New Drone Laws from 30/5/2018

[MattyB]

Posted by The Wright Stuff on 18/07/2018 12:16:28:

Oh my god we are going around and around. A model aircraft is an unregulated drone, at present. Yes, we could be badly affected, but times change. The world evolves. We need to adapt and evolve too. It could be much much worse.

The fact that it could be much worse does not mean we should just lie down and accept it. The 1000ft limit may not affect the flying you do, but it has the potential to make the majority of thermal soaring (where 400ft is not even the launch height in many competitive classes) illegal, and severely impact slope soaring.

Thermal soaring in particular cannot just adapt; the way that thermals are formed means that limiting max height to 400ft will make it very difficult to participate competitively or recreationally other than in the smaller, lighter classes. Essentially a perfectly legal, safe activity is being made illegal on the ground that at some undetermined point commercial BVLOS SUAs will need to use that airspace.

Edited By MattyB on 18/07/2018 12:42:04

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[The Wright Stuff]

Posted by MattyB on 18/07/2018 12:39:36:

Posted by The Wright Stuff on 18/07/2018 12:16:28:

Oh my god we are going around and around. A model aircraft is an unregulated drone, at present. Yes, we could be badly affected, but times change. The world evolves. We need to adapt and evolve too. It could be much much worse.

The fact that it could be much worse does not mean we should just lie down and accept it.

Not suggesting that at all, Matty, sure we need (needed) to make ourselves heard. BUT, we should consider our current position to be a privilege not a right, that is all...

[Paul C.]

Hi Steve, just thinking further about telemetry. I have a spektrum dx8 with a telemetry module ( never used it though) does the altitude measure the height from the model to the transmitter or from the model to the ground beneath it, this I believe is what would be required. No expert on these things just looking for info.

Cheers,

Paul.

[Howard Winwood]

lets have some common sense here, IF there are aircraft flying over or near your club field then you have a responsibility to fly carefully/safely or not at all untill the hazard has passed. IF there are no aircraft anywhere near then what is the problem?

IF the authorities want to check your height, they would have to stand on virtually the same spot in order to triangulate the height.(short of regulations forcing models to carry telemetery equipment to monitor height and I doubt that will happen.)

IF there were ever to be an accident with a commercial or private aircraft, then it beggers the question, should that person have been flying his model anyway?

Stop the doom mongering and get a dose of common sense.

Stop blaming drone users (that is ALL of us if you bother to read the blurb).

Just carry on as normal.

[Nigel R]

Carrying on as normal is about to become illegal for thermal gliders, probably slope, (and a number of other types).

Not sure if that's been mentioned yet.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Howard Winwood on 18/07/2018 13:52:31:

lets have some common sense here, IF there are aircraft flying over or near your club field then you have a responsibility to fly carefully/safely or not at all untill the hazard has passed. IF there are no aircraft anywhere near then what is the problem?

IF the authorities want to check your height, they would have to stand on virtually the same spot in order to triangulate the height.(short of regulations forcing models to carry telemetery equipment to monitor height and I doubt that will happen.)

IF there were ever to be an accident with a commercial or private aircraft, then it beggers the question, should that person have been flying his model anyway?

Stop the doom mongering and get a dose of common sense.

Stop blaming drone users (that is ALL of us if you bother to read the blurb).

Just carry on as normal.

 

Advocating ignoring the law because it doesn't suit you and you think you can get away with it...

Common sense?

I think not.

Edited By Martin Harris on 18/07/2018 14:53:08

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Howard Winwood]

no one is advocating breaking the law, for most it is just carry on as normal, THEY have to prove you broke the law, not the other way round.

from the general tone on this posting.......... we're doomed capt Mainwaring, we're doooomed....

[Denis Watkins]

While they are proving it

They may arrest you due to the sequence of events unfolding

Causing them to arrest and fingerprint you on the way, leading to a criminal record

And loosing you job if employed in such a sector as to warrant it

The wife then leaves you and takes the dog too ! ! !

I think we are best advised to follow the rules

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

My dog wouldn't leave me.

[Paul C.]

Ain't got a dog or a cat .

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Posted by Paul C. on 18/07/2018 19:22:07:

Ain't got a dog or a cat .

