Former Member Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GONZO Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 So, are you saying the rules apply to sub 250gm planes and drones(the normally quoted lower weight limit that the new drone regulations apply to). ie even paper planes of a few grams? If so, IMO, it truly is nonsense legislation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GONZO Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 Don't forget to get permission for the Frisbee when your out walking the dog. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Wilson Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 The club I fly at is 2km off the end of one runway of a protected airfield. Looks like we will need to negotiate with their air traffic control. We may be ok as it is the secondary runway used mainly for helicopters. They dont have quite the same arrival departure path as the fixed wing ga traffic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Wills 2 Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 Our club strip is going to be right in the extended box just outside the ATZ radius. It looks like we will be doing the same with ATC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Jenkins Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 That will concentrate a few minds! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piers Bowlan Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Mr Rusu was spotted by police patrolling Sipson Way which is adjacent to Sipson Recreation ground. He was convicted of flying a UAV (Tundra) within an Aerodrome Traffic Zone without permission from ATC. If he was flying from the recreation ground, that is about half a kilometre from the A4 Bath Road which is the northern boundary of LHR. I see that the Hayes and District Model Aero Club still fly from Cranford Park just South of the M4, which is also quite adjacent to LHR. I attended a model flying event there many years ago. I wonder if the new regulations will impact their continued use of the Park? Edited By Piers Bowlan on 24/01/2019 07:07:53 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stu knowles Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Rather ironic that after all the who-ha on forums about quads being the end of aeromodelling as we know it one of the first convictions is for a fixed wing aeroplane that is unlikely to stray more than a hundred yards from its pilot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuban8 Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 The gentleman in question was foolish to fly his Tundra as he did and has, quite rightly, been dealt with accordingly. Still doesn't excuse or justify the foolishness/recklessness of some hobby drone flyers who have made the issue of illegal incursion into controlled airspace very much a wide spread party piece. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyB Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Posted by Steve J on 23/01/2019 23:24:55: Posted by Bob Cotsford on 20/01/2019 13:17:18: "A man has been charged with flying a drone near Heathrow Airport on 24 December. George Rusu is accused of using a drone on a field near the runway just days after a scare at Gatwick grounded more than 1,000 flights. Pleaded guilty and got a £2000 fine. It was a model aircraft... **LINK** Steve This is potentially uglier than it looks. From the Metro report... "...The court heard Rusu was a member of the Little Harlington Model Flying Club, in Hayes, Middlesex and flew his aircraft two or three times a month for the past two years." According to their website all LHMFC fixed wing pilots need to be BMFA members, though they are not an affiliated club. The recently granted CAA exemption to the 400ft rule was given on the basis BMFA members had a great safety record and can be trusted to act responsibily and in line with the safety recommendations of the Association. I know one swallow doesn't make a summer, but a few more incidents like this and it would seem likely the basis for our current exemption is likely to be questioned at senior levels in the CAA and UK Government. It's worrying. Edited By MattyB on 24/01/2019 15:45:05 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Posted by stu knowles on 24/01/2019 08:29:37: Rather ironic that after all the who-ha on forums about quads being the end of aeromodelling as we know it one of the first convictions is for a fixed wing aeroplane that is unlikely to stray more than a hundred yards from its pilot. Couldn't have put it better myself, cue the outrage ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyB Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Posted by Steve J on 24/01/2019 16:43:25: Posted by MattyB on 24/01/2019 15:39:39: "...The court heard Rusu was a member of the Little Harlington Model Flying Club, in Hayes, Middlesex and flew his aircraft two or three times a month for the past two years." I have seen a post on another site indicating that LHMFC have denied that he is a member. In any case, it strengthens the governments argument for competency testing. Steve Interesting... do you have that link to hand? That is very good news if he is not a BMFA member. You are right though, it will reinforce the arguments for competency testing. Edited By MattyB on 24/01/2019 17:11:09 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken anderson. Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 don't you think even if he was a BMFA member they would have washed their hands of him? …..also I think that there is a distinct possibility there will be a few more hefty fines dished out to some individuals who fly wherever they want to regardless of any rules and regs in force.... ken anderson...ne..1....washed hands dept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GONZO Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Put me right if I've got this wrong . These rules apply to all small unmanned aircraft, even those bellow 250 gm, with no lower limit. These rules apply to free flight aircraft as well as RC aircraft. If so then this man, or anyone else, could be prosecuted for flying: A chuck glider. Or even a Frisbee as its protracted flight(?) path is due to it generating lift as it spins from its dished underside and could be considered a 'sort of' plane. This is a theoretical question exploring the limits of this legislation. Although, a 'jobs worth', we all know there are plenty out there, may act on the theoretical limits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Fry Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 A Tundra is a proper plane, in excess of one kilo. . Excuse it if you wish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GONZO Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 I'm not trying to excuse anything. I'm just trying to see if my understanding of the limits of this legislation is correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Fry Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Gonzo, you are right. No limits. If you wish to be stupid, there is a Contrary to Section xxx (2), Daft Legislation Act 2018, and Whatever Air Navigation Order waiting. As that daft egitt found out. While dragging us one step closer to the abyss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Fry Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Steve, we follow an entertaining but ultimately largely pointless activity. It's fine, as long as you remain in the shadows. You do not need publicity. He provides publicity. I used to do target shooting. Me and my ilk didn't hurt anyone with our pointless activity. We got shafted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Silence is deafening on this I see, had it been an M/R we would be on page 20 by now, BMFA would be being lambasted for not distancing us from "them". 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.