BMFA subs increase.

[Devcon1]

I'm happy with the proposed Increase, whatever fee increase required to enable the organisation to fight our case in our best interests re all the flight restriction work going on.

[Ron Gray]

As has been said, there is the opportunity to vote on the proposed increase at the AGM, either in person or by proxy. Personally I see the increase as something I’m willing to pay to allow me to continue to fly, with the knowledge that the BMFA has helped and is helping the sport not least with the new regs and proposed new regs (drone legislation).

However, the reduction in membership is worrying and the influx of drone flyers just hasn’t happened. I’ve spoken to a few drone racers and asked them why they haven’t joined the BMFA, their answers were “not suitable for us as not geared up for our type of flying” and more pertinent “the BMFA is run by people who do not understand us”, the last statement I really have re-worded quite a bit as what I was told could not be published here! There is also a feeling that existing clubs are not exactly welcoming drone flying members.

@PeterJ - congrats on passing 1000 posts!

[Cuban8]

We've seen the slow decline in club and BMFA membership coming for some time, so I'm surprised that it's getting so much panicked attention. The perfect storm's been brewing and it's approaching landfall. Have we just been relying on the 'drone dividend' to boost numbers and save us? BMFA have been very proactive in this, but it appears that the message has fallen on mostly deaf ears outside of the organisation and on those of the target users.

We're told that the sale of hobby drones has been massive and continues to be strong, yet it appears that very few of those new operators have bothered to join either BMFA or FPVUK, given that BMFA numbers have remained almost static for years and are now contracting. FPVUK says its membership is only around 3000, which suggests that the majority of UK hobby drone flyers (in their tens, possibly hundreds of thousands, if you can believe the sales figures) are merely gadget lovers, operating independently for their own amusement and are probably uninsured. I doubt that much that can be done to convince those people to pay up for something that they see as superfluous, given their lack of engagement with 'officialdom' as I suppose they must see it.

If the market has changed and we'll have to operate with fewer numbers, then one effect will be increased subs, both at club and national level - a fact of life, I suspect.

 

Edited By Cuban8 on 12/09/2018 08:12:39

[Ron Gray]

@Cuban8 -

[Nigel R]

"majority of UK hobby drone flyers (in their tens, possibly hundreds of thousands, if you can believe the sales figures) are merely gadget lovers, operating independently for their own amusement and are probably uninsured. "

I am taking some guesses here. But. From seeing posts on other forums (as before) most drone buyers are

1) latest must have gadget for birthday / christmas, with the expected use pattern (tried it once, too much hassle, didn't instantly get cinema quality film footage, back in the box, load of rubbish, waste of money)

2) want a camera to follow them while they skateboard / bike ride / climb up a cliff / etc

3) want a camera to poke around in dilapidated buildings or some bit of the countryside

almost 0% of those will bother with clubs or insurance or any of that uncool stuff done by those stuffy old geezers standing around in fields with their boring safety rules and messy old engines and stuff

almost all interest is centered around putting a camera somewhere to make youtube videos.

4) the odd one is interested in racing, more serious amateur video stuff, or building one from scratch - they will likely already have used toy type drones and I would guess are likely to make up the bulk of the 3000 FPV members

5) commercial users will defacto get qualified & insured.

[Andy Symons - BMFA]

The National Centre is open for anyone with equivalent insurance, even Percy. http://nationalcentre.bmfa.org/flying/insurance

Edited By Andy Symons - BMFA on 12/09/2018 10:18:04

[Alan Gorham_]

Oh no - another fact appears!

[Peter Christy]

Posted by Nigel R on 12/09/2018 09:35:23:

5) commercial users will defacto get qualified & insured.

I have been told by someone in a good position to know, that a lot of commercial users are putting their pilots through the BMFA Achievement Scheme, as this is recognised by the CAA as a suitable qualification, and is much cheaper than the "commercial" schemes.

I understand that you don't even have to be a member of the BMFA to take the tests, or even pay a fee!

I think the BMFA may be missing a trick here,,,,! Any comment, Andy?

