Latest CAA Update

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Posted by Dickw on 21/10/2019 17:48:51:

CAA website now updated.

Makes interesting reading!

Dick

Edited By Dickw on 21/10/2019 17:55:12

Thanks Dick.

[GONZO]

At £9 / year it's still 5X the cost in the states, not forgetting it's free in France

[Peter Jenkins]

Excellent outcome, Well done the BMFA and the other model aircraft organisations.

Bit of a blow to the doom mongers though! Perhaps those who think the BMFA is a waste of time might like to remember what has been achieved by the BMFA working in concert with the other UK model organisations and might be less inclined to think that joining the BMFA, or other organisation, is a waste of time.

Having had a go at the on-line test, I doubt it would trouble any one capable of reading a short article and then answering some questions about what you have just read. Each section follows the same process so it is quite a benign test.

[Jason-I]

Posted by Steve J on 21/10/2019 17:57:29:

£9 / year.

Register through the associations.

'A' equivalent to online test.

So they have ignored the advice of the science and technology committee that registration should only be every three years then I see.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Jason-I]

Posted by Peter Jenkins on 21/10/2019 18:46:46:

Excellent outcome, Well done the BMFA and the other model aircraft organisations.

 

I disagree. They are just using the BMFA as henchmen to collect our annual registration fee. If the BMFA want to collect an additional fee from me to hand over to the DfT/CAA, then I'll be leaving the BMFA.

I simply refuse to pay this unfair tax.

Edited By Jason-I on 21/10/2019 18:51:30

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Posted by Peter Jenkins on 21/10/2019 18:46:46:

Excellent outcome, Well done the BMFA and the other model aircraft organisations.

Bit of a blow to the doom mongers though! Perhaps those who think the BMFA is a waste of time might like to remember what has been achieved by the BMFA working in concert with the other UK model organisations and might be less inclined to think that joining the BMFA, or other organisation, is a waste of time.

Having had a go at the on-line test, I doubt it would trouble any one capable of reading a short article and then answering some questions about what you have just read. Each section follows the same process so it is quite a benign test.

Yep agreed, there's still enough left in for the doom mongers to enjoy.

[GONZO]

The yearly registration allows for a rapid increase if they choose(I'm just very suspicious and don't trust officialdom).

[Peter Jenkins]

Posted by Jason-I on 21/10/2019 18:49:37:

Posted by Peter Jenkins on 21/10/2019 18:46:46:

Excellent outcome, Well done the BMFA and the other model aircraft organisations.

 

I disagree. They are just using the BMFA as henchmen to collect our annual registration fee. If the BMFA want to collect an additional fee from me to hand over to the DfT/CAA, then I'll be leaving the BMFA.

I simply refuse to pay this unfair tax.

Edited By Jason-I on 21/10/2019 18:51:30

I shall now un-bookmark this post as it is clear that some on this forum will never be satisfied with a compromise. Thank goodness you doom mongers were not in charge of negotiating this outcome. Good bye!

Edited By Peter Jenkins on 21/10/2019 19:03:24

[Jason-I]

Posted by Peter Jenkins on 21/10/2019 19:03:08:

 

I shall now un-bookmark this post as it is clear that some on this forum will never be satisfied with a compromise. Thank goodness you doom mongers were not in charge of negotiating this outcome. Good bye!

 

It's not a compromise at all, it's a whitewash. They are using the BMFA as the taxman (to make it seem more friendly). The door is firmly open to ramp the cost up year on year (there is no agreement on what the cost will be in future years). The have completely ignored the advice of their own select committee.

 

 

Edited By Jason-I on 21/10/2019 19:17:27

[Chris Barlow]

Exactly what have we gained? (Genuine question)

Sounds like the same tactics used by housing developers in planning applications to me! Put in an outrageous proposal for 2500 houses and all the infrastructure problems it creates and sit back, public outcry "it's not acceptable" then change the application to 1000 new houses to address the publics concerns and demonstrate you have listened to their complaints. After all, they probably would have settled for 500 houses but if everybody feels happy?......

£7.50 reduction for the first year, and only the first year. What will it be in 5 years?

Carry on as you were for 2020, but transponders, geofencing and more restrictions are coming after that anyway!

But it's still better than £16.50 isn't it. Lets go fly for another year and be happy!

[Jason-I]

So much for the BMFA saying they would not police the system! Now they are the judge, jury and executioner!

Edited By Jason-I on 21/10/2019 19:15:05

[Chris Berry]

You ungrateful bunch of moaners who clearly aren’t Aeromodellers but occasional flyers when you can be bothered. Rather than what have we gained? You should be asking what have we avoided losing??

[Chris Barlow]

Posted by Chris Berry on 21/10/2019 19:22:36:

You ungrateful bunch of moaners who clearly aren’t Aeromodellers but occasional flyers when you can be bothered. Rather than what have we gained? You should be asking what have we avoided losing??

Real aeromodellers are looking out for the future of the hobby.

And what have we gained? (again)

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

What have we gained ? Nothing.

Thanks to the efforts of those representing us, we have a better outcome than might have been. What's ahead ? I dunno, good job we have the BMFA et al methinks.

