john stones 1 - Moderator Posted September 1, 2023 Share Posted September 1, 2023 10 minutes ago, steve too said: Shapps replaced Grayling. Baroness Vere is still an Under-Secretary of State in the DfT. "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." I'm going with Lol on that one, I make mistakes, a fair man would aknowledge the ? I put in there, not yourself though Steve ???? You ever apologised, or are you not man enough under any of your identities ? " well balanced" Chip on each shoulder. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RottenRow Posted September 1, 2023 Share Posted September 1, 2023 23 minutes ago, steve too said: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." I can’t remember all of the past, but as it sounded a lot better than the future sounds like it will be I’m happy to repeat it. How do I do that please…. Brian. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Gray Posted September 1, 2023 Share Posted September 1, 2023 Rose tinted glasses, aren’t they great? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin McIntosh Posted September 1, 2023 Share Posted September 1, 2023 This whole thing has got out of hand now. Can you just imagine geofencing on, say, an LMA model such as the giant Vulcan? Multi rotors maybe. All most of us want is to be able to take our toy aeroplanes to the local park/ club field. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Griff Posted September 1, 2023 Share Posted September 1, 2023 As a matter of interest, what is the LMA' opinion on this " review of UK uas regulations" document ? Same for passa, if that is an association ? ? Have not checked all my emails yet or the bmfa magazine or even rcme come to that, but may I ask, when did bmfa know of this regulation document release please ? Just asking ..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Griff Posted September 1, 2023 Share Posted September 1, 2023 (edited) Just checked all my emails since December 22, no email from bmfa about this document release apart from an email "members mail merger ?" Email last week or so..... Just saying..... About to start the "first read" of the document, £5.60 was the cost, the bmfa answer sheet was £1..... Everybody should take the time to read the document and fill in the reply part....even if you mearly copy and paste the bmfa response, to show that we actually care about what the caa would wish to do. To do nothing sends the wrong message, so fill in a reply.... Edited September 1, 2023 by Rich Griff 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Billinge Posted September 1, 2023 Share Posted September 1, 2023 The trouble with bad legislation is: Who'se going to Police it? The old Bill already have their hands full trying to Police hurty feelings on the internet let aloneflying a few radio controlled aeroplanes at a club at the weekend. The guys that want to use drones to drop drugs into prisons aren't going to register with the CAA and they aren't going to join the BMFA. The CAA not only have invented a registration scheme in the name of "Safety" they've made us pay to do it. We've been stupid enough to fork out our £9 a year and what have we had in return? I certainly dont feel any safer when I go to the flying feild and I think the whole thing is a joke. I wish the BMFA would call this nonsense out for what it is and stop cooperating with this ridiculous scheme. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Symons - BMFA Posted September 1, 2023 Share Posted September 1, 2023 4 minutes ago, Rich Griff said: Just checked all my emails since December 22, no email from bmfa about this document release apart from an email "members mail merger ?" Email last week or so..... Just saying..... About to start the "first read" of the document, £5.60 was the cost, the bmfa answer sheet was £1..... Everybody should take the time to read the document and fill in the reply part....even if you mearly copy and paste the bmfa response, to show that we actually care about what the caa would wish to do. To do nothing sends the wrong message, so fill in a reply.... The CAA announced the consultation on 9th August via Skywise notifications, the BMFA put a news article on the website the same day. https://bmfa.org/caa-call-for-input-review-of-uk-uas-regulations Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Fry Posted September 1, 2023 Share Posted September 1, 2023 2 minutes ago, Keith Billinge said: The trouble with bad legislation is: Who'se going to Police it? The old Bill already have their hands full trying to Police hurty feelings on the internet let aloneflying a few radio controlled aeroplanes at a club at the weekend. The guys that want to use drones to drop drugs into prisons aren't going to register with the CAA and they aren't going to join the BMFA. The CAA not only have invented a registration scheme in the name of "Safety" they've made us pay to do it. We've been stupid enough to fork out our £9 a year and what have we had in return? I certainly dont feel any safer when I go to the flying feild and I think the whole thing is a joke. I wish the BMFA would call this nonsense out for what it is and stop cooperating with this ridiculous scheme. As an ex copper, I have to say you are absolutely right. No one is likely to come hunting you. Life’s too short. Except when it goes wrong. Some one is encoffined. Then you get the Detective Chief Inpector, with the A team, me doing the liaison with the