Michael Barclay Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 It's a done deal. Has been from day one. The only way to stop bad legislation is by direct action and our government knows that we are a law abiding lot even when our noses are being rubbed in it so they ignore us. The French government on the other hand guessed in advance that the French people don't take kindly to stupid legislation which curtails previously accepted freedoms, and that a few drones could and probably would bring their airports to a standstill, forcing them to back down. That is why their system is free. , Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J D 8 Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 In 2007 I led a nation wide dispute with the department of transport over the provision of adequate injury cover for government agency voluntary rescue members [Coastguards] while on duty. [ Some info still on the interweb ] After months of letters to various leaders including the then Minister of transport it was only after we took direct action, [ Stood down from service. A strike in other words ] something we never wanted or expected to do. That notice was taken and talks began that resulted in a satisfactory agreement being reached. At the flying field today the general feeling was we should all stand tough and say we will not cooperate or pay anything with regards the present proposals. Given my previous experience I agree They will try to divide and rule. I know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 Well when the BMFA calls for strike action count me in, one out all out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuban8 Posted May 12, 2019 Share Posted May 12, 2019 I don't condone breaking the law and will not do so, but if it comes to it I would be prepared to forgo a few months of winter flying (I tend to take a break anyway) and not register. If all bmfa members and others in the 'good guys' camps grit their teeth and take a break from outdoor flying , it'll send a clear message, especially when only those who are the real targets of registration will ignore the law and carry on regardless. When they only get a few outside of the governing bodies registering, perhaps the penny (or 1650 of them ) will drop. Will only be effective if we all agree . Edited By Cuban8 on 12/05/2019 20:21:48 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sticky fingers Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 Just been outside In my back garden , lo and behold I observed a multi rotor flying over housing within the Liverpool ATZ and then climb to out of sight within the normal route of the ultra lights from Formby airfield ,don't know where it was flying from , may have been a police machine but it certainly gives ammunition to someone in their efforts to regulate us only supposition on my part but I,d lay odds it was flown in accordance with current requirements Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sticky fingers Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 Typo , wasn,t flown to current requirement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR 71 Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 I fully agree SF, have a break from flying do more Modelling and more importantly spend a little more time with the better half. And get some very good brownie points for next summer's flying You know it makes sence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Manuel Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 I haven't read the entire thread, so please forgive me if this has already been asked / discussed. Would model owners who don't register until next summer be breaking the law by just having their models in storage at home and not flying them over winter? In other words, is it ownership of a model, or use of a model that requires the registration? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted May 13, 2019 Author Share Posted May 13, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GONZO Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 It's my understanding that it's use(operator) of the models/drones not ownership. Although, when looked at from the aspect of commercial entities it could be taken to mean ownership ie a company with 20 drones and 20 flyer employees would only pay £16.50 registration and the 20 flyer employees would just take the free competency test. When does a set of plans and some balsa or a kit or a part made kit or an ARTF or some spare wings become a registerable drone?? I fail to see how use without registration can be policed in most cases let alone just ownership of complete models/drones or some level of parts to make one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex nicol Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 Forgive my ignorance here, is control line affected by this or does it only apply to free flying models? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GONZO Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 Barton Forum(C/L) At the moment there is no exemption for C/L flying generally. Only for the requirement to get permission from the ATC in aerodrome restricted area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Barclay Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 Posted by sticky fingers on 13/05/2019 14:39:25: Just been outside In my back garden , lo and behold I observed a multi rotor flying over housing within the Liverpool ATZ and then climb to out of sight within the normal route of the ultra lights from Formby airfield ,don't know where it was flying from , may have been a police machine but it certainly gives ammunition to someone in their efforts to regulate us only supposition on my part but I,d lay odds it was flown in accordance with current requirements None of us condone this type of flying but I still don't see how "registration" will stop it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Barclay Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 Posted by alex nicol on 13/05/2019 16:37:38: Forgive my ignorance here, is control line affected by this or does it only apply to free flying models? I guess they will want the money of the control line