[Jason-I]

Posted by Chris Berry on 21/10/2019 19:22:36:

You ungrateful bunch of moaners who clearly aren’t Aeromodellers but occasional flyers when you can be bothered. Rather than what have we gained? You should be asking what have we avoided losing??

That's quite an insult to anybody who disagrees with this unfair legislation. What evidence exactly are you basing your bias on our aeromodelling passions on? I could say the same to you - you clearly are not a proper passionate aeromodeller who does not want anybody interfering in our hobby.

And what exactly for that matter have we gained other than a small reduction in cost (for a limited time only no doubt).

 

Edited By Jason-I on 21/10/2019 19:33:47

[Chris Barlow]

Posted by john stones 1 on 21/10/2019 19:25:43:

What have we gained ? Nothing.

Thanks to the efforts of those representing us, we have a better outcome than might have been. What's ahead ? I dunno, good job we have the BMFA et al methinks.

Agreed John. We have actually lost a little bit less than we might have done.

But part of me is still keeping a careful eye on what it may lead to in the future...

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Posted by Chris Barlow on 21/10/2019 19:28:27:

Posted by john stones 1 on 21/10/2019 19:25:43:

What have we gained ? Nothing.

Thanks to the efforts of those representing us, we have a better outcome than might have been. What's ahead ? I dunno, good job we have the BMFA et al methinks.

Agreed John. We have actually lost a little bit less than we might have done.

But part of me is still keeping a careful eye on what it may lead to in the future...

As are the BMFA Chris, you put a lot into the model flying world, enjoy your hobby, change comes and we have to deal with it.

[Jason-I]

Posted by Jason-I on 21/10/2019 19:27:52:

Posted by Chris Berry on 21/10/2019 19:22:36:

You ungrateful bunch of moaners who clearly aren’t Aeromodellers but occasional flyers when you can be bothered. Rather than what have we gained? You should be asking what have we avoided losing??

 

Note also that I have expended more that the paltry £7.50 saving on campaigning my MP, the CAA, the DfT etc etc. Have you?

Edited By Jason-I on 21/10/2019 19:36:45

Edited By Jason-I on 21/10/2019 19:41:27

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Chris Berry]

None of us wanted this regulation, we’ve happily existed for 100 years without incident but in the grand scheme of what could happen e been, this outcome is 100 times better than it could have been.

No doubt there will be more legislation in coming months and years but sadly that is the nature of the world.

Domestic gas boilers are set to be replaced, as are diesel cars, 2 Stoke garden equipment and filament light bulbs. It’s not always what we want but we need to accept there will be change and in this instance we have a positive outcome for 18p a week.

[Jason-I]

Posted by Chris Berry on 21/10/2019 19:41:02:

None of us wanted this regulation, we’ve happily existed for 100 years without incident but in the grand scheme of what could happen e been, this outcome is 100 times better than it could have been.

No doubt there will be more legislation in coming months and years but sadly that is the nature of the world.

Domestic gas boilers are set to be replaced, as are diesel cars, 2 Stoke garden equipment and filament light bulbs. It’s not always what we want but we need to accept there will be change and in this instance we have a positive outcome for 18p a week.

But what gives you the right to say we are not proper aeromodellers just because we don't want to roll over and accept this unjust tax?

Edited By Jason-I on 21/10/2019 19:44:38

[Chris Berry]

Posted by Jason-I on 21/10/2019 19:35:57:

Posted by Jason-I on 21/10/2019 19:27:52:

Posted by Chris Berry on 21/10/2019 19:22:36:

You ungrateful bunch of moaners who clearly aren’t Aeromodellers but occasional flyers when you can be bothered. Rather than what have we gained? You should be asking what have we avoided losing??

Note also that I have expended more that the paltry £7.50 saving on campaigning my MP, the CAA, the DfT etc etc. Have you?

Edited By Jason-I on 21/10/2019 19:36:45

Edited By Jason-I on 21/10/2019 19:41:27

I certainly have. I, like many others have responded to every CAA and EASA consultation, spoken with my MP and done everything possible I can do, like many.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Posted by Jason-I on 21/10/2019 19:43:14:

Posted by Chris Berry on 21/10/2019 19:41:02:

None of us wanted this regulation, we’ve happily existed for 100 years without incident but in the grand scheme of what could happen e been, this outcome is 100 times better than it could have been.

No doubt there will be more legislation in coming months and years but sadly that is the nature of the world.

Domestic gas boilers are set to be replaced, as are diesel cars, 2 Stoke garden equipment and filament light bulbs. It’s not always what we want but we need to accept there will be change and in this instance we have a positive outcome for 18p a week.

But what gives you the right to say we are not proper aeromodellers just because we don't want to roll over and play dead?

And what gives you the right to accuse others of rolling over and playing dead ?

You tough guys got something, get to it and launch your plan into action, or is it just noise and foot stamping ?

[Jason-I]

Posted by john stones 1 on 21/10/2019 19:46:01:

But what gives you the right to say we are not proper aeromodellers just because we don't want to roll over and play dead?

And what gives you the right to accuse others of rolling over and playing dead ?

I didn't accuse anybody of that. I just said that I don't want to roll over an play dead.

I will not be paying the fee and I will continue to campaign my MP, the Dft and the CAA. That's my choice. Its up to you what you do.