CAA registration consulation

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Philip Lewis 3]

Absolutely.

What about the clubs that actually own their land?

Simple, you own the land only not any rights to the sky above it.

Edited By Philip Lewis 3 on 07/05/2019 21:50:03

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Philip Lewis 3]

Nor does anyone else, you still have the legal right to use it.

Wrong, the CAA regulates it and anything that flies even a paper plane does so under an exemption from the CAA. ATC above 10,000 feet LOS below but it's all regulated by the CAA. Police police the ground (sometimes) but the CAA police the sky.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

31 pages, you've got some stamina, been involved with CAA twice at our club, found them very reasonable and fair, I've no idea what kind of pressures people have been put under, nor how it'll all end up, hope for the best n keep your chin up.

[iqon]

Posted by john stones 1 on 07/05/2019 22:57:37:

31 pages, you've got some stamina, been involved with CAA twice at our club, found them very reasonable and fair, I've no idea what kind of pressures people have been put under, nor how it'll all end up, hope for the best n keep your chin up.

May keep this going for 100 pages.........

[cymaz]

Just emailed my MP.

[PETER BRUCE - Eastchurch Gap]

As many on here are aware politicians and the top brass of the Civil Service have to find something to do so they legislate..

Things start by allowing (for a daft instance) propelled motor vehicles on the highway as long as a pedestrian waving a red flag is in position at the front of the direction of travel at all times...

My point is that with legislation comes more and more legislation follows.

This also will increase costs which are passed onto to us.so don't think this will be the end of it.

I posted the video of the Amazon drone delivery because I could not reproduce the article from the paper published in the USA however look what a discussion the video has raised.

But gentlemen - look at how much notice we have really had by looking at the date the video was published on YouTube.

V

V

V

V

V

V

V

14th December 2016

Perhaps we were all asleep.

Regards Peter

 

PS Red Flag Act - 1865

Edited By PETER BRUCE - Eastchurch Gap on 08/05/2019 08:36:27

[Broken Prop]

It is being stated that we do not own the air above our flying sites but I am not sure about that. In the 1980's London Transport woke up to the fact that they DID own the airspace above their tube stations.

They promptly sold the rights to developers and tall buildings were erected over Monument, Blackfriars, Mansion House and probably other stations as well.

Not sure if that helps us though as a tall building erected on our flying field would get in the way a bit....

[Simon Chaddock]

But London Transport had to get permission to sell the right to build above their stations and the developer had to get permission to actually do it..

[Jason-I]

Curious that we need registration to fly a small model plane upto 400ft above our own land, (as we dont own the airspace) yet we could grow any number of 400ft trees (or higher) on our land without any issue whatsoever.....

[Bruce Collinson]

Whilst it won't change anything in this debate, technically freeholders do own airspace, in the same way that in theory they own the soil down to the centre of the earth. Imagine a cone with the point at said centre.

Below ground, the ownership is constrained by numerous factors including seperation of the mineral rights and statutory provisions for, e.g., the Coal Authority but in principle if a third party excavates under your property, it's trespass.

So is aerial incursion, e.g. by crane jibs which are frequent bones of contention and oversailing licenses in cities often involve large sums of money. Your neighbour may not build over your land, even an overhanging eaves gutter is a technical trespass, but the ultimate and practical constraint is the Civil Aviation Acts whereby the CAA has sanction for aerial activity, although not for trees I suspect although at 400' they'd almost certainly be deemed to be a navigation hazard and thus brought back to the CAA.

The imaginary cone extends to wherever in the universe your philosophy/religion runs out of space, but it's a fat lot of good,as is the soil below say 25' unless there's oil or you live in the West End and can't live without a swimming pool, cinema, 10 car garage etc, all subterranean. Per Robbie Williams. Jimmy Page had a right good go at frustrating it, unsuccessfully.

BTC

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

I think I recall that although you have a right to enjoyment of the airspace above your land, the laws of trespass don't apply unless the incursion can be shown to be denying you reasonable enjoyment of your land. I'm fairly sure that I read somewhere about a landowner trying to stop models from an adjoining model site overflying his land and failed.