--

Pete

[Andy Symons - BMFA]

No you dont have to be a memeber or pay a fee, just ensure the examiner lets the office know in advance the candidates details so the insurance can be extended to cover them.

Its one of the many things the BMFA does that can benefit all model clyers whether they be members or not.

[Nigel R]

and presumably that insurance cover is only valid for the duration of the test itself?

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Folks ask why we are not benefiting from the "drone dividend"? I agree many are just gadget tweakers so will never be really involved long term. But a good number are more than that, so you might ask why haven't they joined us? Well er,...do you think the blantant hostility that eminanted from pages such as these from our comunity towards these new flyers might have payed a small part? The effective erection of huge "You are not welcome here" signs". When some of us did speak up for inclusion we were shouted down. In fact one committee member in a club I am a member of remarked "the day a drone flys from our strip will the day I leave this club" With such welcoming attitudes is any wonder they're not here. The BMFA did its best to attract drone flyers I think, but if the grass roots membership doesn't back it up it isn't going to work.

The increase? It's not even 8p a week for heaven sake - its less than the cost of a servo extsion lead! I'm not a unqualified fan of the BMFA, in particular I have major issues with its governance, but day-to-day it does a damn good job and without them we would be in big trouble with respect to the new legislation - and we ain't out of the woods yet. So I'll happily pay the exta £4 if that is what is voted for at the AGM.

BEB

[Andy Symons - BMFA]

Insurance is valid for the flying session of the test to allow cor a familiarisation or coaching flight or two.

[Cuban8]

I don't think that it's unreasonable for any club to decide not to accept drone flyers. What we call the 'gadget brigade' wouldn't be interested even if you twisted their collective arms. The club that I belong to does not accept new multirotor flyers at the moment because the existing members did not want the airspace cluttered with camera equipped machines hovering around and getting in the way. We do have a few existing members who have racing drones, and have set up a small course off in a safe corner of our site and that works well. They are also members of a local group of drone racers and they race competitively with them. One or two fly their fixed wing models as  FPV, and as long as they fly within the regular circuit as normal, it's not a problem.

From what I've seen, drone racing can be accommodated successfully within most fixed wing clubs if the interest is there, rather as Helis are now and are a definite asset - video drones within a normal flying environment does have its problems though.

Edited By Cuban8 on 12/09/2018 11:25:53

[avtur]

In total agreement with @BEB above.

If the BMFA are openly planning for reduced numbers then that shows there is problem, perhaps they should be commended for at least being honest and recognising the situation, the 'drone dividend' boat sailed some time ago, it won't return so the BMFA is left with the problem of declining numbers to deal with.

Subs can only ever increase and as the member base declines then increased subs are the only way they can continue to fund their range of activities, either that or reduce the range.

[Erfolg]

I can understand that there are issues with drone fliers, from the perspective of fixed wing RC modelers. It is similar to the issue with respect to RC helicopter operation, in conjunction with RC fixed wing. The flight patterns are very different, potentially bring both types into conflict with respect the airspace usage. The solution has been in many clubs to operate slots for each type, or a more extreme solution in forming RC Helicopter only clubs. Although some fixed wing clubs do operate a fixed wing only policy.

To be honest I do not see an influx of drone operators as members, however arranged as a solution to the issue of insurance cost. It could even make things worse from a accident/claim perspective.

Also like large scale immigration, it is not all gains in extra revenue from membership. There is an often overlooked down side in requiring more staff to support the extra numbers and issues that come with them.

The size of the BMFA office could well be optimal, for all I know, as it is now.

The longer term issue could be any year on year fall in the numbers of fixed wing RC and FF modelers. Perhaps a modest increase in membership numbers due to increased legislation, encouraging club membership, will be a short term benefit. The longer term may require those drone members, operating as drone only clubs or accommodated in fixed wing clubs.

I do feel strongly that the accounts of the NFC and its funding needs to be transparently separate from the main membership. There are a number of reasons to argue the case for this as a policy, IMO it is about understanding where the expenditure is going. Is this important, well yes, many organisations have sleep walked into administration by supporting activities (not just the NFC) that have leaked or even hemorraged money.

