Legislation Proposal at last

[cymaz]

Just spotted this on the BBC News Site. And of course when the media talk of drones they think of quadcopter

[Rich too]

It’s just been on Sky News. “Most” drones are quadcopters. Personally, I’d like them to get on with it so I know where I stand as a country flier. I may have a lot of kit for sale.....

[Ron Gray]

Trouble is it will be largely unenforceable. Stop vendors selling them unless a licence can be produced will help but then there would also have to be internet control for foreign imports.

I’m totally in favour of more controls, I fly a drone commercially and the idiot drone flyers who can be seen in a lot of places (look at You Tube) cause problems for us all. Geofencing works on the more expensive drones but is not common at the cheaper end of the market.

Unfortunately I think that the horse has bolted.

[Rich too]

The thing that makes me angry Ron is that I do not fly a drone. I’ll wait and see what happens and then make a decision on my future in the hobby.

[Bob Burton]

I await with interest to see what the definition of a drone turns out to be.

[trebor]

How's a license going to prevent ordering parts from China and building your own, I've got 2 quads and there both bitsa,s.

[Ron Gray]

@ trebor - exactly my point!

@ Rich too - totally agree, we all fly drones, irrespective of multi rotors  or fixed wing, they are all UAVs so we all get tarred with the same brush unless legislation differentiates between them.

Edited By Ron Gray on 26/11/2017 07:59:43

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[sharpy1071]

It is claimed by the powers to be that this will stop criminal activity. Ha Ha. There is a sign in every town, village city saying 30mph does that stop people doing more than 30mph? There are gun laws, if your a criminal does that stop you from buying/using a gun? I own DJI450 which I have flown responsibly (I believe) I also fly model RC aircraft, which I fly responsibly and I am a member of the BMFA. What astounds me is I walk into Maplins, PCWorld etc there you have drones of all sizes and there is no facility for insurance on them in fact the staff know nothing about the BMFA insurance scheme in many cases. You hear of accidents with drones, sometimes life changing, and there is no insurance supplied by the offender. This will not stop the law breakers.

Edited By Pete B - Moderator on 26/11/2017 08:36:01

[cymaz]

HomeBargins are selling Rc helicopters (aka drone) for under £20! Has the BMFA had a say in this or spoken to Baroness Sugg, CAA .?

[Peter Miller]

I have to say that I dread the uninformed minds of the legislators..

I base this on the fact that many years ago the MInister for aviation replied to a letter that I sent to my MP.

The minister stated that birds do not fly very high.

Oh No?!!

Canada geese have been seen at 29,000 feet. In text, Twenty nine thousand feet.!!

So much for the "expertise" of the Minister for Aviation and I doubt if any other legislator is any better

[cymaz]

Posted by Rich too on 26/11/2017 07:40:27:

The thing that makes me angry Ron is that I do not fly a drone. I’ll wait and see what happens and then make a decision on my future in the hobby.

As I see it ,a drone is a uav. Planes are UAVs. Any UAV is a Rc plane, glider, helicopter..etc..etc. One of our fliers who is a county member, I’ve said to him to pay his insurance now through the club and be a club member. Maybe the legislation will get buried under the brexit work and forgotten about for a couple of years.

Flying illegally or taking the kids out to the park?......

[ChrisB]

Quiet news day, old news rehashed, nothing new.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[ChrisB]

We don't encourage multi-rota aircraft at our club, although not banned completely. We don't allow FPV or any automation of any kind for anything.

We don't encourage them primarily because we are a conventional fixed wing model flying club (we don't encourage helicopters either, but there is a dedicated heli club nearby anyway).

Also, society associates MR with the term drones and not a conventional fixed wing model aircraft. So, if locals or someone in authority see a MR hovering around the flying site, they will immediately think of the headlines in the Daily Mail and BBC but seeing a scale model or an aerobatic model or a glider, they will just think of model aeroplanes being flown by men in straw hats at smoking a pipe and will hopefully not get too excited and that's fine with us!

Yes there is and will continue to be legislation for everything that flies but its not the legislation that people should be worried about, its the reaction/overreaction of the media who ultimately influence the average man on the street and the local authorities, be it planning, environmental health, councillors, police etc

[ChrisB]

When you read the DFT statement on the GOV website and look at the pictures, what are their main concerns and what is their main interest? Its certainly not a wot4 or a spitfire. Its all about Multi-rota aircraft!

 

Anyway, a Statement from Dave Phipps below (taken from the BMFA Facebook page)

 

Many of you will have seen this morning's news headline relating to multirotors.

As you know, the BMFA works closely with the CAA & EASA to protect our sport.

BMFA Chief Exec, Dave Phipps, has released the below statement to clarify the current situation.

"DfT announces commitment to implement new rules for drones

The DfT (Department for Transport) have today announced their intent to create new legislation to regulate drones. A draft Bill outlining the new laws is in preparation and will be presented to Parliament in the Spring.

The new laws are consistent with the regulations being drafted by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and will introduce new requirements for education, training and registration of drone users (and their drones above 250g) along with new powers for the Police who will be responsible for enforcing the laws.

We remain hopeful that the DfT will retain a ‘common sense’ attitude to model flying and will also follow EASA’s lead on this. EASA recognise the excellent safety record achieved by model flying and have made special provisions in their rules to allow a much ‘lighter touch’ to be applied.

