Cuban8 Posted August 12, 2019 Share Posted August 12, 2019 Perhaps a pertinent question is to ask whether BMFA's remit and/or scope includes litgitimising a quite useless piece of legislation that is in the process of being foisted, unjustly, on its members........,and in the full knowledge that what is being put into place will do nothing to solve 'the drone problem' either real or imagined. If this nonsense does actually come to pass, presumably BMFA will only be interested in whether its members are operating legally for the purpose of validating members' insurance cover. Might BMFA clubs be delegated to check their members' registration status and subsequently declare conformity? How would anyone know whether a member was registered or not if they chose not to say or indeed lied about registering? Sounds like it could be a real can of worms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted August 12, 2019 Author Share Posted August 12, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Barclay Posted August 12, 2019 Share Posted August 12, 2019 Seems to me that the BMFA have been given the finger by the Baroness. Maybe they should give her it back and refuse to co-operate. I for one would be most unhappy if my details were passed on to the CAA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Lewis 3 Posted August 12, 2019 Share Posted August 12, 2019 BMFA cannot pass on your details without your permission, (GDPR). My guess would be that the BMFA would want to gain an exemption of some sort for their members and would then ask their permission to pass data on as it would be in the members interests to do so. Best case scenario (I would suggest for absolutely everyone) would be for the BMFA to get a meaningful exemption making them a very attractive organisation to join, at least that way everyone would be insured and that simply cannot be a bad thing! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuban8 Posted August 12, 2019 Share Posted August 12, 2019 So the consensus is that we simply roll over and allow this travesty to take root? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J D 8 Posted August 12, 2019 Share Posted August 12, 2019 I certainly do not think so, fight it all the way and in the end if enough do not co-operate the Dot will have to think again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted August 13, 2019 Author Share Posted August 13, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Barclay Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 Posted by J D 8 on 12/08/2019 23:52:57: I certainly do not think so, fight it all the way and in the end if enough do not co-operate the Dot will have to think again. Agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 Posted by J D 8 on 12/08/2019 23:52:57: I certainly do not think so, fight it all the way and in the end if enough do not co-operate the Dot will have to think again. Absolutely! -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuban8 Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 The test and fee are a total red herring as far as we're concerned - don't forget that the free for all use of drones has prompted this, not hitherto, any urgent requirement for additional regulations on model flying. All model flying should have been given a blanket exemption whilst the effectiveness of drone registration etc is proven - which it never will be given the certainty of the regs being ignored by the majority of its target group and unenforceable anyway. The fantasy of having your consumer goods delivered by drone will also remain in the realms of the publicity stunt, so another nail in the coffin of regulation from that standpoint. It's a rotten set of proposals set out by people who should know better. As for the £16.50 that so many are apparently happy to stump up - perhaps better use of resources will be to fund a legal review, or whatever would be most appropriate for our grievance.to be properly explored, so the government's case for our regulation as proposed can be properly tested. Edited By Cuban8 on 13/08/2019 09:31:28 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 C8: Absolutely! I'd be more than happy to stump up £16.50 (or whatever) to fund a judicial review of this mess! -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Barclay Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 5000 demonstating at Hong Kong airport have in effect closed it down. There are 40000 members of BMFA. What should we do to bring our case to the attention of the press and public as it seems emails to the Baroness mean nothing. I don't like being treat with contempt and for the first time in my life I feel I could be very militant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuban8 Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 I think we're some way off civil disobedience or shutting down government buildings. Not a path I'd like to see us take and one which will not happen anyway. Social media is a very powerful tool, but since BMFA's acceptance of drones on all of our behalfs, rather than leaving them to come under the remit of their own specialist body, there'd need to be quite a bit of back-pedaling - not going to happen - so much for the 'drone dividend' that has been much trumpeted as a saviour of the hobby. More like a poison chalice. Like you, Michael, this fiasco has really got to me and needs to be pushed back to a review of its legality and fitness for purpose as it affects us, if it's finally pushed through unamended by rational discussion. Still a couple of months to go before D (drone ) day, maybe BMFA can pull something out of the bag from their talks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 The BMFA have a pretty good track record of working with the CAA and obtaining concessions and were fairly quick off the mark to call for the assistance of the membership a few months ago so perhaps there is no immediate need for direct or drastic action? I cannot imagine that people of the calibre of Dave Phipps are simply hiding their heads in the sand below the ivory towers of Chacksfield House and perhaps the lack of updates reflects that work is continuing in the background? Let's hope that the BMFA can give us a nice surprise soon... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Gorham_ Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 Perhaps the BMFA are occupied with organising the upcoming Nationals and we can expect something after the bank holiday weekend? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted August 13, 2019 Author Share Posted August 13, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 While I had doubts (and I think I expressed them in this forum at the time) I think the reasoning behind encouraging drone flyers to join the BMFA was for better reasons than simply boosting numbers for "profit". I believe it was seen as a way of encouraging people to taste model club flying and hopefully embrace the hobby - and drone racing was seen as a legitimate remote controlled sporting aerial activity so it made sense to bring that aspect into the BMFA "umbrella". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 Jeremy, I'm not a lawyer and haven't read every last letter of the EASA regulations, but my understanding was that local aviation authorities were to allow model aircraft to continue pretty much as at present with as little interference as possible. I seem to recall that when Baroness Vere was testifying before the Commons Committee she stated that EASA required ALL "drones" to carry transponders in the future. In fact, the regulation states that this is only applicable to autonomous or semi-autonomous "drones" - something she omitted in her testimony. OK, so the transponder issue is further down the line, but it seems to me that the DfT have deliberately overlooked the options they were given, to our detriment. I would have thought that would be grounds for a judicial review? -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted August 13, 2019 Author Share Posted August 13, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 Steve, EASA has little to do with the EU, and we will still be a member, Brexit notwithstanding. Having signed up to EASA, we are bound by their regulations and recommendations. I suspect the "for now" is because until the EASA rules come in to effect, the DfT can (perhaps?) ignore them. Once the EASA rules come into effect, the UK will be bound by them. There have been several comments about the DfT regulations needing amendment in the near future, and I suspect this is what they are talking about. It would seem to be common sense to ensure that you are EASA compliant from the outset. Sadly, Baroness Vere seems to posses very little of this admirable quality! -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted August 13, 2019 Author Share Posted August 13, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuban8 Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 I have absolutely no doubt that the BMFA officers who have been in at the sharp end of this are giving their all and will continue to do so with the best of intentions for a positive and just outcome for BMFA members and model flying in general.. As has been said, it's gone quiet of late, so 'no news is good news' or 'the lull before the storm' - take your pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted August 13, 2019 Author Share Posted August 13, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Christy Posted August 13, 2019 Share Posted August 13, 2019 Steve J: The point I was trying to make is that, regardless of Brexit, we will remain an EASA member. As such we will be bound by its rules, whether we are in or out of the EU. Jeremy: Thanks for your clarifications. Many years ago - for my sins - I was a union rep. (I didn't volunteer, I just didn't step back quickly enough!) I well recall "consultations" which were carried out because they were legally required, but at the same time the company was under no obligation to implement the results of the "consultation". I guess the same applies here. Nevertheless, I still have the option to vote with my feet, and the implementation date being in the depths of winter, I will feel under no pressure to register until I feel the need to go flying again! Probably not before spring at the earliest! -- Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted August 13, 2019 Author Share Posted August 13, 2019 [This posting has been removed] 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.