CAA scene investigators, and it suddenly is a machine wot grinds slow and thoroughly. Call it out fine, but if you don’t fight, you are going to have to live with the consequences. Comply, or do model boats. Or do as the BFMA ask. I would suggest the poor creatures (language self censoring) at the BFMA are just as unhappy with the process, but have to restrain themselves from assaulting the idiots. No point. Life’s a bitch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Jenkins Posted September 1, 2023 Share Posted September 1, 2023 Spektrum SkyID is priced at $99 in the USA. They say it is compatible with any radio brand. Link. Weight quoted as 14 g. Size 18.5 mm x 34.5 mm x 18 mm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted September 1, 2023 Share Posted September 1, 2023 Price of RID could be a biggie for me, moneys limited, still have my fishing tackle though. Don't forget to fill it in. 😉 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Fry Posted September 1, 2023 Share Posted September 1, 2023 In France one identification device can be used/swapped on models in the same class, same owner ID. Its about 10 to 15 grams, €40 ish, transmits (I think) location, speed, owner ID, into the ether. Visually a circuit board in shrink wrap, with an Ariel, servo lead coming out. I think, never confirmed, all of my stuff is one class, motor gliders, power models, 800 g to about 8 kilos. I have one in a motor glider I fly in the wild, it plugs into a spare rx socket to get power. Sorry it’s a bit vague, it makes the machine legal, I fly carefully, past that life is too short to worry too much. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Gray Posted September 1, 2023 Share Posted September 1, 2023 1 hour ago, Peter Jenkins said: Spektrum SkyID is priced at $99 in the USA No doubt FrSky will bring out one at a 1/3rd of that cost. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Griff Posted September 1, 2023 Share Posted September 1, 2023 Thanks Andy... Why was this forum and others not informed earlier ? My fault, I should check on bmfa site every other day in future me thinks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leccyflyer Posted September 1, 2023 Share Posted September 1, 2023 2 hours ago, Rich Griff said: Just checked all my emails since December 22, no email from bmfa about this document release apart from an email "members mail merger ?" Email last week or so..... Just saying..... About to start the "first read" of the document, £5.60 was the cost, the bmfa answer sheet was £1..... Everybody should take the time to read the document and fill in the reply part....even if you mearly copy and paste the bmfa response, to show that we actually care about what the caa would wish to do. To do nothing sends the wrong message, so fill in a reply.... I was notified by the CAA on 8th August by email. Are you not subscribed to the CAA Skywise email notifications? You can read them without having to have them printed out - doesn't cost a penny. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyB Posted September 1, 2023 Author Share Posted September 1, 2023 3 hours ago, Keith Billinge said: The trouble with bad legislation is: Who'se going to Police it? The old Bill already have their hands full trying to Police hurty feelings on the internet let aloneflying a few radio controlled aeroplanes at a club at the weekend. The guys that want to use drones to drop drugs into prisons aren't going to register with the CAA and they aren't going to join the BMFA. The CAA not only have invented a registration scheme in the name of "Safety" they've made us pay to do it. We've been stupid enough to fork out our £9 a year and what have we had in return? I certainly dont feel any safer when I go to the flying feild and I think the whole thing is a joke. I wish the BMFA would call this nonsense out for what it is and stop cooperating with this ridiculous scheme. 3 hours ago, Don Fry said: As an ex copper, I have to say you are absolutely right. No one is likely to come hunting you. Life’s too short. Except when it goes wrong. Some one is encoffined. Then you get the Detective Chief Inpector, with the A team, me doing the liaison with the CAA scene investigators, and it suddenly is a machine wot grinds slow and thoroughly. Call it out fine, but if you don’t fight, you are going to have to live with the consequences. Comply, or do model boats. Or do as the BFMA ask. I would suggest the poor creatures (language self censoring) at the BFMA are just as unhappy with the process, but have to restrain themselves from assaulting the idiots. No point. Life’s a bitch. Gents, you need to read some of the small print n the CAA proposals… In the most dystopian version of RID that is being looked at, all the data from your flight is not just being broadcast locally via Bluetooth or WiFi. It could also be being sent back to a central database via the mobile data networks and recorded by the authorities for posterity. This means enforcement could be carried out remotely via an AI solution that trawls the data looking for transgressions in real time or historically (e.g flying to close to buildings not under your control, flying 1ft over the height limit, etc.). The first you would know about your “crime” is when a letter drops through your door asking you to pay a fixed penalty notice or (if it’s more serious offence) your appearance day in court. All this may feel unlikely now, but make no mistake, it is absolutely possible and is right there in the document today (though they are very careful not to say what they will do with the data). This, along with multiple additional over-reaches, is why it’s so important to respond. Big brother may absolutely be watching…. