New Drone Laws from 30/5/2018

[Colin Carpenter]

Sorry chaps but I’m with Private Frazer on this . “We’re all doomed !!!!!!!” Colin

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Cuban8]

Posted by Steve J on 05/06/2018 11:46:03:

Posted by Cuban8 on 05/06/2018 10:45:08:

It won't address the drone problem anyway, so why lumber us with it?

This has very little to do with the "drone problem" and a lot to do with enabling commercial unmanned aircraft operations in lower airspace.

As it stands at the moment, come the 30th November, you have two choices, sort out your registration and competency with the CAA or find another hobby.

Steve

Respectfully, I disagree. The illegal and irresponsible operation of hobby drones by a 'couldn't care less' section of their buyers has got the government in a panic and fueled by 'privacy issues' and some pretty dubious claims of near misses by pilots, and the idiotic YouTube postings of drone shots of city skyscrapers, power stations, military bases etc etc. Register a drone and prove your competency? the bad guys will just laugh and carry on, so what's the point?

Unmanned aircraft in the lower airspace? Please don't mention the skies being full of delivery drones from retailers - it's not going to happen other than for limited gimmick effect- and any professional use of drones for surveying, traffic management, security, checking electricity pylons and so on, are going to be so few and far spread that existing regs (perhaps with minimal tweaking) will easily keep the lower altitudes accessible for all. So why are we (some of us) as aeromodellers and legitimate safe historic users of that lower airspace, all of a sudden, apparently accepting without question the equivalent encumbrance of a red flag carried in front of the first horseless carriages?

I'll not be finding another hobby, and I'll go along with what I'm required to do if it comes to it, but to simply roll over now in the face of what is going to be bad legislation dumped on us and missing its actual target, is not usually how we react in this country.

Registration and competency testing in the manner in which it is being proposed for us is just plain daft and I hope that good sense will prevail in the talks with the CAA, who have in general, been very positive towards our activities over the years.

I had a long conversation with half a dozen club members over the field on Sunday about all this (in the shade, too hot to fly) and the above comments are a distillation of the views of myself and those others. I'm sure we're not alone.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

We used to play football (it's a sport where you kick a ball about ) on the street, using gate post as goals, then along came all you irresponsible car/bus/truck/van drivers n ruined things, selfish is what it is. What makes you believe only yourselves didn't want to be just left alone, what gives you the impression we rolled over n just accepted what may come, you got no appreciation for the efforts made on our behalf by the various associations ? Or are you sat on a solution and keeping it to yourselves ?

You done your part in enabling "Drones" to fly at designated safe areas "club fields" and making them welcome ? or is that others responsibility ?

Personally I blame the lecky fliers, if they hadn't kept buying all these great improvements there might never have been "Drones" and us "proper modellers" could have carried on regardless. (that's sarcasm by the way)

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by The Wright Stuff on 05/06/2018 09:10:12:

Posted by JOHN MOSLEY 2 on 05/06/2018 08:32:56:

 

I guess we all need an altimeter feed back built into all receivers.

Is this a current requirement for models over 7 kg?

If not, what evidence do we have that enforcement will be any more precise for all models, than is currently the case for models over 7 kg?

In the event that the BMFA and CAA fail to reach a compromise to allow model flying to continue as at present then the responsibility to remain under 400' will remain the responsibility of the pilot. The easiest way to ensure compliance is to carry a telemetric altimeter - practical and becoming more affordable. I can build (and have built several) Arduino based variometer/altimeters for around a fiver for my radio system which compares accurately to a commercially available version. Loggers are available which could be installed on a casual basis in order to familiarise pilots with the appearance of their models at estimated heights and checked after landing. Clubs might like to consider investing on one if their members object to purchasing one for themselves or dispute observations that they may be flying too high.

I have installed these altimeters in my larger models linked in to telemetry controls to cut my throttle to idle at the height limit in force at my club - of course it's possible to use kinetic energy to zoom climb above the limit but it's an extra layer of peace of mind over the provision of an audible alarm.

Smaller power models are rarely flown above 400' in normal operation but over 7kg and jet models will need to be flown very carefully - however these models are likely to be flown by more experienced pilots with the wherewithal and inclination to take responsibility for accurate height limitation.

At this time, I have confidence that the BMFA are doing everything reasonably possible to work with the CAA to achieve the best possible outcome - I find it interesting/encouraging that the CAA are appearing to acknowledge the fundamental differences between "drone flying" and our RC flying on their website - let's hope this can result in a clear definition of a drone as a separate entity.

The main concern for me is a blanket limit will make any thermal gliding impractical at my club, which is unlikely to be able to negotiate an exemption.