fliers as well. Lets face it they classed model planes as "drones" to make up the numbers of those paying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GONZO Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 As far as I can find you can fly a kite weighing up to 2kg up to 60mtr high. So, it seems somewhat inconsistent to require CL planes to register when they are not free flying(tethered to the pilot by two steel wires) and would only reach a max height of 60ft(line length) + 6ft(height of pilot) total 66ft(say 20mtr) when doing a wing over in aerobatics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyB Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 Posted by Philip Lewis 3 on 10/05/2019 16:17:05: Posted by Steve J on 10/05/2019 15:44:58: Posted by Philip Lewis 3 on 10/05/2019 15:38:29: Where can I read this The ANO (CAP 1763) and the consultation response that the DfT published in January. In simple terms: do you want your number on all the club's models? and do you want to be responsible for everybody in the club doing the test? Steve PS It is discussed in the video on the previous page at around 22:00. Can't see anything in there that would put me off allowing people to fly under my registration, prove to me that you've passed the test, you are insured under the BMFA or equivalent. Also it doesn't actually state that the "Operator" must own the drone just that the operator is responsible for it. Read more carefully - this has all been discussed before in this thread, you would have to be mad to take responsibility for all the models owned by your fellow club members... Posted by MattyB on 02/05/2019 23:03:11: Posted by Steve J on 02/05/2019 14:55:22: Posted by Dickw on 02/05/2019 14:46:20: Not sure how that would be possible without the "operator" being present on site. I disagree. Have a look at the examples in the consultation response that was published in January. Steve I just refreshed my memory on that one - interesting stuff... ”Operator: person or organisation who has management of the small drone but may not be directly controlling the flight. There is no requirement for the operator to be present during the small drone flight but their responsibilities are listed here: • The operator must not permit their small drone to be flown at a height of more than 400ft above the surface, unless the permission of the CAA has been obtained; • The operator must not permit their small drone to be flown within 1km of a protected aerodrome unless the required permissions have been obtained; • As of 30th November 2019, the small drone operator must not permit their small drone to be flown unless the remote pilot of the aircraft has been issued with an acknowledgement of competency which is valid for that flight. To obtain the acknowledgement of competency, remote pilots will have to pass an online test; • As of 30th November 2019, the operator of a drone between 250g-20kg in mass will be required to register themselves before permitting any of their small drones to be flown.” So yes, technically the operator does not need to be present. However I would argue that does not make it a wise decision for clubs to have one individual sign up as the single registrant taking responsibility for every model owned and flown by club members anywhere in the UK. If one of them does something stupid/loans it to someone who has not passed the test I would not personally want to be called to give evidence or (worst case) prosecuted alongside them for failure to supervise the remote pilot in question. Edited By MattyB on 13/05/2019 18:10:00 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GONZO Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 MattyB, I think documentation would be key in covering oneself/the club if going down the route of just one registered operator. Like a commercial operator would require their flyer/employee to sign a legal document agreeing to comply with ALL CAA requirements and rules. Some one does not have to do something stupid, as you put it. There is always the possibility of theft. Edited By GONZO on 13/05/2019 19:43:27 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Marsh Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 This was on Facebook today. Reason is why we are getting lyched because of this idiot. Took off from a road, flew along a pavement , into a football ground to watch the match. Is the world full of idiots? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted May 13, 2019 Author Share Posted May 13, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Marsh Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 The person said they were somewhere and saw this person get out and fly his drone. The 3rd picture has been zoomed in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted May 13, 2019 Author Share Posted May 13, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted May 13, 2019 Author Share Posted May 13, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Lewis 3 Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 Posted by Steve J on 13/05/2019 20:35:53: Posted by Paul Marsh on 13/05/2019 19:53:36: Reason is why we are getting lynched because of this idiot. There is an interview with a CAA bod a few pages back in which he basically admits that recreational SUA flyers are being milked to pay for the U-Space/UTM registration system and still people think that the regulatory changes are due to "multicopter pilots behaving badly". Steve Yes the CAA have interpreted it that way but the governments reasons for it in the first place include and I quote; "But the recent disruption to Gatwick airport operations, affecting tens of thousands of passengers in the run up to Christmas, was a stark example of why continued action is required to make sure drones are used safely and securely in the UK". Edited By Philip Lewis 3 on 13/05/2019 20:52:25 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted May 13, 2019 Author Share Posted May 13, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cymaz Posted May 13, 2019 Share Posted May 13, 2019 Idiots will be flying them on the future........without regulation. Get real CAA 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.