little differentiation or purpose between the various schemes.

The common factor in ALL the tests is the questions asked on a range of safety related items and more pertinently, Air Law in general, with additional emphasis applicable to the type of models being tested. Therefore, the fact that these ACHIEVEMENT certificates are being made available to the pilots of greater range of models should make no difference to any validity perceived by the CAA or EASA.