Former Member Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel R Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 Worth noting DJI recommend that the US cost of $5 per three year period is about right, and the UK projected £10-£15 per year is too much and will likely result in a high degree of non-registration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuban8 Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 IMO a flawed submission from a Mr Clarke a PPL currently requiring re-validation...........just what we need. "in general drones (quadcopters) are at least as safe, if not safer, in the airspace and to the public on the ground than ‘model aircraft’ (Vis fixed wing and helicopters). They are in the main lighter, smaller and slower than many model aircraft and easier to control. In addition all recreational and commercial drones are battery powered thus eliminating the risk of carrying volatile fuels" Edited By Cuban8 on 11/06/2019 12:34:18 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 I'm going to try to find time to watch more of the debate but a few minutes cherry picking shows that the RAeS CEO made some excellent observations, supported by the DJI representative at around 11.00 Let's hope some of this gets through to the legislators - all debate seems to be centring on the safety aspects rather than looking at any pressure to clear lower airspace for commercial reasons...quite how those interests will exert their influence in the face of what seems fairly reasoned argument against high cost registration and the effectiveness of registration and electronic identification against malicious intent remains to be seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 Posted by Cuban8 on 11/06/2019 12:33:12: IMO a flawed submission from a Mr Clarke a PPL currently requiring re-validation...........just what we need. "in general drones (quadcopters) are at least as safe, if not safer, in the airspace and to the public on the ground than ‘model aircraft’ (Vis fixed wing and helicopters). They are in the main lighter, smaller and slower than many model aircraft and easier to control. In addition all recreational and commercial drones are battery powered thus eliminating the risk of carrying volatile fuels" By his reasoning, light aircraft must be even less safe as they are heavier, larger, faster and carry vastly more (and often more volatile) fuel than any model. Edited By Martin Harris on 11/06/2019 14:03:36 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted June 11, 2019 Author Share Posted June 11, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted June 11, 2019 Author Share Posted June 11, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel R Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 Richard Parker: Just that a UTM is a critical component in levelling the playing field for everybody. It provides the same access to the sky, whether you are Amazon or anyone else. Q86 Martin Docherty-Hughes: Yes, but Amazon is going to make a fortune out of this. What are companies like Amazon going to put into the system? Richard Parker: There are many different use cases for drones. Amazon and its drone deliveries is but one. Q87 Martin Docherty-Hughes: So they won’t be putting anything into it. My worry is that Amazon is going to get a lot of work done for it and yet is paying nothing into the system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel R Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 They also got quite a heated exchange with DJI over the Chinese security agency being able to get any and all data that a DJI device transmits. Apparently it could be a national security problem if a DJI drone videos something interesting and it ends up being sent over the internet to the intelligence services in PRC. Interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 **LINK** Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel R Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 Ah, excellent. Good to see the least useful point during the exchange being picked up on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuban8 Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 On iPlayer if you missed it. Not watched it fully myself yet. **LINK** Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Miller Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 I am reminded of an old saying that applies to many politicians and civil servants (And a lot of other people as well) which always worries me. "I have made up my mind. Do not try and confuse me wth the facts!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Berry Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 The view I would take now is to say we've lost the battle but we don't want to lose the war. So, I;d say lets aim for a one off fee and one off test, the same as you have for cars, PPLs, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael matthews 2 Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 FWIW . The Dft. could not organise the change to railway timetables without messing it up. The Caa has decimated the Air Display scene, So now Model Flyers are next in line. The figures plucked from the ether, how did they arrive at the amount of flyers concerned to come up with a cost of £16.50 when the very people that are likely to be the problem will not register anyway. So what will next years cost be, given that less fees will be collected. Members of the BMFA are already well regulated and do not fly in built up areas as we need a take off and landing place. We have a good safety record, we are insured, we have a proficiency scheme in place, so what are we getting for the £16.50 ? I only hope that the Caa have only paid a deposit on the software to run the scheme, as it will be very expensive to run given the likely reduction in people registering in the future. I hope that common sense will prevail MIke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Geezer Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 Balanced report of the Committee in The Times, sadly the kicker is in the last paragraph - the Beastly Baroness has obviously either not listened to the facts relating to our models, or had already made up her tiny mind that drones and r.c. model aircraft are one and the same thing. quote: Baronesse Vere of Norbiton, the aviation minister, has said that the registration scheme will increase accountability for operators of unmanned aircraft, all of which pose safety threats. There are none so deaf as those those that will not hear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel R Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 Posted by michael matthews 2 on 12/06/2019 14:08:17: so what are we getting for the £16.50 ? A nice, virtual, internet based, rubber stamp. A small amount of our life wasted obtaining said stamp. Of course, not to forget, like every other resident of Britain, we will all be an awful lot safer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted June 12, 2019 Author Share Posted June 12, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel R Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 Posted by Peter Miller on 12/06/2019 08:17:48: "I have made up my mind. Do not try and confuse me wth the facts!" The very antithesis of science. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted June 12, 2019 Author Share Posted June 12, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 It's not clear from this statement on the BMFA website - make of it what you will: The UK Model Flying Associations provided written evidence to the Science and Technology Committee back in April and members should not conclude that because we are not involved in the first session that we are not involved in the process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cymaz Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 Hopefully Dave et al are running to catch up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Barlow Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 Watched the whole thing, all 2 hours or so! As I suspect the issue isn't going to be the cost. The CAA guy even said that clubs or the BMFA could act as operator for all their members for £16.50 as could Amazon which wasn't received well! The problems will come with the "additional" legal responsibilities from acting as operator, which we won't know until the "Drone Bill" is published. There was also talk about conspicuity (not even going to try to spell it) and all SUA flying with built in transponders with a unique ID linked to registration. Only good for chasing responsible pilots? Well the case was made that in sensitive areas all identifiable aircraft can be ignored and security can focus on what is left. That makes perfect sense except that in reality any responsible pilot, registered with a transponder fitted wouldn't be flying in that sensitive area in the first place. The DJI guy made a lot of good points and comments explaining that registration and other measures should be as cheap as possible or free to encourage as many people to sign up as possible to make the system work as far as national security and safety was concerned. But I did notice that when questioned repeatedly about the registration scheme for established traditional model flyers the CAA guy was struggling to make a valid case and didn't appear comfortable with his answers, yet when questioned about how an integrated system would work for "last mile" deliveries and Amazon he was a lot more confident with his answers and was repeatedly backing the the Altitude Angel guy. I suspect the CAA had already set out their stall to satisfy those questions first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted June 12, 2019 Author Share Posted June 12, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Bastow Posted June 12, 2019 Share Posted June 12, 2019 So it is ok for clubs or the BMFA to register as the operator allowing all there members to just do the remote pilot bit, which does not cost anything? That would make quite a dent in there expected 170,000 registrations at £16 a time, especially if the LMA and Drone organizations ect, all did the same. Before anybody says anything I do realize this is unlikely to happen because of the legal position but just goes to show how ill thought out it all is. I despair of the political classes I really do! 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.