Jump to content

Latest CAA Update


Chris Berry
 Share

Recommended Posts

Thanks for the info Frank - but its in some attachment not actually written on the BMFA website!

It seems CAP 1789 says exempted if under 250 grams and only capable of less than 42.5 MPH and not capable of flying over 120 ft away and not carrying a camera. How many of these youngsters toy drones actually conform to ALL those requirements?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by MattyB on 07/10/2019 18:23:44:
Posted by Steve J on 07/10/2019 15:03:39:

Slides from the achievement scheme roadshow.

**LINK**

Steve

It will be very interesting to see how many of the suggestions in the 16th Sept joint proposal between the CAA and DfT (I did have to read the authors more than once to check it wasn't a misprint...!) come to pass...

"CAA/DfT submitted proposals to SoS for consideration – 16th September which included:

  • Commitment from DfT & CAA to work with model flying community
  • Reduction in DRES costs and associated fees
  • Recognition of Achievements
  • Registration through Associations
  • Exemption for members to allow registration in line with membership renewal
  • Exemption for Control Line (Agreed)
  • No requirement for external numbers (Agreed)"

Where are the above points listed/publicised?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Steve J on 07/10/2019 18:57:20:

Posted by MattyB on 07/10/2019 18:23:44:

It will be very interesting to see how many of the suggestions in the 16th Sept joint proposal between the CAA and DfT (I did have to read the authors more than once to check it wasn't a misprint...!) come to pass...

Between that slide and number 11

  • Membership ‘opt-ins’
  • Conditions of membership
  • Membership types
  • Achievement scheme

it looks like they are considering options for registration via the associations and 'A' certs may be regarded as equivalent to the test. Is the 'A' going to become a 'licence'? Will people have to redo 'A's every few years?

Steve

I would like to be proved wrong but I can’t see how the A test in it’s current format (i.e one that never expires, is examined by volunteers and has limited questioning on current air regs) is going to be accepted as equivalent to the online test. Rationale - it doesn’t give the authorities the “You signed up and stated you understood” stick they are looking for to make prosecuting transgressions easier. Equally I can’t see how the BMFA or other national associations could re-engineer the current achievement schemes to give them the capacity and consistency to address those concerns; they’d need a few hundred new examiners at least to get through everyone if the test was needed every (say) 3 years. 

We shall see, but I am not so sure the online test is really worth fighting that hard. As long as you only need to do it every 3-5 years and the cost is minimal it’s probably far simpler, cheaper and logistically manageable than making the A cert equivalent to a license to fly.

Edited By MattyB on 07/10/2019 23:07:26

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Full size pilots don't retake their written tests every few years - keeping current with air law is simply something they are expected to do.

I imagine the argument would be along the lines that all association members receive regular updates from the BMFA via the newsletter and, if club members, will be able to discuss such matters with their peers - Joe Public would not be in that position. Alternatively, one of the twenty questions could be on how to stay abreast of developments and changes and only a one off CAA test would then be necessary to align with full size practice and cover any darker awareness agenda for prosecuting transgressors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends if the exemption were to apply to association members and therefore joe public would do the online test and association members would be able to be exempt via their A certificate. There are many members who don’t have their A certificate, so they would either have to take the online test or obtain their A.

Presumably a members registration number would be their association number but Joe public would have a CAA number. It could get messy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by MattyB on 07/10/2019 18:23:44:
Posted by Steve J on 07/10/2019 15:03:39:

Slides from the achievement scheme roadshow.

**LINK**

Steve

Surely no-one is going to take the BMFA seriously if they put out presentations in Comic Sans.

I can just about cope that my kids primary school does this....frown

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Steve J on 08/10/2019 07:46:31:

Posted by MattyB on 07/10/2019 23:04:06:

We shall see, but I am not so sure the online test is really worth fighting that hard. As long as you only need to do it every 3-5 years and the cost is minimal it’s probably far simpler, cheaper and logistically manageable than making the A cert equivalent to a license to fly.

Indeed. I don't understand the fuss about the online test.

Steve

The 'fuss' is because most of us are put out by being required to participate in a totally pointless exercise. Anyway, a test that allows you to take it as many times as you like until you eventually creep over the pass mark is ridiculous. I'm not advocating that their silly test be made more rigorous, quite the reverse, a simple and straightforward declaration that one has read and understood the required info, with a tick box confirmation should be more than sufficient and possibly more effective rather than multiple guessing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This does seem a significant step forward, potentially. Well done the BMFA, my fingers crossed for possible progress and continuing outbreak of sense amongst authorities.

As Steve says, in full size flying we don't have to resit the exams; we are expected to keep our knowledge up to date, on all the issues to do with our flying licences and competence. No reason why we shouldn't do the same as model fliers, though I share some irritation at the idea of an online test which effectively can't be failed. That is pointless.

I thought the presentation was reasonably crisp and clearly written without excess verbiage, and it got the points across well. I wasn't sure what the last collage of images meant to show but that is minor. As for the font , it has the advantage of being clean and bright, easy to read, especially for those with interpretation difficulties or dyslexia - I understand the sans serif fonts are preferred for that. It helped convey a hopeful & cheery message to me!

Edited By John Bisset on 08/10/2019 09:24:19

Edited By John Bisset on 08/10/2019 09:24:37

Edited By John Bisset on 08/10/2019 09:24:49

Edited By John Bisset on 08/10/2019 09:25:12

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still baffled by the inconsistencies involved in the minimum age requirement. Its a long time since I was involved in full-size aviation, but I believe that you still only have to be 17 to hold a PPL. Indeed, I believe you can go solo from 16.

So, you have the situation where you are considered fit and able to fly a full sized powered aircraft (fixed-wing or helicopter) on your own, but not fly a model!

Ridiculous!

--

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if full size licenses were introduced tomorrow, do we think 16 would be the minimum age? I think 16 is the minimum age for historic reasons.

"Indeed. I don't understand the fuss about the online test."

Concur. There are much bigger fish to fry here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Steve J on 08/10/2019 09:48:24:

12 to be the remote pilot of an unmanned aircraft over 250g doesn't seem unreasonable to me. People below 12 will be able to fly if supervised by somebody over 16 and there may be a exemption for association members.

Steve

Have they changed it, then? The last time I looked it was still saying 18?

--

Pete

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think most of our models come under the A3 category, which CAP 1789 states:

-No flight within 150m horizontally of residential, commercial, industrial or recreational areas

-No uninvolved people present within the area of flight.

When you consider the area our models cover during a normal in visual line of sight flight, will this kill off many of our current flying sites from 1st July next year. Or am I missing something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...