Edited By Martin Harris on 05/06/2018 15:44:07

[The Wright Stuff]

Practical, pragmatic interpretation, Martin. Thank you.

I assume enforcement is not going to be possible or effective or even desirable except for for blatant, regular, significant or dangerous breaches of the height limit. Armed police are not going to be racing up the strip the moment you go above 401 feet - I assume there will be some 'grace'...

I'm not suggesting deliberately flouting the rule, just that foot to foot precision is not required, and if pilots can be 'trained' what 'more-or-less 400 feet' looks like for their models, then a club logger for familiarisation purposes sounds like an excellent idea...

[JACK]

I think the main point here is that these new laws/rules are aimed at the multi copter side of our hobby,the fact that joe public et al see all model aircraft as drones is an unfortunate side effect....the fact that a lot of multi copters can be programmed to fly a "mission" autonomously,out of sight of its operator is really the main problem,l don't know of any model aircraft that currently can do this,though l accept that it is possible,most of us fly aircraft models that need to stay in visual range of its pilot,or end up as a hole in the ground!!,so my point is that owners/operators of multi copters capable of autonomous operation should be required to register etc,but extending this to other aircraft is definitely O T T, l build and fly scale gliders at 1/4 and 1/3 scale,a 400ft restriction is just not logical or acceptable,chances are the glider/tug combo will be at or near 400ft and still on tow!!,l will pause here to accept the screams of hate from multi copter pilots!!!...jack.

[Cuban8]

Posted by The Wright Stuff on 05/06/2018 16:02:34:

Practical, pragmatic interpretation, Martin. Thank you.

I assume enforcement is not going to be possible or effective or even desirable except for for blatant, regular, significant or dangerous breaches of the height limit. Armed police are not going to be racing up the strip the moment you go above 401 feet - I assume there will be some 'grace'...

I'm not suggesting deliberately flouting the rule, just that foot to foot precision is not required, and if pilots can be 'trained' what 'more-or-less 400 feet' looks like for their models, then a club logger for familiarisation purposes sounds like an excellent idea...

With the exception of models that already have a mandatory 400' height limit and have abided by that rule for many years, what is to be gained by limiting thermal soarers to that altitude, when for half a century R/C gliders have been thermalled to significant altitudes and to my knowledge, without a problem. People are sensible in these circumstances and such flights would not be made if local knowledge revealed that light aircraft or microlights were regularly using the airspace.

It's all getting back to the commercial drones that will be 'blackening our skies' at any moment now - I don't believe it, certainly not for very many years, if at all - despite what European think-tanks tell us.

[aquila]

I would love to believe none of this will affect us but as a glider flier who only goes out when the wind is suitable, trying to get an exemption at short notice for a specific location as an individual I can foresee being a problem unless the BMFA can get blanket clearance for these sites. But as they have the only one of these for a fixed site and as a well-respected organisation I doubt we will be able to. If that is the case, and I have been assured this applies from 1/08/2018, all glider fliers will have to restrict themselves to organised events, even retirees who can go any time. As someone else has stated we are a non-commercial group and the drone manufacturers are a huge possibly multi-billion pound lobby group

[PatMc]

Posted by JACK on 05/06/2018 18:32:58:

so my point is that owners/operators of multi copters capable of autonomous operation should be required to register etc,but extending this to other aircraft is definitely O T T, l build and fly scale gliders at 1/4 and 1/3 scale,a 400ft restriction is just not logical or acceptable,chances are the glider/tug combo will be at or near 400ft and still on tow!!,l will pause here to accept the screams of hate from multi copter pilots!!!...jack.

I think you'll find that if the glider is over 7Kg you're already subject to the 400ft limit when not attached to the tug but even if it is under 7kg it seems unlikely that the glider/tug combo is within the 7kg limit so again subject to the 400ft limit. Unless prior permission has been granted by either the relevant ATC if within controled airspace or by the CAA if outside controlled airspace.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Posted by JACK on 05/06/2018 18:32:58:

I think the main point here is that these new laws/rules are aimed at the multi copter side of our hobby,the fact that joe public et al see all model aircraft as drones is an unfortunate side effect....the fact that a lot of multi copters can be programmed to fly a "mission" autonomously,out of sight of its operator is really the main problem,l don't know of any model aircraft that currently can do this,though l accept that it is possible,most of us fly aircraft models that need to stay in visual range of its pilot,or end up as a hole in the ground!!,so my point is that owners/operators of multi copters capable of autonomous operation should be required to register etc,but extending this to other aircraft is definitely O T T, l build and fly scale gliders at 1/4 and 1/3 scale,a 400ft restriction is just not logical or acceptable,chances are the glider/tug combo will be at or near 400ft and still on tow!!,l will pause here to accept the screams of hate from multi copter pilots!!!...jack.

