Zflyer Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Perhaps a properly worded letter from the BMFA once more addressing the flaws in the system on behalf of its members. Alternatively why not see if we can delay the outcome via the Courts by challenging the misrepresentation of the evidence. I see we still have no actual footage of the Gatwick drone.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason-I Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Posted by Zflyer on 22/10/2019 12:08:09: Alternatively why not see if we can delay the outcome via the Courts by challenging the misrepresentation of the evidence. I see we still have no actual footage of the Gatwick drone.... I see also the the Gatwick incident was back on the news last night and was spoken about in terms as the confirmed drone incident that affected hundreds of thousands of people. No mention of the fact that no evidence has been found. The whole article was demonising drone users all over again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuban8 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Quite a few on BMFA Facebook page are not happy although the flow at the moment seems to be with those in some sort of ecstasy and relief at only being fleeced of nine quid rather than sixteen. Very short sighted view that I'm surprised people are taking, given the wider and unjust ramifications for model flying that are still in place. Edited By Cuban8 on 22/10/2019 12:15:52 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Manuel Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Well done to the BMFA for their hard work, which I'm sure is ongoing. They have achieved a better outcome than most of us expected, but perhaps not as good as we hoped. I'm sure that it wasn't through lack of trying that they were unable to avoid the totally pointless individual annual operator registration scheme. The political will to implement it was too just high. Keep up the good work BMFA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Posted by Jason-I on 22/10/2019 12:03:55: Posted by john stones 1 on 22/10/2019 11:48:25: Lot of noise again I see, t'was the E.U wot dummit, you are only the tip of the Iceberg and are speaking for the masses, Nanny Williamson, oh dear oh dear. When are you going to put something forward, get yourselves upfront and lead the fight ? We've seen nothing other than digs at other people. Rebels without the claws ? I don't understand your objections (as usual). We pay the BMFA to represent us. I was making a suggested course of action for the BMFA to follow which I am perfectly entitled to do.- this is what I have 'put forward' The BMFA alone can do nothing, which is why I was suggesting they use their members to continue the fight against injustice. If you are happy to pay the unfair fee for the useless scheme, then fine, you need not take part in any future action. I have not just been banging my chest, but have been taking the fight to my MP, the DfT and the CAA in as much as I possible can. As for your statement about the EU, this is a red herring: The EU does not mandate us to pay a fee. The EU does not mandate the splitting of pilot vs operator such that individuals are subsidising companies. The EU does not mandate that we register and pay on an annual basis. The EU doe not mandate that the CAA should spend MILLIONS on their gold plated scheme. This scheme is wrong, it is unjust and it should be objected to at every opportunity. Yep (As usual) you don't understand, the E.U comment came from the warrior cast, so we agree, I reckon it's a red herring also, the BMFA have put plans forward already for the memberships to get involved, some did, not just yourself, many continue to have faith in the BMFAs line as being the best way forward. If your happy to pay the unfair fee ? Silly comment, no ones happy. By all means continue to moan and make silly digs at others, but here's where we are, big underdogs fighting for survival, BMFA is a better bet than you people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Posted by Gary Manuel on 22/10/2019 12:29:35: Well done to the BMFA for their hard work, which I'm sure is ongoing. They have achieved a better outcome than most of us expected, but perhaps not as good as we hoped. I'm sure that it wasn't through lack of trying that they were unable to avoid the totally pointless individual annual operator registration scheme. The political will to implement it was too just high. Keep up the good work BMFA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Cotsford Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 The world moves on and generally this involves increased beurocracy. We are drowning in red tape, unfortunately analysis usually justifies the increased regulations, be it building standards, IT audit trails or any other area. I've said it before, this has little to do with irresponsible flying and more to do with commercial interests. Yes, it seems unfair that as indiviual operators we appear to be hit more heavily than large scale commercial operators but from the CAA's point of view I suppose that both operators require the same level of registration hence the same cost. We can't go back to the situation that existed in the 70s when the population was lower, there were more open spaces, less technology available and the sun always shone at weekends so we move forward. Pandora's box is well and truly open and I gather mass population culls are considered non-PC so the box remains open. C'est la vie. £9 a year in additional annual costs is about the cost of a packet of fags, 1/2 a gallon of glow, just over a gallon of petrol or 1/6 of my club fees. IIRC I paid more for just one of the cans of paint to be used on my current build. I think I'll still be able to splash out on the occasional bag of chips even with this extortionate charge on my personal freedom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GONZO Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Brian, I don't understand that reply. I was talking about the basis of law not consumer law or attitude. My understanding is that UK law was always based on the presumption of 'free men' and as such unless an action was prescribed against by a law then you were legally entitled to engage in that action. On the continent I understood the presumption came from the other point of view and an action could only be lawful if the action was prescribed in law. I'm no 'legal eagle' and may be describing this wrongly but I'm sure I've got the idea correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ashby - Moderator Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 For obvious reasons thread locked and some posts removed; rudeness, trolling, politics and worse. Edited By David Ashby - Moderator on 22/10/2019 13:28:46 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.