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyB Posted September 1, 2023 Author Share Posted September 1, 2023 4 hours ago, Rich Griff said: As a matter of interest, what is the LMA' opinion on this " review of UK uas regulations" document ? Same for passa, if that is an association ? ? Have not checked all my emails yet or the bmfa magazine or even rcme come to that, but may I ask, when did bmfa know of this regulation document release please ? Just asking ..... FPVUK response - https://fpvuk.org/caa-call-for-input/ FPVUK thread where they are discussing it - https://dronehub.co.uk/t/caa-call-for-input/413 FPVUK’s guidance doc (equivalent to the BMFAs) - https://fpvuk.org/files/FPV-UK-response-to-CAA-Call-For-Input.pdf There is nothing on the LMA site that I can see, so I’m guessing any guidance they have given to their members is via email, if they’ve done so. The PSSA are an informal club not a national association, so they won’t be doing anything on this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyB Posted September 1, 2023 Author Share Posted September 1, 2023 (edited) The FPVUK response to the RID question is interesting, and a lot more robust than the BMFA’s… “Question 14: Should CAA implement Remote ID (Opportunity 11) and why? Definitely, no. Remote ID would require huge investment in infrastructure and systems in the UK. This cost would no doubt be passed on to UAS Operators in one way or another (perhaps through the registration fee). It would also require significant investment from drone manufacturers. And finally it would involve very significant, and disproportionate, cost to operators of legacy drones and potentially model aircraft flyers too. The fact is that those intent on using a drone for nefarious purposes will not activate remote ID, and they certainly will not retrofit a remote ID module to a legacy drone. It is almost inevitable that any remote ID functionality will be defeated/disabled by ‘hackers’ (those who like to ‘tinker’ with how electronic products work). Spoofing could also be employed by those intent on using their drone without being traced. Or, they could simply build a drone from components. Furthermore, the Police already successfully track and trace criminals who use drones using existing detection systems. Likewise, the CAA already has access to this data which allows it to understand the sector, etc.” Edited September 1, 2023 by MattyB 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Griff Posted September 2, 2023 Share Posted September 2, 2023 Thanks for the reply Matty... Caa skywise ? Will do some research on that... I printed the documents off as reading that type of stuff is so "user unfriendly" on a matchbox sized screen on an internet mobile phone. I do not have an internet computer etc. at home, but the public library does in town, a bus ride away. Slept on "the documents" overnight and will re read this evening. Seems to me that all model flying will be banned ( with heavy penalties, re education, yeah right, internment camps ? ) other than at established well regulated, "no fly zones " to full size and "Amazon aviation" unmanned aircraft systems sites. It also seems to me that the caa/government has already made up their minds as to what they are going to do irrespective of "stake holders" opinions.....they have given us beer and bingo, so don't need anything else do we ! ? Next time you attend the polling station practising your democratic rights, pay full attention as to what happens when you hand in your voting card.... Apply what you witness in the context of rid, big brother has been active for many many years... At least fill in the reply form to the caa document, the subject of this whole thread. Someone said we have 2 1/2 years or so before a big irreversible change happens. Let's enjoy it while we can...United we are strong. Long live article 16 and fill in that form. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Griff Posted September 2, 2023 Share Posted September 2, 2023 Thanks for those "drone" links which I have briefly looked at. Going to library Monday to print off their views... Seems they want "seperation" from "model aircraft" groups... Caa just group us all together, from a sycamore or dandelion seed to a large Lancaster model, unmanned aircraft systems....yes I know that there are different classes but....... Man made "machine" that can actually fly without an on board ( dangling from etc. ) Pilot. A webinar participant said that the caa "don't own the sky..." ...yet. Seems to me they think they do own the sky, and mearly allow these flying uas machines to use it under increasing rules. Anyway, a look at the drone point of view would be beneficial I think. Off down the garden to do a "Churchill" and a "Wright" later. Nice day here today, perfect for model flying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterF Posted September 2, 2023 Share Posted September 2, 2023 13 hours ago, Rich Griff said: Thanks Andy... Why was this forum and others not informed earlier ? My fault, I should check on bmfa site every other day in future me thinks. Sign up for BMFA news so you get an email when there is a new news