Commons Science and Technology Committee Enquiry on Drones

[Dave Cunnington]

[ChrisB]

Vere won’t be in post long. She has a condescending, patronising and sarcastic attitude that will keep her moving departments on a regular basis. I’m surprised the committee weren’t kissing her feet to thank her for allowing them to speak with her.

I think registration will happen but it may be short lived.

I feel sorry for the poor people who have to work with Charlotte Vere, particularly those in the CAA. My sympathies go out to them!!

[Peter Christy]

Whilst I think we are in for turbulent times for the next 12 months or so, I don't share the general doom and despondency that seems to permeate this thread. Our hobby has been here before, for different reasons, and managed to survive.

Back in the late 70s, it was CB radio that was causing mayhem, with 27 MHz becoming unusable in many areas, and the government refusing us an alternative frequency. The political mantra of the time was "We will never allow CB on 27 MHz!". Within a couple of years, the UK had the largest allocation of 27 MHz to CB in the world, and we moved on to 35 MHz - something the politicians had maintained was impossible, as it was used by the military!

Now even CB licenses have been scrapped as it is uneconomical to collect the payments - much like the licenses we used to have to get for our RC gear!

Like CB, drones are a fad. An annoying one, and currently causing us a lot of grief, but like any fad, it will soon die a death all on its own. The current generation of youngsters seem to have the attention span of a goldfish, so it might die off even quicker than CB did! Once that happens, and all the wild plans of ignorant politicians are shown to be worthless and uneconomic to enforce, it will be back to business as normal.

Also, I cannot see either Grayling or Vere surviving in their posts once a new prime minister is in place, and certainly not after a general election, which seems inevitable, sooner rather than later. I believe the CAA are very much on side, but are obliged to follow the orders they are given. A change of leadership could well allow them to adopt a more common sense approach.

Yes, we will have a rough ride for a year or so, but I see no reason to despair in the longer term.

--

Pete

[Michael Barclay]

Transponders for every model aircraft and a system that can read them.

I think I am going to take up paragliding. I can't be doing with all this stupid regulation.

[Nigel R]

" registration will happen"

It's a done deal. We're only looking at when it starts, how it is done, and and what cost, and to who. And really, down in the weeds, we're just hoping we don't get hit too hard.

"Like CB, drones are a fad"

People said that about cars and computers, among other commonplace items.

I concur that, right now, they're peaking - as a toy.

In their "non-toy" uses, I think there is mileage (I don't count the drone delivery dream in this category). I think they'll be with us for a long time yet. But not in the mass numbers being predicted.

Baroness Vere seems like a nice open minded individual.

[GONZO]

Michael Barclay,

Rang the BMAA(British Microlight Aircraft Association) for info on sub 70kg foot launched aircraft; NO licence, NO medical or self declaration, NO registration for the aircraft or pilot, NO competency tests, in fact 'no nuffin!' Just 'buy and fly' preferably with a short training course to stop you killing yourself. Para Motor Glider anyone?

[John Bisset]

 

Oh dear. As so often, this really does demonstrate the level of technical ignorance of  so many politicians - and sadly of too many in the civil service whose job it ought to be to find out what is feasible.

This diagram is idealistic dreamland; even for current air traffic, effective tracking of transponder equipped aircraft is only possible at a fair altitude and in areas with plenty of radar head cover. Loss of signal is routine at lower altitudes and the technology does not even adequately cover the sailplane community yet, let alone microlights and smaller machines. The idea that ATC or any other authority will be able to effectively track and monitor radio control aircraft in real time is still science fiction.

It is akin to the notion, still popular amongst politicians and ignorant newsmen,that ocean surveillance is easy to achieve. The sheer size of the task escapes them. The same is true here, not that this will stop the 'authorities from causing chaos by demanding the impossible or pointless.

Edited By John Bisset on 10/07/2019 10:47:31

[ken anderson.]

if anyone wasted the electric last night and watched the Boris v Hunt show on ch 4...….. its scary to imagine either in charge of the UK....and even more so when you look at the opposition...

ken anderson...ne..1...scary dept.

[John Bisset]

Ken,

That comment pleases me in a silly way- we got rid of all TV over ten years ago and don't miss it a bit! I strongly recommend that!

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[John Bisset]

Thanks Steve, I realised that. Don't get me started on the impossible aspirations within so many Business Plans.

NATS would like their 'sponsors' to believe that this is feasible, because it allows them more money and influence as they sell the idea they are 'in control'. UJ Politicians and civil servants love the idea of 'control'.

Except within limited local areas, such as around the largest airports and at high altitudes, this is and will remain dreamland for a long time - also a pointless, expensive dreamland.

It is easy to draw two way arrows and boxes on a diagram. How precisely these interfaces are supposed to work and on what timescale, is another matter.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[John Bisset]

I'd agree that Direct Remote Ident is feasible Steve, especially for limited high threat areas. Though many folk advocating all this do seem to conveniently forget about line of sight issues and ground interference problems

It's the two way bit that is less feasible and worries me more. How to get enough power capacity to provide that in a meaningful way in a small model. That is where the ideals part company with reality for me.

(Of course the dread 3 letter acronyms get in the way again. I can think of two other meanings for UTM off the top of my head, one of which is in a way somewhat relevant to this and may yet cause some confusion down the line !)

