Are the BMFA Mandatory Questions Applicable?

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Bear with me - this is very involved, but I think it's important!

As many will know a new version of the ANO was released last summer. In the main it appeared that very little had changed as far as we are concerned other than the fact that the key article numbers had changed. So, for example, what was article 137 became article 240 and what was article 138 became article 241 etc.

Now these changes are reflected in the BMFA Mandatory questions for the Achievement Scheme - where question 3 states:

"What does article 240 (previously 137) of the ANO state?"

With me so far? Nothing too surprising here. But,.....

I've been ploughing through the new ANO and had left the early (general) clauses until now. There I find that the new version of the ANO's article 23 states:

"Exceptions from application of provisions of the Order for certain classes of aircraft
23.—(1) This article applies to—
(a) any small balloon;
(b) any kite weighing not more than 2kg;
(c) any small unmanned aircraft; and
(d) any parachute including a parascending parachute.
(2) Subject to paragraph (3), nothing in this Order applies to or in relation to an aircraft to which
this article applies.
(3) Articles 2, 91, 92, 94, 95, 239, 241 and 257 (except 257(2)(a)) apply to or in relation to an
aircraft to which this article applies, and article 265 applies in relation to those articles"

Phew!

Decoding that lot, what it seems to do is grant for "small unmanned aircraft" (that's us!) a blanket exemption from the entire ANO except for the specific articles listed in paragraph 3.

The problem is that article 240 is conspicuous by its absence from that list!!

If I'm right that would mean that.....Q3 of the BMFA's Mandatory Questions asks about an article of the ANO that doesn't apply to model aeroplanes!!!

Opps!

BEB

[Andy Symons - BMFA]

There isnt any oops there. 240 doesnt apply to model aircraft as such bowever it clearly applies to model aircraft pilots and indeed applies to any person.

Edited By Andy Symons - BMFA on 08/02/2017 00:05:37

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

I'm sorry Andy - nice try but it won't wash. Yes it applies to RC pilots - like it applies to everyone - whenever they go to on holiday! So, if our RC Pilot was drunk and made a nuisance of himself on the plane to Malaga he could indeed be prosecuted under article 240. But please tell me, what on earth has that to do with the safe operation of model aircraft which I thought was what was being assessed in the A-cert test?

The answer of course is - nothing to do with it at all. All sorts of laws apply to RC Pilots as citizens but have nothing to do with the safe operation of model aeroplanes. Are you going to start asking questions about TV licences next?

The facts as I see them are these:

1. The ANO is concerned with the regulation of people operating aircraft - including model aircraft

2. The A-cert test is designed to recognise a pilot's ability to safely and competently operate a model aircraft.

3. Article 23 of the ANO grants a legal exemption from most of the other articles of the ANO - including article 240.

4. Therefore article 240 does not apply to the operation of model aircraft

Given items 2 and 4 above why are you asking questions about article 240 during the A-cert test? It's irrelevant to model aircraft operation. Yes it applies in other contexts - but not in this one.

I have a much simpler, and I think credible, explanation. In the previous version of the ANO this blanket exemption granted by article 23 did not exist. All the ANO applied to model flying unless it locally stated otherwise. This was clearly untidy and CAA have taken the opportunity of the 2016 version to put this right by explicitly listing those article the do apply to model aircraft. Only BMFA missed that bit!

It's OK to admit that you missed it - I missed it too! It's buried deep in a 700 page document!! So as I say I can understand that you missed it and carried on just converting the old system numbers etc. But please - don't come up with "explanations" based on what people's legal duties are outside of the context of the operation of model aircraft in an attempt to justify the mistake!

Why not just take this to the Achievement Scheme people and they can discretely change the question to one that is relevant to the operation of model aeroplanes and we'll all say no more about it Or can't BMFA be wrong?