article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Jenkins Posted September 2, 2023 Share Posted September 2, 2023 (edited) As a matter of fact, the UK Government owns the sky. There is no such thing as "common sky" as there is with common land. You do not own the sky above your house. The CAA administers the rules for the civil use of UK Airspace. The UK military is responsible for the use of the airspace above designated ranges. As Matty has pointed out many times, the reason for all this activity goes back many years to when the EU, of which we were then a member, realised the very significant economic bdnefits that could flow from the opportunity presented by unmanned air vehicles. The military have been the early adopters of unmanned vehicles covering land, sea and air environments. Even they have not been allowed to fly UAVs outside military ranges in the UK. As an example, when Global Hawk (a very large jet powered reconnaissance platform, carrying radar and electro-optical sensors, with a 30 hour endurance) is allowed to take off and land, a restricted airspace is put in place to provide segregated airspace containing only this aircraft as it takes off and climbs to 65,000 ft, or descends to land, at which height it only meets other military aircraft - sometimes. Remembee that there are 2 big companies that have a duopoly in the civil aviation market in the above 100 seater airliners - Boeing and Airbus. Russia has tried, and failed, and China is trying to establish itself in this area. The other bigger problem is that there are only 2 big civil engine manufacturers supplying this market, namely GE and Rolls-Royce. Hence, the attractiveness to the EU politicians of a new market with very low entry barriers that the civil use of unmanned aircraft represented. That covers design, manufacture, certification and generation of entirely new types of revenue generating business within the EU to counter others e.g. Israel, USA etc. Examples of such opportunities are: A. Agriculture - monitoring crop health quickly and easily using airborne sensors B. Building surveys C. Emergency service use for providing persistent reconnaissance over an area of interest to greatly extend the limited manned aircraft capability D. Pipeline and transmission line surveys - currently using manned aircraft which is very much more costly than an unmanned semi autonomous craft. E. Generating new business. Compare with how the introduction of mobile telephony enabled new businesses to begin. An example here is the huge increase in producing film and TV programmes with aerial sequences that would have been too expensive to include using manned aircraft. We should not think that all of what is being proposed is of little or no benefit to us as citizens of this country. Furthermore, it is disingenuous to suggest that the powers that be have made up their mind. The purpose of consultation is to find out what people think of broad proposals. I doubt there are many in every level of government who have any knowledge of our sport/hobby of flying model aircraft. This is our opportunity to put our views forward. Previously, we surprised government with the number and forcefulness of our responses. We should do so again. Time is running out to get your responses in so please make the effort to do so. Edited September 2, 2023 by Peter Jenkins Formatting and spelling! 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leccyflyer Posted September 2, 2023 Share Posted September 2, 2023 1 hour ago, Rich Griff said: Thanks for those "drone" links which I have briefly looked at. Going to library Monday to print off their views... Seems they want "seperation" from "model aircraft" groups... Caa just group us all together, from a sycamore or dandelion seed to a large Lancaster model, unmanned aircraft systems....yes I know that there are different classes but....... Man made "machine" that can actually fly without an on board ( dangling from etc. ) Pilot. A webinar participant said that the caa "don't own the sky..." ...yet. Seems to me they think they do own the sky, and mearly allow these flying uas machines to use it under increasing rules. Anyway, a look at the drone point of view would be beneficial I think. Off down the garden to do a "Churchill" and a "Wright" later. Nice day here today, perfect for model flying. On you go then - get out and get flying. 😄 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace Posted September 2, 2023 Share Posted September 2, 2023 Done my bit - but what a load of jargon and treacle to wade through. BMFA and @MattyBuseful starters 👏 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan W Posted September 2, 2023 Share Posted September 2, 2023 (edited) Sitting offshore on my nightshift, I have ground my way through this consultation. Despite all the CAA flubber-lubber-lubber, in end it's quite simple for most of the questions to say "Does not apply to model aircraft operated within pilot line of sight". I did think that the BMFA responses were trying to sit between two stools of traditional model aircraft and FPV "drones". Since my own response was purely from the perspective of traditional model aircraft, it was relatively easy to be blunt and straight to the point. I did find the FPVUK response to be a useful contrast to the BMFA one and between the two enabled me to clarify my thoughts. Edited September 2, 2023 by Jonathan W . 1 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.