Representatives from the UK Model Flying Associations will be meeting with the DfT early in the New Year to discuss the proposals in greater detail.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-powers-for-police-to-address-illegal-and-unsafe-use-of-drones

Edited By ChrisB on 26/11/2017 10:12:41

[ken anderson.]

if any legislation curbs some of the wasters its better than nothing. If you fly within the rules you should have nothing to worry about.RIP the wasters who have total disregard for any existing regs etc......most of us will have seen a bit iffy flying of drones.....or what ever you want to call them...... LOS flying never has been a problem(apart from the odd one)its the "drones" that are flown fpv far and above where they should be that are the concern...... please note -this is my view(one of the many) and isn't intended to offend/or put noses out of joint-unless you are one of the wasters....

ken Anderson...ne...1 rules and regs dept.

[Cuban8]

Definition of a 'drone'? For our purposes we're talking about machines that fly rather than drone ships, cars etc.

'A device capable of performing functions in a fully autonomous and independent manner after being programmed with instructions by an operator' Am I anywhere near close with this definition.?

[ken anderson.]

hello Cuban...you may think your near close...but there will be others who will say your not.....

ken Anderson..ne...1 clear dept.

[Bob Burton]

"'A device capable of performing functions in a fully autonomous and independent manner after being programmed with instructions by an operator' "

So, I could build and fly a multirotor that had no such functionality and it would not fall under the "drone" regulations ? I can't see that happening.

In order to make things simple I suspect that there will be a simple rule based on weight. This will seem to be simple to enforce but will not work in practice. As for registration, naturally anyone who intends to use their drone for illegal purposes will register it and make sure that it can be identified from a distance.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[iqon]

So nothing changed yet, let me know when it does

[Ron Gray]

We all generally refer to multi rotors as drones, we differentiate between fixed wing and these 'other' types. the reason we can do that is because we know the difference because we are in the sport. Others, out side the sport, do not usually have such an informed view.

But, taking Ken's point above, early this year I was with my granddaughter on a local village playing field quite happily playing on the swings (the granddaughter, not me!). This chap arrives, on his own, in his car and sets up a seat and ground station complete with viewing screen on the edge of the field. He then proceeded to take off and fly FPV out over the surrounding fields and flew well beyond VLOS, staying up for about 20 minutes. He then came into land on the playing field and to be fair it was a very good landing!

Typical  drone you may say, and you would be correct but this was a fixed wing jobbie not a multi rotor. I asked the guy if he knew that he was breaking the law but his reply was that it wasn't hurting anyone so what's the harm. I also asked him if he had insurance, he said that he did through the BMFA I then asked if he took photos for commercial use to which he said sometimes. Pushing my luck a bit I asked if he was a certified CAA drone pilot, he said no as this was not a drone! I politely pointed out that he was breaking the law on several points, didn't he realise that? A shrug of the shoulders was the response!!!!!!

Turning to the matter of clubs banning / discouraging / encouraging multi rotors. I'm a firm believer that the more members we can attract and educate the better it will be for everyone. However, despite me being a stalwart BMFA supporter I do think that their attitude when it comes to competency for multi rotor flying is rather somewhat behind the times. I refer specifically to the requirement to be able to switch off GPS and most automation to fly in atti mode and this is where they are at odds with our governing body the CAA. The CAA recognise that automation / semi automation (and by that I refer to assistance) is now very common place and in fact on some of the latest 'drones', the DJI Mavic being one, you cannot actually switch off GPS or put it into atti mode. The reasoning behind this is that these features are used as safety functions by DJI (geofencing being just one). If you turn up to do the A cert or BPC with a Mavic you will not be able to, if you go to the CAA you will be able to do the flying test with one! I would also add that the CAA test is much more about safety than the BMFA one and shouldn't that really be the point of the basic tests? The point I am trying to make is that the BMFA make it less inviting for prospective pilots so they don't bother. I know this first hand having had exactly that discussion with a couple of chaps who had thought about doing it but to them flying a figure of 8 circuit with hovering was not really 'their thing' but they totally bought into the CAA approach which includes emergency descents, orientation issues etc.

I have raised this with the BMFA but was somewhat taken aback by the response that I got from them and the fact that it would have to wait a year for it to be discussed (the CAA make regular changes to keep pace with technology developments). The feeling I got was that the BMFA do not want multi rotors as part of the flying fraternity.

Edited By Pete B - Moderator on 26/11/2017 15:52:54

[Dave Bran]

So, here we go recycling all the old comments all over again.

Does anyone here bother to follow the AAIB and other Government reports on drone incidents?

Been very VERY quiet for quite a few months.

ALSO, to the "anti-multirotors in clubs" brigade - FACT - Every MR sport pilot who has joined into two of my clubs has gone on, if not already able, to fly helicopters and fixed-wing, and is an asset to the club. And a few competent FW pilots have added MR and Heli skills to their portfolio. In a lot of cases I have done the cross format familiarisation, and its been a pleasure, so YOUR LOSS.

The worst experiences I have personally had have been with CAA certified pilots, who in my now quite extensive experience are in actuality shockingly clueless about safe use of video eqpt, safety rules, etc.

The last one I was in contact arrived and turned on while using my (in use) video frequency. When asked he didn't know WHAT his video frequency was set to, or how to access it, or the process to check receive before transmit to ensure interference free.

He was also quite happy to have a large and powerful fixed wing twin prop "drone" untethered and powered up in the pits, some of the time even facing his own legs while he played with the radio Tx settings with the tx buried into the back of his "faraday cage" 4x4! He didn't see any problem when it was mentioned, so one must assume he behaves similarly when out on jobs with public in the frame.

[Ron Gray]

As always Dave, you can find exceptions to the rules it doesn't mean they are all like that, similar, not all drone pilots are idiots!

Edited By Ron Gray on 26/11/2017 12:38:35