Screams of hate Jack, must have missed those posts

Your post looks like you've misunderstood the present laws.

[PatMc]

Posted by Steve J on 05/06/2018 20:21:44:

Posted by PatMc on 05/06/2018 20:09:42:

if it is under 7kg it seems unlikely that the glider/tug combo is within the 7kg limit so again subject to the 400ft limit.

The BMFA Handbook corrections and additions addendum issued in 2013 states that "It has been clarified that a tug / glider combination has to be viewed as two separate entities, even when they are connected.". Strangely, this didn't appear in the 2017 handbook.

Steve

I stand corrected on that point, Steve, I wasn't aware of the clarification. But 1/4 scale gliders must be starting at around 5kg for the lighter ones & 1/3 scale surely over 7kg, are the tugs going to be sub 7kg ?

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[PatMc]

Posted by Martin Harris on 05/06/2018 15:38:40:

Smaller power models are rarely flown above 400' in normal operation but over 7kg and jet models will need to be flown very carefully - however these models are likely to be flown by more experienced pilots with the wherewithal and inclination to take responsibility for accurate height limitation.

My observation when comparing the altitude of powered models with my E-gliders is that some smaller powered models are often in the 500 - 600ft range those over 7kg routinely fly to that altitude range & above. some
I'm basing this on video taken from gliders with the timing compared from the glider altimeters. In case anyone's wondering, partly due to some doubt over the legality of flying camera equiped models over 400ft I gave up model aerial photography some time ago.

Edited By PatMc on 05/06/2018 21:02:31

[PatMc]

Posted by Steve J on 05/06/2018 20:57:22:

Posted by PatMc on 05/06/2018 20:44:30:

But 1/4 scale gliders must be starting at around 5kg for the lighter ones & 1/3 scale surely over 7kg, are the tugs going to be sub 7kg ?

I would be surprised if a tug capable of towing a 1/3 or even a 1/4 scale glider wasn't over 7kg. My 30cc tug is 5.5kg, which is why I know about the clarification.

Steve

I've never taken part in rc glider towing but wouldn't you're tug manage a lighter 1/4 scale glider ?

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Dave Rose]

Posted by Peter Broughton 1 on 05/06/2018 19:58:09:

""I would love to believe none of this will affect us but as a glider flier who only goes out when the wind is suitable, trying to get an exemption at short notice for a specific location as an individual I can foresee being a problem unless the BMFA can get blanket clearance for these sites. But as they have the only one of these for a fixed site and as a well-respected organisation I doubt we will be able to. If that is the case, and I have been assured this applies from 1/08/2018, all glider fliers will have to restrict themselves to organised events, even retirees who can go any time. As someone else has stated we are a non-commercial group and the drone manufacturers are a huge possibly multi-billion pound lobby group"""

 

It seems agreed here that the reason this new ANO is coming is because of the advent and use of multicopter thingys known as "drones"

Gliders an d other model planes are caught up in the ANO definition. It is not practical to have each thermal glider meeting or individual practice flight having to have an application sought from and granted by the CAA.

What the BMFA must do is negotiate an exemption of the ANO applying to "gliders" These to be defined as SUAs designed and constructed as gliders and capable of gaining height in the air without the use of power.

Seems simple. What drone can rise without power?

Come on BMFA- tell us that is what you are going to go for.

 

 

 

Edited By Dave Rose on 05/06/2018 23:21:23

[PatMc]

Posted by Dave Rose on 05/06/2018 23:20:24:

Gliders an d other model planes are caught up in the ANO definition. It is not practical to have each thermal glider meeting or individual practice flight having to have an application sought from and granted by the CAA.

What the BMFA must do is negotiate an exemption of the ANO applying to "gliders" These to be defined as SUAs designed and constructed as gliders and capable of gaining height in the air without the use of power.

Seems simple. What drone can rise without power?

Come on BMFA- tell us that is what you are going to go for.

Edited By Dave on 05/06/2018 23:21:23

That doesn't help electric self-launched gliders - probably the most common type of flat field "glider" now.

[Cuban8]

Posted by Steve J on 05/06/2018 20:27:54:

Posted by Cuban8 on 05/06/2018 18:36:55:

when for half a century R/C gliders have been thermalled to significant altitudes and to my knowledge, without a problem.

One of the two actual collisions between a recreational SUA and a manned aircraft in the UK in the last decade involved a thermal soarer. Google "AAIB G-OPFA". The other involved a Wildthing.

Steve

Thanks for that, Steve. The report is here **LINK**

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]