Billy no mates.

[Paul C.]

Fraid so John

[ChrisB]

Have I missed something????

The BMFA,SAA, FPVUK and LMA have issued a statement regarding an exemption agreed by the CAA, DFT and the associations, which will be in place on or by 30th July.

You can all worry if you want but I won’t be, as it’ll all be fine!

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

We ain't all worrying, some of us are pretty laid back about, some will just get on with whatever comes, best of all some of us have a dog/cat.

[Paul C.]

And I am off to Spain tomorrow for a week

[Gordon Whitehead 1]

I've been flying models using Spekky altimeters for over 8 years. Initially because we had a 300ft height limit imposed at Chivenor airfield where I flew. Keeping a Nano Boomerang jet below 300ft whilst doing aerobatics was possible but a bit taxing. During the past 4 years I flew with a 400ft height restriction for my over 7kg Jungmeister as my current club field lies within the Manchester ATZ. On my old Spekky system (DX18 Gen 1 so only beep and vibe warnings, no voice) I would set the alt to beep at 20ft below the height limit and generally fly within the limitation with the occasional brief excursion above depending upon the figure being flown.

Today I fitted an altimeter to my 6 or 7 year old 5S Sebart Katana hack aerobat with the beeper set to 400ft to see what effect the new rules would have on my hitherto carefree flying activities with this model. Doing my usual aerobatic routines, the model was mostly below 400ft as you should expect, as flying this type of model all the time at 400ft and above is unnecessary. However, many of my favourite manoeuvres had the plane popping up higher than the limit for brief periods, eg: vertical 4-point roll topped with a vertical snap roll and stall turn with a one-turn spin and 4-point roll on the down line (called the "Totem Pole" by Neil Williams in his "Aerobatics" book; rolling 8-point hesitation loop with 1/2-rolls in each leg; figure M - the old FAI manoeuver comprising vertical 1/4-rolls with stall turns and an inverted recovery to vertical in the middle; vertical figure 8. All these could be squashed into a smaller vertical distance but with less satisfaction due to the rushed nature of the manoeuvers, and made more difficult and less pleasing because of the trees over which one has to fly at our sheep pasture site, thereby raising the "hard deck" to maybe 40 ft above ground level.

To me, model flying has always meant aerobatics, so that's the way I like to fly. Naturally, by far the greater proportion of every flight has always been flown below 400ft because there's no need to spend lots of time really high up doing aeros as the model becomes too small to control with any great degree of accuracy. Also, whilst aerobatting, it's important not to barge into anyone else's model flying airspace so you need to be well aware of what's going on around you.

Regarding any fly-in, I think that 400ft might not provide enough separation between models if upwards of 3 or 4 are flying at once each doing its own thing.

Well, that's my experience for what it's worth. Has anyone else out there got similar experience?

Edited By Gordon Whitehead 1 on 18/07/2018 21:14:42

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Erfolg]

Those who fly RC naturally have their attention firmly fixed on the issues affecting them. Outside of our community although within the often quoted 30, 000 BMFA members there are many who will be affected, immediately I think of FF modelers.

In the case of FF they will probably be required to fit a device that prevents the model exceeding 400 ft, either by intention or otherwise.

With respect to RC models, if a 1, 000 foot limit is granted.will there become a requirement to ensure that the operator is aware of the height they are operating?

Although limits have been set previously, I have a feeling that we are entering a very different era, in that demonstrating compliance could become mandatory.

I personally have doubts with respect that it is necessary to prove guilt, as many court cases, no longer (if ever) on prove of guilt, more often hinging on the weight of accusations, sometimes who the accuser or accusers are, this sometimes being the determining factor, as absolute proof is often not possible. In practice you may have to proof that you were operating legally.

If a rabbit is not pulled out of the hat at the last minute, the BMFA should immediately issue a circular which lists the constraints and how we could comply. If it is necessary at some time to be aware or record your operating height as an example, for those of us without RC sets which have available telemetry, there are opportunities of enterprising retailers of after market, independent of RC set systems. Although how you would prove that any readout reflects the events, is another matter.

Edited By Erfolg on 19/07/2018 12:04:07

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]