I agree that the proposed increase is bearable, but if it were a longer term trend, then questions will need to be asked. That is what ever the hostility this may bring.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Alan Gorham_]

It's regrettable it hasn't prompted hundreds or thousands more people to take up the hobby. It was certainly touted as being a vehicle for doing just that. So, what now for the BMFA? By their own admission membership numbers are declining, and are set to decline further, so what's to be done? Maybe it'll be discussed over another black tie dinner........

Whatever the BMFA decide on, they need to do it promptly because the game is moving on rapidy with flyers joining alternative organisations in their dozens - or thousands in the case of FPV flyers.

Again Percy I must pick you up. You refer to "the BMFA" as wanting this, or doing that. The members voted for a National Flying Centre at an EGM. You were a member at the time and it was your choice to leave subsequently. What if membership numbers are down because others left for the same reason you did? Perhaps 5000 left and 2000 have joined as a result of the National Centre. Nobody can know that surely.

Some of the BMFA members who wanted a National centre wanted a centrally located, readily available competition venue given the loss of MoD sites. The NFC has certainly performed that function and maybe that has even led to the retention of some BMFA members - who knows?

The NFC has also been used for corporate activity days where none modellers are given some hands-on exposure to R/C flying via a buddy box and trainer. Who is to say that a small number of those modellers won't join the BMFA in the near future.

The BMFA are supporting modellers and are trying some initiatives.

It seems clear that people who leave the BMFA becasue they are disgruntled join the LMA or FPVUK, but in penny numbers compared to overall BMFA membership numbers.

I'd like to ask again what those of you have left would say (if) the LMA membership suddenly jumped up by 10,000 and the hardworking committee asked for a £20 increase in subs to cover the increased admin costs.

Judging by some of the responses on this thread you'd probably all go back to the BMFA because it was "cheaper"!

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Erfolg]

I would be surprised if there were a significant number of claims related to vehicle damage, particularly if they were BMFA members vehicles parked or otherwise. The arrangements as described by Percy are very similar to another two clubs that I have personal knowledge with respect to parking arrangements that they have adopted. All of which are inaccordance with the BMFA guidance.

Yet is the increase anything to do with insurance in reality? If so, clubs who do not operate a flight line and parking arrangements in accordance with both common sense and BMFA recommendations, they would benefit from some form of censure. If good practice requires some walking, there can be no excuses, we walk, or vehicles can only be allowed into a risk zone whilst flying is suspended, then removed to a safe location.

The issue of benefit of the NFC, is in my opinion valid. I thought that is why it was agreed there would be no subsidy or transfer of money to the project. If individuals wish to make donations, pay a NFC subscription, or participate in events great. I wish the NFC success. Just do not expect the body of the BMFA to make any contribution. It should now be an issue that is no longer controversial, if the assurances previously provided have been fully adhered to. End of story.

The concerns with respect to the cost of BMFA membership, should not be dismissed out of hand. Not all members are a financially fortunate as others, just like others they enjoy their hobby, but money could be tight. I am sure that most will continue with their BMFA membership. Yet to dismiss a rival, organisation as being insignificant or small could be a mistake. OK the BMFA is 10 times bigger, at the moment. That is why a year on year increase could become counterproductive, in that less money could result in being raised in the long run. This is really an era where there are many profound changes taking place in both commerce and society, it is no time to be complacent.

Edited By Erfolg on 12/09/2018 14:51:05

Edited By Erfolg on 12/09/2018 14:51:51

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Stuphedd]

Is it all the BMFAs fault?? Are they to blame ?? our numbers are falling , ( many threads on that subject)

My experience of "trying " to fly at other clubs , have met with Are you a member ?? no well you carnt fly here!

As a whole us aeromods are not the most welcoming folk .

Pete

The last time I flew else where , I had an Aileron servo fail , landed safely albeit a bit away from the spot and all I got , was serve you right , stick to your own club in future !

cheers