The Gov't, CAA, BMFA & UAV legislation thread

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

I'm quite happy to sit out the exemption period and register through my renewals while continuing to fly as normal (assuming my flying can be regarded as such!) Meanwhile I'll simply keep an eye on any developments resulting from the ongoing work the BMFA et al are doing with the CAA. The next meeting is scheduled for the 14th of this month, I believe.

[Chris Berry]

Posted by Martin Harris on 06/11/2019 18:57:35:

I'm quite happy to sit out the exemption period and register through my renewals while continuing to fly as normal (assuming my flying can be regarded as such!) Meanwhile I'll simply keep an eye on any developments resulting from the ongoing work the BMFA et al are doing with the CAA. The next meeting is scheduled for the 14th of this month, I believe.

Couldn't have put it better myself. The 14th will hopefully glean further clarification.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Alan Gorham_]

All they had to add was an actual definition of a "special tool"!

[Don Fry]

They have. Key words are easily, access by anyone.

Specialist tool has become defined as, "any tool, or specialist equipment".

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

More stringent than the requirements for flight data recorders on airliners then! Shame for any scale modellers who now have to modify their existing models or put non scale stickers on them.

Might have been better to have left well alone...

[Alan Gorham_]

Posted by Don Fry on 08/11/2019 15:26:10:

They have. Key words are easily, access by anyone.

Specialist tool has become defined as, "any tool, or specialist equipment".

Specialist tool being defined as specialist equipment is not a definition. Good definitions include examples to remove ambiguity. This introduces more ambiguity.

[Don Fry]

Alan, back in the about 1970, an important bit of common law principle came along. It's about drink driving, but the principal applies. Bloke said, "I know what Parliament wanted, what they debated, but this is what they wrote."

Dont shoot messengers. Stupid definition, check. Clearly wrong, check. What they wrote, check.

Also a second principle of Common Law, that comma before specialist equipment, acts as a catch-all. It would for instance exclude a magnet wot activates a catch, including it as a sort of tool.

What they wrote is what a judge will rule on.

BUT, just bear in mind, the polititions are distracted about their employment prospects. And the CAA has not got a great track record for competence. I would reckon it's still getting done on the hoof. The BFMA might have an easy argument as to how A becomes B.

But I'm not up for an argument. If a properly qualified person wishes to tell me I'm wrong, I'm happy to learn. But I'm not just going round the houses arguing how many Angels you can fit on a pinhead.

[Alan Gorham_]

That's all great, but irrelevant to what I wrote.

Steve J e-mailed the CAA to ask for clarification of what is a specialist tool and my point is that they had a chance to clarify and didn't, so we are none the wiser.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

The definition now seems irrelevant..."any tool or specialist equipment" covers anything but fingers, teeth or telekinesis!

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Posted by Martin Harris on 08/11/2019 18:35:01:

The definition now seems irrelevant..."any tool or specialist equipment" covers anything but fingers, teeth or telekinesis!

Teeth could present a problem.

[Chris Berry]

So if I read it right it now says that numbers can be inside provided no tolls or equipment is used to access the number?

Therefore where does that leave us with a standard sports model like a wot4 in terms of putting the number on the inside as opposed to the outside? Or a model where there are no hatches or clear canopies or a competition scale model such as those at the nationals?

Will the BMFA clarify please?

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Surely it's as clear as day!

The BMFA (etc.) obtained a concession "There will be no requirement to place any registration numbers on the exterior of model aircraft, but they must be carried in an easily accessible location (within a battery hatch for example)."

Steve has informed us that the CAA are refining this to "Where it is not possible to display your operator number on the outside of your drone or model aircraft, you may instead attach it on the inside- within a compartment that can easily be accessed by anyone, without the need for any tools or specialist equipment."

The BMFA have a meeting with the CAA on the 14th where I suspect this will be discussed. I wouldn't expect (or put any faith in) any statement until after this meeting.  As things stand, your competition scale model will need to have a hatch built in to it to contain the number which, although a nuisance and right royal pain in the backside in the case of an existing model, shouldn't be beyond any competent modeller.

Edited By Martin Harris on 08/11/2019 18:59:41

[Chris Berry]

That's fair enough. Hopefully the meeting on the 14th will glean clarification.

The previous requirement was ok but the latest one could be seen as worse.

Time will tell

[Nigel Heather]

Posted by Don Fry on 08/11/2019 15:26:10:

They have. Key words are easily, access by anyone.

Specialist tool has become defined as, "any tool, or specialist equipment".

Where is that. The Drone and Model Aircraft Code still says

 

• visible without needing a special tool to remove or open part of your aircraft

 

If the CAA have now defined ‘special tool’ as ‘any tool” why haven’t they updated the very document that they ask people to refer to as preparation for the test?

 

Cheers,

 

Nigel

Edited By Nigel Heather on 08/11/2019 19:11:07

[Tim Flyer]

I must say . Putting an operator number inside a model seems a rather simple task to me . It couldn’t be much clearer.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Posted by Tim Flyer on 08/11/2019 19:18:02:

I must say . Putting an operator number inside a model seems a rather simple task to me . It couldn’t be much clearer.

Yep, and being able to show it when required, ain't rocket science either.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by Nigel Heather on 08/11/2019 19:10:34:

If the CAA have now defined ‘special tool’ as ‘any tool” why haven’t they updated the very document that they ask people to refer to as preparation for the test?

Steve's words were:

"... we will be updating the service with the following:"

(my bold)

Edited By Martin Harris on 08/11/2019 19:30:15

[Lima Hotel Foxtrot]

Posted by john stones 1 on 08/11/2019 19:24:32:

Posted by Tim Flyer on 08/11/2019 19:18:02:

I must say . Putting an operator number inside a model seems a rather simple task to me . It couldn’t be much clearer.

Yep, and being able to show it when required, ain't rocket science either.

Methinks people are nitpicking.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[tigerman]

If you are worried about putting your reg number on the outside of the model ( I am not going to bother ,who is going to go around and check )Do what my mates do in the USA and put your number on the back of the prop !!!!!!

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Posted by tigerman on 08/11/2019 20:06:04:

If you are worried about putting your reg number on the outside of the model ( I am not going to bother ,who is going to go around and check )Do what my mates do in the USA and put your number on the back of the prop !!!!!!

If your numbers 12 6 it may already be on the front.

[Keith Berriman]

I am of the opinion that the numbers should go inside your model to give you a bit more confidence that you/we took the CAA test, paid our fee and gained our numbers, so little chance of the numbers being seen by other eyes and taking advantage of our work to follow the CAA Guide lines

[Jason-I]

The registration number is so they can track us down if we carry out criminal activities with our model aircraft. Why would anybody want to put that number anywhere on constant view such that real criminals can copy the number and then use it on their own gatwick attack drones?

Anyway, I've already cut out the middle man. Instead of using a dumb number that the police have to look up on a database to find out who it belong to, I've just written my name and phone number on the inside of all my models.. Who would have thought such a simple solution exists.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Posted by Jason-I on 08/11/2019 21:24:41:

The registration number is so they can track us down if we carry out criminal activities with our model aircraft. Why would anybody want to put that number anywhere on constant view such that real criminals can copy the number and then use it on their own gatwick attack drones?

Anyway, I've already cut out the middle man. Instead of using a dumb number that the police have to look up on a database to find out who it belong to, I've just written my name and phone number on the inside of all my models.. Who would have thought such a simple solution exists.

If someone knows you and your address/phone number, they could use your details when committing a crime.