Good Grief

[Martin McIntosh]

I have just glanced at the latest dictat from the BMFA. Does anyone really expect this to be taken seriously? For instance, a `drone` under 250gm with a camera must be registered as I see it, unless it is a toy one. Lets face it, they are all toys as any models of whatever type or size can be viewed.

Lots of the usual gobbledygook about registering and how long it lasts, whether you are a member of a club, as an individual flying in the local park with your `toy` or whatever.

Whilst I applaud the efforts of the BMFA to sort out this mess, just how many will take any notice?

Rant nearly over, but on the 31st we should surely be free of these insane EU rules.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Surely the dictat was from the CAA? That's who sent me an email on the subject earlier today...

[leccyflyer]

Yes, the email I recieived was from the CAA and the rules will come in on the 31st December, not go out on 31st December.

[ken anderson.]

mine came from the CAA...….not the bmfa.

 

ken anderson...ne..1...oop's/edit dept.

 

Edited By ken anderson. on 18/12/2020 22:19:07

[alan p]

lets stop beating the BMFA the latest dictat (Martins word) is not from them it is the CAA. We will need the people in Leicester to decipher the load of verbal diarrhea for us.

If read they state the legislation is moving into British law virtually as is. Though to be honest the explanation is about as clear as mud

[Geoff S]

It's nonsense to blame the EU. Rules on model fllying seem to be being enacted all over the world. You just have to listen to Bruce Simpson's rants from New Zealand for example.

The email I received today came from the CAA, not the BMFA or any European Union NGO and it won't make a srap of difference to the way or how I fly. Mainly because it's just common sense not because I intend to flout the rules.

Geoff

[Nigel R]

Posted by Martin McIntosh on 18/12/2020 20:48:49:

I have just glanced at the latest dictat from the BMFA. Does anyone really expect this to be taken seriously? For instance, a `drone` under 250gm with a camera must be registered as I see it, unless it is a toy one. Lets face it, they are all toys as any models of whatever type or size can be viewed.

Lots of the usual gobbledygook about registering and how long it lasts, whether you are a member of a club, as an individual flying in the local park with your `toy` or whatever.

Whilst I applaud the efforts of the BMFA to sort out this mess, just how many will take any notice?

Rant nearly over, but on the 31st we should surely be free of these insane EU rules.

I suggest checking your facts on every front there.

[Peter Jenkins]

Martin, I think you are doing the BMFA a grave disservice. If it wasn't for their efforts, specifically their CEO, we would be in the same position as the US modellers are in. So, incidentally, would the rest of Europe. So, rather than ranting about the BMFA, and to be fair the other 3 organisations, you should be cheering them to the rafters for essentially arriving at a state where there is almost no difference from where we were before all the drafting of drone laws started. The gobbledegook is EU and UK DfT inspired. There is a simplified set of block diagrams produced by the BMFA that sets out very simply what you can and cannot do.

Enjoy your freedom to keep flying on pretty much the same basis as before. The EU rules have been put into British Law and that comes into force on 31st Dec as the EU rules fade out.

[Andy Symons - BMFA]

Martin

See **LINK**

All nicely deciphered and it essentially means we carry on pretty much as we are.

[cymaz]

Posted by Andy Symons - BMFA on 19/12/2020 06:23:07:

Martin

See **LINK**

All nicely deciphered and it essentially means we carry on pretty much as we are.

I’ll second that

[alan p]

Thankyou Andy

Explains any situation that may occur

Merry Xmas to the people at Leicester

[Tim Flyer]

Thanks very much Andy and your colleagues at BMFA .. I also really appreciate the huge efforts of BMFA guiding us through what to many is a lot of legislative gobbledygook.

BMFA have also been a great help with their pandemic guidance notes ... without those our club might have been much harder to organise and floundered in a muddle of differing opinions !

[Cuban8]

We've absolutely done this to death. Fortunately, we are able to carry on pretty much as in past years because of the efforts of the BMFA who have engaged with those bureaucrats who don't really understand our hobby IMHO, and have moderated their excesses. Naturally, there is potential for the Hi-viz, peaked cap, badge covered rule reciters to continue to have a field day with this, but for most normal people with lives to lead and much bigger problems to confront at this time, model flying continues and as far as I'm aware, nobody has been dragged off of a flying field by the police for contravening the regs.

The hobby faces far greater existential problems outside of form filling, on-line tests, registration, the drone delivery to your garden fantasy and all the rest of it. When we get bored with what's being going on over the last few years and it fades into the background, perhaps our focus can get back to more practical matters to keep the hobby alive?

[J D 8]

Well said Cuban8

[BackinBlack]

We used to have CAP658 and the ANOs 138, 166 and 167 contained in CAP393. The essence of these regulations was

Don't do anything that endangers an Aircraft or the people therein

Don't do anything with your Aircraft that endangers people, animals or property

Added to that a few specific rules relating to controlled areas.

Simple, sensible and traditionally British in character.

We now have a complex set of rules to achieve the same - Safe Flying. Miscreants never did take notice of the old rules and will still ignore the new ones.