BEB

PS Oh while you're at it tell them the answer to Mandatory Question 2 could be improved as well. Parliament does not write the ANO, nor do they pass or approve it. In fact, it goes nowhere near parliament at all. So to say it is "how parliament establishes the law" is at best misleading and at worst wrong. Parliament passes the Civil Aviation Act, that in turn creates and defines he powers of the CAA. One of those powers is to develop a system of regulation. The ANO is CAA's chosen system of regulation. So the ANO is CAA's method of establishing the law as a secondary statutory instrument - not parliament's.

[Denis Watkins]

Someone needs to simplify this for the average, and the below average intelligencia, which

Accounts for 7 out of 10 of us

And can I suggest the complex writings thus far, though they are commendable and concise and correct

These writings must fly over the heads of 90% of the readership, whom they are aimed at

With respect of my learned friends

Edited By Denis Watkins on 08/02/2017 11:19:40

[Martyn K]

I agree with your summary BEB. I suspect that the error lies with the CAA though and it is their oversight.

Unless this omission was to preempt the EASA rule set and it will be covered in more detail there.

 

Martyn

 

Edit - having said that - EASA rules are more likely to affect Order 241

 

 

Edited By Martyn K on 08/02/2017 11:33:05

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

It could well be Martyn. for one am very surprised that we have been given an excemption to 240 - it doesn't really make sense. But there we are - it is what it is - at least until the next update of the ANO!

Denis - fair comment. I did begin by saying these are complex and involved issues. In short then:

1. CAA have the power to excempt anyone from any of the regulations within the ANO.

2. They have chosen to excempt model flyers from artcile 240 - which used to apply to us.

3. However, questions on article 240 are still appearing ion the list of madatroy questions for the BMFA A-cert. Despite the fact that we are excempt from it when flying model aircraft. (surprisingly!)

That is my point in a nutshell.

BEB

[John F]

ANO 240 simply states that "a person must not recklessly or negligently act in a manner that likely to endanger an aircraft, or any person in an aircraft"

This is a reminder, that is all, based on the fact that model flyers could possibly be in the vicinity of aircraft due to their hobby.

I had to read and understand that as part of my aeromedical training and I had to get newbie nursing staff to read and sign as understanding that as part of their TOR's when I was training them.

The ANO applies equally to everyone who could possibly have access to aircraft.

That means us.

Are you bored and just want to pick a fight with the BMFA again?

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

See this helps folks Mandatory questions.

I follow what your saying BEB...had to read it a few times though

John

[Martyn K]

Just read Article 92

92.—(1) This article applies to or in relation to—
(a) balloons except unmanned free balloons;
(b) gliders;
(c) kites;
(d) parascending parachutes; and
(e) airships,
within the United Kingdom (which are referred to in this article as “relevant aircraft"

(2) A relevant aircraft which is launched, moored, tethered or towed must not be operated—
(a) in such a manner as to—
(i) represent a hazard to other airspace users; or
(ii) without the permission of the CAA, result in any part of the relevant aircraft whilst it
is being launched or towed, or its tether, mooring or towing equipment, extending
more than 60 metres above ground level;

Para (2)(ii) seems to limit the maximum towline length for a Glider to 60m unless prior permission is granted. Or does this only apply to man carrying gliders?

Do you agree?

Edited By Martyn K on 08/02/2017 11:42:19

[kc]

Asking A Cert candidates questions such as " What does Article X say " is absurd and will result in many people not bothering to take the test. This is a test for competance to fly solo not a test for lawyers!

The questions should be straightforward and ask relevant questions such as " how close to a building can you fly if the model has a camera attached." etc,etc,

[Andy Symons - BMFA]

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 08/02/2017 11:27:39:

2. They have chosen to excempt model flyers from artcile 240 - which used to apply to us.

No they havent, nobody is exempt from article 240, it applies to absolutely every single individual in the UK.

Certain articles relate to aircraft, others to persons, 240 relates to persons (model aircraft flyers are persons) there is nothing anywhere in the ANO that suggests model aircraft flyers as a group of persons are exempt from article 240, otherwise we would have clearance to endanger an aircraft with our models.

