Jump to content

CAA Call for Input: Review of UK UAS Regulations Aug 2023


MattyB
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have made my response, I will bring it up at my club night on Jan 4th. As former Club Secretary I used to keep a close eye on all this type of thing and pass it around, to the members and bring it up at meetings. I am not sure that this is happening to the same extent now so I will bring it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing on the telly so I've just submitted my response. As a glider flier with many nice composite models it would be impossible to retro fit any RID device into them so I've certainly made the CAA aware of that and who I'd expect compensation from if they made my models worthless.

  • Like 6
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 18/12/2023 at 17:27, MattyB said:

That first year could certainly be a nice little money-spinner for the CAA, dwarfing the annual take-home from the DMARES scheme... 

 

The last number that I saw for registered operators was around 200k, so call it £2M from operators. If they charge 1/2 hour to process an authorised site application and there are 3k applications that is < £500k.

 

19 hours ago, MattyB said:

... those that have been following regulatory matters for a while already understand responding is important and will do so ...

 

I used to think that, I now have my doubts about filling in CAA forms when they are going to ignore answers that they don't like. I will be writing to my MP (again).

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@MattyB..... Till now yes as u pointed out I have not read any documentation which i will honestly say is NOT out of being lazy, but as you also mentioned in an earlier post ,, like many out there I'm not interested in the bureaucracy of it all,, I go to the club field, fly my models & come home again thats it thats aal that matters at the end on the day ,,,  However, as you and others insist so much,,, after a couple of hours reading the following documents:-

 

https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/Call for Input Review of UK RPAS Regulation v3_1 (CAP2569).pdf

https://bmfa.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/BMFA-LMA-Response-to-CAP2610-8-Dec-2023_.pdf

https://consultations.caa.co.uk/rpas/review-of-uk-uas-regulations-consultation/consultation/intro/

 

I will now confirm for you my thoughts and views on Remote ID along with any changes to Regulations & Laws that may have also been mentioned in said documents and after watching a video posted in another thread in the last day or so of which I've seen many videos of the same nature ,, remain unchanged and are still the same as they have been from the start and will continue to adopt, embrace and support Remote ID and any/all changes as and when they do actually happen

 

Please read/take this view with the greatest of respect,, its not a dig at you or anyone else or as negative towards this discussion I'm just giving an as honest view and opinion as I can .. ok I admit I'm not the worlds greatest typist and hell,, absolutely no good at putting my thoughts into writting do I atleast try.. I hope this helps

 

  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, ken anderson. said:

Done my response....I hope I haven't wasted my precious time.....but I think my opinion won't count for much if anything!

 

Ken Anderson....ne...1...response dept.

 

Phew, yes just managed to wade through mine although I must say I was tempted to say to "hell with it" on several occasions. Will wait until closer to the closing date for submission - might be a few mods and a rethink here and there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/12/2023 at 12:47, Ron Gray said:

Whilst I respect your choice, may I ask why?

 

I've just had a quick recap on my previous comments in the thread and I think i have already said why I support it which as i mentioned above that view is unchanged after now reading the documentation I dont know what else you want me to say ,, one thing I've not seen anywhere unless my cheap non-specsavers glasses as failed me for, is a compelling reason why Remote Id shud never be implemented???.. or a compelling argument for me any im sure many others out there to have a change of mind in view and to not support it.... I await patiently for such compelling reasons/arguments

 

I can say no more than that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, GaryWebb said:

 

I've just had a quick recap on my previous comments in the thread and I think i have already said why I support it which as i mentioned above that view is unchanged after now reading the documentation I dont know what else you want me to say ,, one thing I've not seen anywhere unless my cheap non-specsavers glasses as failed me for, is a compelling reason why Remote Id shud never be implemented???.. or a compelling argument for me any im sure many others out there to have a change of mind in view and to not support it.... I await patiently for such compelling reasons/arguments

 

I can say no more than that

I, like many other fliers, have expensive gliders that simply do not have the space within them to install an RID or other piece of electronic equipment. Is that not a very good reason why I/we should not want them?

Edited by David Elam
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GaryWebb said:

 

I've just had a quick recap on my previous comments in the thread and I think i have already said why I support it which as i mentioned above that view is unchanged after now reading the documentation I dont know what else you want me to say ,, one thing I've not seen anywhere unless my cheap non-specsavers glasses as failed me for, is a compelling reason why Remote Id shud never be implemented???.. or a compelling argument for me any im sure many others out there to have a change of mind in view and to not support it.... I await patiently for such compelling reasons/arguments

I think the question is actually "why do we need Remote ID"? You mention "compelling arguments" - well how about 'what positive difference will it make to the safety of model aircraft flying and our interaction with existing users of UK airspace? My answer would be.......for the forseeable future none at all.

I truly respect your opinion and would welcome your response to my notion that RID for model aircraft is worthless.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, john stones 1 - Moderator said:

Whilst I'm far from being a fan of RID implementation, I ain't so sure "my model hasn't the room to fit one in" is accurate, only had the one browse to look at them, various size units about, 1 weighing 10g. No doubt many are better informed on the things than me though. 😉

This is the Spektrum RID module.

https://www.spektrumrc.com/product/sky-remote-id-module/SPMA9500.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, john stones 1 - Moderator said:

 I ain't so sure "my model hasn't the room to fit one in" is accurate, 

 

so what they are saying is theres no physical room to fit something like Spektrums Sky ID unit which a slight bit bigger than an oxo cube????  maybe a slightly smaller battery may help certainly with electric models

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, john stones 1 - Moderator said:

I reckon the question is "How do we convince the powers that be that we don't need RID" Come up with that gem and we're good to go.

 

Feel free to open a new thread to that one with my name attatched......:classic_laugh:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, john stones 1 - Moderator said:

I reckon the question is "How do we convince the powers that be that we don't need RID" Come up with that gem and we're good to go.

Absolutely. Trouble is how does anyone convince fixed view bureaucrats of anything, unless one's argument either saves or makes money for the department in question. Worth or effectiveness rarely comes into it. I'm tempted to quote several govenment 'howlers' that have been in the headlines recently but won't.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, GaryWebb said:

 

so what they are saying is theres no physical room to fit something like Spektrums Sky ID unit which a slight bit bigger than an oxo cube????  maybe a slightly smaller battery may help certainly with electric models

How big are the oxo cubes you buy?

This unit is nearly 1.5" square.

You undermine any argument you are trying to make by posting nonsense such as this. 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cuban8 said:

Absolutely. Trouble is how does anyone convince fixed view bureaucrats of anything, unless one's argument either saves or makes money for the department in question. Worth or effectiveness rarely comes into it. I'm tempted to quote several govenment 'howlers' that have been in the headlines recently but won't.

 

Agree C8, but that's the issue we have, plus trying to limit the damage it does to our hobby going forwards.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...