[Jonathan W]

Yes, I was already getting confused by the meaning of UTM, since I have to be aware of the Universal Transverse Mercator coordinate system in my job.

[Cuban8]

Well now, what riveting viewing that made.

I am sick and tired of being fed this line about the 'soon to be realised' (when?) ubiquity of drones and the obvious risk to our civilisation that they pose in the minds of bureaucrats and academics who clearly have an agenda of their own to work to.

Nothing but ifs, buts, maybe, in the fullness of time etc so as usual, full of nebulous predictions about how our skies are to be transformed by unmanned aircraft - but by the contributors own admission they've no idea of a time scale or how this revolution will (or won't) manifest itself.

The submission by the learned professor would be laughable, if he didn't have the ear of those in power, and the Baroness merely underlined her lack of understanding about us – she was sticking to her position come what may, and to hell with any common sense or evidence that countermanded her jaundiced view of model flying.

Dave Phipps did fine and put his points over in a calm and ordered fashion and I think made a good impression on the Chairman and other committee members.

The dangerous bit is their obsession with electronic ID on all unmanned aircraft. I think we can live with their totally pointless registration system (as it will prove to be, as sure as eggs is eggs) and if we are robbed of sixteen quid or so as an aside, then that's just tough luck.

As a members of a club and operating from a known site, flying within LoS, usually within a couple of hundred metres of point of launch, what the hell more is an electronic gizmo in a model going to tell you, over simply walking up to the flyer on his patch and asking him for details. Why would anyone be bothered anyway, if those with an interest in such information knew a club operated from the site, were BMFA members etc. were flying responsibly, legally and generally minding their own business?

Finally, it seemed quite clear that they expect anyone with even a single (viable?) unmanned aircraft in their possession to register and pay up. Expect a visit from plod to have a look in your garage, workshop or loft for incriminating evidence of the ability to operate an unmanned device (intent doesn't seem to matter) whilst unregistered. No opportunity to 'SORN' your models, presumably?

[John Bisset]

Posted by Jonathan W on 10/07/2019 13:00:57:

Yes, I was already getting confused by the meaning of UTM, since I have to be aware of the Universal Transverse Mercator coordinate system in my job.

That;s the first one that comes to mind for me too!

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[David Ashby - Moderator]

Thanks Steve. Interesting. To his credit Tim Loughton seems to have grasped the situation very well.

[Alan Gorham_]

Well said the honourable member for East Shoreham and Worthing! If only he was Air Minister!

[Cuban8]

Tim Loughton

" I agree with that. It does seem that the DFT and the CAA are trying to reinvent the wheel and failing to harness the huge experience and network capability of existing legitimate, respected and experienced model flying aircraft operators. It seems a no-brainer to me that they should be talking with them much more closely and using what is there already, rather than coming up with a completely new and, on the face of it, rather bureaucratic and disproportionate and costly scheme"

Sadly, Michael Ellis (MoS for Transport) is still living in, or at least believing the drone lobby fantasy world of the likes of PWC and others. Moreover, he's clearly unaware (or chooses to ignore the fact) that all BMFA members have fully traceable numbers that many of us already affix to our models, and I doubt if there would be much objection to that being part of an obligation of BMFA membership. How hard can it be?

An encouraging read of proceedings in Hansard, perhaps all is not lost, seeing as we appear to have a few MPs with a grasp of the real problem and who might just be able to put the tech fantasists and serial legislators back in their box.

Edited By Cuban8 on 11/07/2019 09:59:54

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Philip Lewis 3]

All I can say after watching the unelected and unelectable condescending air minister (tap of the hand on the lid of the pen and a smug look) is what a breath of fresh air!

[Peter Christy]

Also interesting that other speakers in the debate seemed to be equally well clued up. Indeed the only one who failed to grasp the situation, or answer any of the questions put to him, was the government minister! PWC, whose advice he seemed to rely on, have been shown repeatedly to be incompetent, and indeed at one time were banned from taking on any more government work, IIRC.

The only consolation I draw from all this is that successive governments - of all flavours - have proven repeatedly incompetent in pretty much every area they touch. Political expediency nearly always trumps common sense.

--

Pete

 

Edited By Peter Christy on 11/07/2019 10:05:53

[Cuban8]

I think we need to raise our game on the social media, local newspapers, local & national radio and TV. I've said before we also need a well known personality with a sympathetic stance to our plight to attract news editors etc and communicate just how unjustly we're potentially going to be treated. Those outside of our little comunity have no idea what's transpiring.

Dear new BMFA PR Consultant.............how about consulting your contacts book and drumming up some celeb support to highlight our battle? Preaching to the converted in the mag and the BMFA Facebook page only gets the message out to those already in the know. Do we have someone of influence visiting the Nats or the National Centre?

Edited By Cuban8 on 11/07/2019 10:48:36

[Nigel R]

42 billion? 628000 jobs?

If it wasn't being used as basis of gov action, I'd laugh, loudly.

Still, nice to see some in that debate are clued up and on the side of sense and reason.

 

"Political expediency nearly always trumps common sense."

Simple reality is that they want to keep their job.

That means keeping the party line.

Party line panders to public angst and whim.

It is the thorn in democracy's side.

One cannot rely on the public for sense and reason, only to behave like a herd.

Edited By Nigel R on 11/07/2019 10:49:20