In terms of what we do as model flyers little has changed, but we now have to make ourselves known to the authorities and pay £9 a year to continue doing what we did.

Just saying............

[kc]

I agree with Martin! The point about whether an under 250 gram drone with a camera is a toy is so unclear! If you follow the links the CAA give all the info is so confusing even to an experienced aeromodeller - hopeless for youngsters and newcomers to understand so they will no doubt ignore it. To be of any use the wording needs to say clearly what you can and cannot do.

I assume Martin meant the ending of all EC rules on 31st Dec, not model legislation.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

As I understand it, all EU law simply remain as UK law at the end of the year. From then onwards, subject to any possible trading agreements and worldwide conventions, the UK is free to amend legislation as it sees fit.

Edited By Martin Harris on 19/12/2020 13:35:09

[Dickw]

Posted by kc on 19/12/2020 12:58:36:

I agree with Martin! The point about whether an under 250 gram drone with a camera is a toy is so unclear! If you follow the links the CAA give all the info is so confusing even to an experienced aeromodeller - hopeless for youngsters and newcomers to understand so they will no doubt ignore it. To be of any use the wording needs to say clearly what you can and cannot do.

I assume Martin meant the ending of all EC rules on 31st Dec, not model legislation.

Explanation of "Toy" from CAP722

"To be classed as a toy, a product must be able to comply with the ‘Toys (Safety) regulations 2011.
Essentially, a ‘toy’ is a product that is considered to be suitable for use by a person who is under the age
of 14 years. Therefore, if the product is not marked as such within its packaging, then it cannot be
considered to be a toy."

Dick

[Martin McIntosh]

Ok, I misinterpreted CAA for BMFA but it makes no difference in the end. The whole point was that we should soon be free of these idiotic `diktats` as I put it, but this is obviously not going to be the case. Just what exactly did the majority vote for or even bother to do so? Other than the safety aspects regarding buzzing of airliners etc, very little of this has come from the UK.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

As I understand it, until the end of the transition period, our laws remain in line with European law. Let's hope that in the future some improvements will be made but I doubt that model aircraft legislation will be top of the agenda.

Once free of the restrictions of EU membership, then perhaps we can lobby our representatives to put well reasoned changes to Parliament for eventual consideration but it's unrealistic to expect things to change on the day we officially leave.

[Peter Miller]

Based on the current shambles I can't help feeling that nothing in the current government can be classed as "Well reasoned."

[Peter Jenkins]

Martin, you may have missed the driving force for the unmanned aviation industry which is to provide the European Union (of which we were a member state at the time) with a new industry to provide employment and generate revenue.

At the size of vehicle we are talking the potentisl exists for a wide range of activity that will require use of the airspace we occupy. A small example of the roles these unmanned aircraft can fulfill:

• Agriculture - e.g. checking for crop health
• Powerline inspection
• Search and rescue
• Emergency services
• Transport of critical medical supplies
• Environmental inspection

There will be many more and I haven't mentioned Amszon delivery - yet.

The entry barrier to building these air vehicles is low unlike the huge barrier to entering the existing man carrying aircraft industry. This represents a huge opportunity to the EU nations and to the UK even outside the EU. Like all aviation matters it's important that laws are agreed internationally so that national boundaries do not present an articicial constraint to an aircraft.

I think that the BMFA's CEO has done a quite outstanding job to get first EASA and then the UK DfT and CAA to recognise the special position that model flying needed to be treated as an exception. The problem as ever is the law of unintended consequences. Hence, the need to make sure that people don't game the system and use the model flying exemption to conduct commercial work. Notwithstanding that I'm sure that there will be some clever dick who will find a way through to bending the rules. The pilot who flew the ill fated Emiliano Sala using an aircraft and pilot qualification that did not allow a hire and reward flight to be undertaken.

I think that's what has upset you, and probably a good many others, as nit picking regulations. The regulations did not stop the footballer Sala's tragic end but the law exists to allow action to be taken against those who hazard the safety of others. Yes, it will make no difference to law breakers but as part of a civilized society we use the rule of law to help us to live harmoniously.

Well, that's my take and I'm just delighted that the F3A aerobstics world can continue to operate by exceeding 400 ft height limit to which non-model flyers are limited.

[Martin McIntosh]

Thanks Peter, but I was talking about a drone under 250gm, not the ones which have an enormous potential for the reasons you mentioned above which can only be beneficial to us all (except places like Amazon who would just cause chaos for little benefit other than to themselves).

I think that the novelty factor has passed for the toy ones but there will still be a few this Christmas which will be in your local park oblivious to the CAA, EASA, what have you.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

The distinction is that a camera equipped sub 250g drone can be used for malicious/illegal purposes.

[Peter Jenkins]

It's a bit like when you fill in the form for entry to the US and they ask you if you have ever committed a criminal offence. What a silly question I thought as people will lie. Aha, said the man in the bowler hst (stetson I suppose) if we find you have lied we can deprt you immediately as you have entered the country illegally.

So, since ignorance of the law is no defence, if you go doing naughty things with your camera equipped <250 gm model, the authorities can charge you with breaking the law. Simples!