EDIT:

After a bit of searching, I've remembered that it was a council which tried to prevent a model flyer launching and landing on a public footpath across council land but flying over it.  While they could prevent operation from the land either side of the footpath, they were ruled not to be able to prevent the model flyer operating this way.

Edited By Martin Harris on 08/05/2019 14:37:18

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Don Fry]

"14th December 2016

Perhaps we were all asleep.

Regards Peter"

Search for "Amazon" on historical threads on this site. We were awake and discussing it. It also reminded me how knowledgeable BEB was on these matters. 

Edited By Don Fry on 08/05/2019 16:41:58

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

I've just received the following comments from my MP which seem reasonably encouraging after the initial general statements:

The planned drones registration scheme aims to improve the safety aspects of drone usage in the UK.

 

The two measures are a requirement for all drone users of drones of 250g and above to register themselves, and their drone(s) too; and the introduction of mandatory competency testing, such as online tests, for all leisure users (commercial users already have required standards to meet).

 

These powers will be introduced to help the police better prevent malicious behaviour and misuse of drones. While fixed wing aircrafts will be included in the scheme, the Government has said it will work with model aircraft flying clubs to examine ways to exempt members of clubs with adequate safety cultures and practices.

 

The final scheme has not yet been confirmed by the CAA and a consultation is open until 7 June, with the details available on their website. Before the consultation closes and the final details are announced, I would recommend you to state your concerns about the restriction on ownership to those older than 18.

 

My position is that the best approach, from a public policy point of view, is to listen to expert evidence from the field to decide how to best balance the competing interests of the general public, the aviation industry, and enthusiasts. Thank you for sharing your view, and I can assure you that I will bear it in mind in the coming months.

Interesting comment about the under 18s - not sure if there's something on the agenda over and above the published proposals or he's just picked up on one of my comments?

Anyway, good to know that I've got a bit more than a standardised response and some expression of interest in the subject.

Edited By Martin Harris on 08/05/2019 17:03:18

[cymaz]

I still fail to see how an online test will improve safety.

Anyone who gets a quadcopter and really doesn’t give a hoot about regulations is going to fly it, unregistered.

The craft crashes out of line of sight or disappears behind an airport fence they are going to walk away, cursing the fact they have “ just wasted £100 on rubbish”

Edited By David Ashby - Moderator on 09/05/2019 14:35:58

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Don Fry]

Martin's post is worrying. The MP Hhas been reading or been briefed. two of his paragraphs copied below,

 

The final scheme has not yet been confirmed by the CAA and a consultation is open until 7 June, with the details available on their website. Before the consultation closes and the final details are announced, I would recommend you to state your concerns about the restriction on ownership to those older than 18.

 

My position is that the best approach, from a public policy point of view, is to listen to expert evidence from the field to decide how to best balance the competing interests of the general public, the aviation industry, and enthusiasts. Thank you for sharing your view, and I can assure you that I will bear it in mind in the coming months.

Interesting comment about the under 18s - not sure if there's something on the agenda over and above the published proposals or he's just picked up on one of my comments?

Now his view of under 18 owners is clearly wrong, or not up for negotiation. But he seems to have some knowledge.

Worse to me, " balance the competing interests", so the interests who compete;

the public, sympathetically lead by the Daily Mail

the aviation industry, who are not and will never care a hoot about us, they want quads, real or imagined, gone.

and us.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by cymaz on 08/05/2019 17:32:39:

I still fail to see how an online test will improve safety.

I don't think many here will argue with you about that, Cymaz

Don, what part of ownership by under 18s has he got wrong?

I can't see that he can do other than attempt to balance the interests of "interested parties" - his job is to analyse the facts of any matter and make a balanced judgement.  We all know that party dogma and directed voting is a fact of life in Westminster politics and interestingly, he disagreed with various policies of his party and became independent a few months ago.

Edited By Martin Harris on 08/05/2019 19:26:32

[Adrian Smith 1]

At least Martin got a response from his MP. I have had the customary silence from mine whenever I have asked a question on this or other matters. Well I have had it up to here with this lot especially after widespread reports today of many MPS still fiddling their credit cards REPETITIVELY and the Watch Dog wanting to cover it all up.

My vote goes elsewhere next time. As somebody once said to me - if voting ever changed anything the establishment would do away with it! Very depressing.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]