Former Member Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan M Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 I did, briefly, explain that it wasn't a drone or a toy, but a proper traditional model aeroplane that took a long time to learn to fly. I've just done a little thought experiment: I thought "cricket" and the very first thing that then came into my head wasn't the fathers-v-pupils game I participated in at my son's school last summer (the first time the blighter bowled anyone out in his life was his own dad!), nor was it the local cricket club club-house where we normally hold our RC Club committee meetings, nor was it anything to do with Lords, the MCC, Australia, Kerry Packer, kids playing in some dusty slum in Karachi, or a score of other cricket references that might bounce around some random person's head... the very first thing I thought of was the disgraceful behaviour outside a nightclub by Ben Stokes! Edited By Pete B - Moderator on 22/12/2018 13:49:15 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan M Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 Posted by Percy Verance on 22/12/2018 13:05:12: Not necessarily STF. It may simply have been her way of breaking the ice or making conversation. Damn I slow!! Maybe she fancied me?! Better get that model dusted down and head back over to the park... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan M Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 Posted by Percy Verance on 22/12/2018 13:11:01: I'll leave you to your beliefs then...... Charging the batteries as we speak....! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Blandford Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 I would suggest as many as possible write (or e-mail) to their MP explaining clearly the difference between actively controlling a model in LOS and having a multi-rotor operating in completely autonomous mode. Our MPs are there to represent US (the people). Please provide them with the understanding they need. During the last consultation I e-mailed my MP, clearly explaining why a 400 feet limit was not good for my (electric) thermal glider, complete with graphs of telemetry showing most thermal lift only occurred above 400 feet.. I received a reply from my MP, indicating he had (given my expertise!) passed my communication on to Baroness Sugg, the Minister. I subsequently received another reply that included a response from the Minister. This was positive in that it indicated the Minister was listening to the model associations, and expected the exemption we currently have to be provided. Where I fly, we also have a NOTAM in force telling full size pilots we may be flying model up to 1800 feet above sea level (around 1500 feet above ground level). So this is using regulation in the "other" direction. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Fry Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 Posted by cymaz on 22/12/2018 12:30:13: To me, it seems a shame none of the media I saw or heard didn’t contact or interview anyone at Chacksfield house..They would have put the media right on a few things and shown that model flying is done by a responsible and law abiding bunch of individuals. At the time of Dunblane, Torfaen Rifle Club had national standard pistol shooters. Contenders for commonwealth games medals. No one was or will be interested about collateral damage. Find another sport mate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cymaz Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 I have sent emails also. Always had a polite reply. I hope she sees sense. Public and press perception is everything these days. The saying “ any publicity is goood publicity “ just doesn’t cut it anymore. Twitter reprisals, internet trolls, magazine airbrushing.....if you’re face don’t fit, forget it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 You're distinction is already there, you act within the law. I don't know what you've heard, but I keep hearing illegal drone flying. By all means have two more years of posting doomsday next stop, it'll be loads of fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 I wrote to my MP yesterday, pointing out that since these people had already ignored existing legislation, why would anyone believe that more of the same was the answer? I emphasised that what was needed was *plausible enforcement* of existing laws, not more that a) couldn't be enforced and b) would only make life more difficult for the law abiding. I also pointed her towards this site: **LINK** which, I understand, has had a 100% success rate at preventing drone incursions at a prison on Guernsey. I've only had to contact her twice before (on matters unrelated to model flying) and each time she has been helpful, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed. I don't expect to hear back this side of Xmas, but if I do, I'll let you all know... -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eflightray Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 Is there an 'official definition of a 'drone' ? (Preferable not one just made up to suit forums). People seem to just be lumping any multi-rotor model in to that category, yet there are fixed wing model that can basically do the same job. I'm sure the Army doesn't say, "No, it's not a drone we use, it's a fixed wing model plane". ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 The "official" description is UAS (Unmanned Aerial System), which covers everything from "drones" (as we would define them) to any model aircraft - or even military "drones". There appears to be no "official" definition that distinguishes between those capable of operating beyond Line-Of-Sight - autonomous or semi-autonomous devices - and those, such as our models, that require constant visual contact with the pilot to maintain controlled flight. And therein lies the problem! -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 Not so long ago, we seemed pretty content with the outcome of the new regs, still some concern maybe, but better than we hoped for, in my case. Been an incident, and we're in panic mode again, therein lies the problem. Let's ban lecky flyers, wouldn't have happened without the development in that area. I.C lads are easy found...follow the noise n smoke trail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erfolg Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 I expect that the ambiguity in the definition of "!drone" is simply that it provides the regulators with maximum flexibility with respect to their interpretation of who is covered by their diktats.>> It would not prevent the creation of sub groups, if thought advantageous. Although I suspect regulators in general see no advantage to themselves with the concept.>> There is nothing to stop the BMFA or LMA suggesting sub categories. Unless the CAA saw an advantage to themselves I cannot imagine that they would particularly welcome the idea.>> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Stevens Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 If caught and convicted then surely the thing to do would be for Gatwick/airlines/authorities to launch civil action and claim all the lost revenue they have suffered plus any costs to the public purse? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Skilbeck Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 Posted by supertigrefan on 22/12/2018 17:48:18: They've been named AND had their address revealed...….. And noted that he's a model aircraft enthusiast, got into model aircraft via his boss, who he's worked for 17 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cymaz Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 Posted by Frank Skilbeck on 22/12/2018 18:14:43: Posted by supertigrefan on 22/12/2018 17:48:18: They've been named AND had their address revealed...….. And noted that he's a model aircraft enthusiast, got into model aircraft via his boss, who he's worked for 17 years. Where is the info? Online? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Skilbeck Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/gatwick-drone-identities-of-arrested-couple-revealed/ar-BBRir3m?ocid=spartandhp It's also on the daily mail online Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.