 

You appear to be confusing a model aircraft with a model aircraft flyer. 2 very different things.

Edited By Andy Symons - BMFA on 08/02/2017 11:47:21

Edited By Andy Symons - BMFA on 08/02/2017 11:50:02

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Posted by kc on 08/02/2017 11:41:04:

Asking A Cert candidates questions such as " What does Article X say " is absurd and will result in many people not bothering to take the test. This is a test for competance to fly solo not a test for lawyers!

The questions should be straightforward and ask relevant questions such as " how close to a building can you fly if the model has a camera attached." etc,etc,

I tend to agree K.C but examiners should use some common sense in how they ask questions, as they've always done, but then you run the risk of folk diverging and some folk just want parrots performing.

John...aka Polly.

[Andy Symons - BMFA]

Posted by kc on 08/02/2017 11:41:04:

This is a test for competance to fly solo not a test for lawyers!

No it isn't. It is a test of a basic level of piloting skills, safety awareness and the legal responsibilities of flying a model aircraft. It is not and has never been a test of competence to fly solo.

[ben goodfellow 1]

A test ??? and heres me thinking its an acheivement scheme . a test implies you have to have it , which of coarse yo dont

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Posted by Andy Symons - BMFA on 08/02/2017 11:46:40:

Posted by Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 08/02/2017 11:27:39:

2. They have chosen to excempt model flyers from artcile 240 - which used to apply to us.

No they havent, nobody is exempt from article 240, it applies to absolutely every single individual in the UK.

Certain articles relate to aircraft, others to persons, 240 relates to persons (model aircraft flyers are persons) there is nothing anywhere in the ANO that suggests model aircraft flyers as a group of persons are exempt from article 240, otherwise we would have clearance to endanger an aircraft with our models.

You appear to be confusing a model aircraft with a model aircraft flyer. 2 very different things.

Edited By Andy Symons - BMFA on 08/02/2017 11:47:21

Edited By Andy Symons - BMFA on 08/02/2017 11:50:02

No I do not believe am confused.

BEB

[Andy Symons - BMFA]

We will have to agree to disagree then.

[fly boy3]

I agree completely with kc. The way it is worded will definitely put off the older members, and I do not know how very young members will get on with it. In my opinion, this will put a block on what was an achievable scheme in the past. A test, forget it. Cheers

[kc]

Andy, the A test is used as a test of competence to fly solo in many ( most? ) clubs. If its not a test of competence to fly solo what is it? Why bother passing a test just to get a bit of paper if it doesnt qualify you to do something?

This is where the BMFA could solve lots of the problems with the Government over drones -suggest to the Governmemnt/CAA that a law be passed that RC model pilots must pass the BMFA A Cert to fly solo and be insured. No A cert then must have an A cert instructor to fly. Simple and it's worked for clubs for decades.

[Rob Buckley]

What this bit of the ANO is about is the endangering of aircraft. Kites, small unmanned aircraft etc are not aircraft in the ANO.

That means if you stand at the threshold of your nearest airport throwing bricks at passing 747's, that is endangering aircraft. If you stand by a model flying site and throw bricks at passing Wot 4's that is not endangering aircraft.

If you however fly a model in the way of a 747 that is endangering the aircraft using the model, so model flying is bound by the ANO.

The ANO has said this for a while, just the order has changed.

[Andy Symons - BMFA]

Posted by kc on 08/02/2017 12:42:13:

Andy, the A test is used as a test of competence to fly solo in many ( most? ) clubs. If its not a test of competence to fly solo what is it? Why bother passing a test just to get a bit of paper if it doesnt qualify you to do something?

This is where the BMFA could solve lots of the problems with the Government over drones -suggest to the Governmemnt/CAA that a law be passed that RC model pilots must pass the BMFA A Cert to fly solo and be insured. No A cert then must have an A cert instructor to fly. Simple and it's worked for clubs for decades.

What clubs and individuals (and the CAA for that matter who accept some of the tests as proof of competence for commercial operation) use the tests for is up to them, yes the A cert is at a suitable level for that, however the test is simply a basic test of piloting skills, safety awareness and the legal responsibilities around model aircraft flying.

Are you really suggesting the BMFA should push for the govt/CAA that an A cert should be compulsory? Not a popular suggestion I would imagine and certainly not something the BMFA has ever considered.

BTW it is slightly under 50% of clubs that ask for the A to fly unsupervised.

As for why bother to pass a test that qualifies you for nothing, simple really the sense of "achievement" being one reason but personally speaking the real benefit of the scheme is the focus it gives thouse that decide to practice and work towards passing the certificates and the improved flying skills, safety awareness and awareness of responsibilities that goes along with that.

Edited By Andy Symons - BMFA on 08/02/2017 13:01:18

[Piers Bowlan]

Posted by kc on 08/02/2017 11:41:04:

Asking A Cert candidates questions such as " What does Article X say " is absurd and will result in many people not bothering to take the test. This is a test for competance to fly solo not a test for lawyers!

The questions should be straightforward and ask relevant questions such as " how close to a building can you fly if the model has a camera attached." etc,etc,

I think KC has hit the nail on the head. When I took the air law exam as part of my ATPL, several decades ago, the questions were (and still are) multi-choice and there wasn't any requirement to know what the article numbers were, just to know the content. Also, the pass mark was, and still is, 75% so why all five mandatory questions must be correctly answered in the BMFA achievement scheme, seems harsh and a bit daft.

KC's other point about turning the achievement scheme into a licence to fly would open a pandoras box of bureaucracy and cost which would be the death nail of the hobby I feel. Some of the charm of this hobby is it's relaxed unregulated nature. Long may it continue, although the writing is already on the wall I fear.

[Peter Christy]

Well, said, Piers. My sentiments exactly! Surely all that is required is that a pilot should be aware of his obligations under the law, not to be able to quote chapter and verse. We are not trying to pass the Bar exams!

One of my problems with the achievement scheme - which I support in principle - is that it has suffered from serious "mission creep" over the years. And this has not been helped by the BMFA's own attitude to it, saying on the one hand that it is only for personal satisfaction, and should not be used as a certificate of competence, and then using it as a prerequisite to enter the Nationals!

It does seem to have taken on a life of its own!

--

Pete

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Firstly, you have a point, on my driving theory test i got 100 % i didn't need that to pass though, lots of other important tests in life you'll pass with less than 100%.

Secondly, Pandoras box ain't gonna be opened by the BMFA, the last thing they'll want to do is awaken the sleeping masses.

Thirdly, why you always looking for doom around the corner.

John

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Posted by Peter Christy on 08/02/2017 15:56:07:

Well, said, Piers. My sentiments exactly! Surely all that is required is that a pilot should be aware of his obligations under the law, not to be able to quote chapter and verse. We are not trying to pass the Bar exams!

One of my problems with the achievement scheme - which I support in principle - is that it has suffered from serious "mission creep" over the years. And this has not been helped by the BMFA's own attitude to it, saying on the one hand that it is only for personal satisfaction, and should not be used as a certificate of competence, and then using it as a prerequisite to enter the Nationals!

It does seem to have taken on a life of its own!

--

Pete

Get yourself elected Peter if you wanna change things

John

[Geoff S]

I'm just glad I passed my 'A' back in 1997 a couple of years after I retired. I just wanted to be able to fly safely without endangering anyone (including myself!). I think if I'd had to quote chapter and verse of the CAA regulations I wouldn't have bothered.

Let's face it, it's mostly (all?) fairly obvious that you fly away from people and buildings and certainly don't endanger any person carrying aircraft. I can never remember the appropriate numbers and certainly not the wording of the regulations. I suspect the vast majority of model pilots can't either unless they've just swotted it for a test.

I may not be the most competent of pilots but I'm pretty sure no-one is wary of sharing a flying site with me or think I may hurt them or damage their property. Isn't that what it's all about?

Geoff