CAA Proposes 8.3% increase in Operator Registration Fee from April 2024

[Mike T]

3 hours ago, RedBaron said:

If all the new industries that want to monopolize our skies can't fit in with what exists then it does not say much for whatever "technology" they have

...

A basic requirement of all these new industries should be that they prove their technology does what is required before they leave the ground for the first time.

 

 

Exactly this.  The rights of existing (98 years and counting) lower airspace users should be protected.  The burden (including costs) of ensuring that new 'commercial'  entrants to the use of this airspace should fall on said new entrants.  They are the people who should be charged for 'innovation' as they are the ones who will profit from it. 

 

If the best solution turns out to require some form of remote ID on all UAVs, then the cost of equipping the 'hobby' flyers should be borne by the commercial operators.  After all, the technology will be simple and cheap...

 

[Cuban8]

Is this document going to be simply taken as a true and realistic statement of how the CAA believe these new technologies will develop?

Will it have to face proper scrutiny of the viabilty of its claims, paragraph by paragraph, and then  have CAA justify their words before quite possibly, vast of sums of  money and effort  are thrown at another ill thought through white elephant that some believed to be  a good idea at the time?

[Andrew Calcutt]

The small amount they collect from fees,probaly funds 4-5 non jobs.We are walking eyes wide open,to a model flying ban.The airspace is not that busy at the heights we fly it's nonsense 

[ken anderson.]

Model flying Ban?....when?, I'm busy building a model at the min....plus my BMFA,club fees are due....what do you reckon...pointless?

 

Ken Anderson....ne...1.….model flying banned dept.

[Cuban8]

10 minutes ago, Andrew Calcutt said:

The small amount they collect from fees,probaly funds 4-5 non jobs.We are walking eyes wide open,to a model flying ban.The airspace is not that busy at the heights we fly it's nonsense 

Agree. Although I don't think a blanket ban on our hobby is on the cards or could be justified outside of a national emergency of some extreme type, as was the case when most UK  model flying was curtailed during WW2.

None of us are reactionary, but are really concerned at the excesses of many futurists who have the ear of government, and who seem to come up with all sorts of ideas that may well affect people without actually any hard and fast evidence their dreams will come to pass.

[FlyinFlynn]

16 hours ago, Cuban8 said:

Agree. Although I don't think a blanket ban on our hobby is on the cards or could be justified outside of a national emergency of some extreme type, as was the case when most UK  model flying was curtailed during WW2.

None of us are reactionary, but are really concerned at the excesses of many futurists who have the ear of government, and who seem to come up with all sorts of ideas that may well affect people without actually any hard and fast evidence their dreams will come to pass.

I disagree with your premise that the powers that be couldn't or wouldn't impose a ban on model flying outside a national emergency. Recent history has clearly demonstrated historical values stand for nothing in todays world. Besides, if the powers that be need a national emergency in order to pursue some prescribed course of action I reckon they would just invent one (also as per recent history), they are that emboldened now.

[GrumpyGnome]

Oh dear. A CT to stop us flying model planes......

[Andy Symons - BMFA]

34 minutes ago, FlyinFlynn said:

I disagree with your premise that the powers that be couldn't or wouldn't impose a ban on model flying outside a national emergency. Recent history has clearly demonstrated historical values stand for nothing in todays world. Besides, if the powers that be need a national emergency in order to pursue some prescribed course of action I reckon they would just invent one (also as per recent history), they are that emboldened now.

I have to say that is some advanced level doom-mongery. If the powers that be wanted us out of the shared airspace we would already be out of it.

As it stands the effects on us so far have been minimal and I very much feel that going forward apart from some adaptation to the reality that airspace is only going to get busier there will be a minimal effect for the majority of model flyers. The BMFA have worked very hard both in Europe and the UK over the past years to ensure the effects have been minimal and we will continue to do so.

[Peter Jenkins]

32 minutes ago, Andy Symons - BMFA said:

I have to say that is some advanced level doom-mongery. If the powers that be wanted us out of the shared airspace we would already be out of it.

As it stands the effects on us so far have been minimal and I very much feel that going forward apart from some adaptation to the reality that airspace is only going to get busier there will be a minimal effect for the majority of model flyers. The BMFA have worked very hard both in Europe and the UK over the past years to ensure the effects have been minimal and we will continue to do so.

Well said Andy.  I think some people who have posted are getting too carried away with some deep state conspiracy theories.  From my time working both inside and outside central government, the cock up theory is almost always the correct one.  You have to get a lot of different people and departments lined up to achieve such dastardly aims and, sadly, even during a major pandemic, it is clear that our machinery of government is very far from being the Rolls-Royce machine we'd like to think we have.

[steve too]

1 hour ago, GrumpyGnome said:

Oh dear. A CT to stop us flying model planes......

 

“Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you.”

[FlyinFlynn]

1 hour ago, Andy Symons - BMFA said:

I have to say that is some advanced level doom-mongery.

Currently the time difference between someone being a conspiracy theorist to a soothsayer is about 6 months.... and shortening. I think I will bookmark this 'conversation' for review in 6 months. We will see.

[Peter Christy]

Someone earlier in this thread mentioned the old wireless transmitting license that we all had to get from the Post Office. Strangely, a few days ago I found my original license! It wasn't cheap, but wasn't excruciatingly expensive. It allowed us to transmit on "approved bands" - 27 Mc/s and 465 Mc/s. (465 was later moved to 459 to make way for UHF TV, and Mc/s became MHz, for the benefit of those who couldn't speak English!)

 

In addition to the frequencies we also had to notify the Postmaster General *where* we were going to fly from, and get permission from him in writing if we intended to fly elsewhere!

 

Of course, this latter requirement was totally unenforceable and ignored by all.

 

So, in the course of 60 years, we seem to have gone a full circle....!

 

--

Pete

 

[GrumpyGnome]

21 minutes ago, FlyinFlynn said:

Currently the time difference between someone being a conspiracy theorist to a soothsayer is about 6 months.... and shortening. I think I will bookmark this 'conversation' for review in 6 months. We will see.

 

Apart from the cases where that's not true:

 

• moon landing
• CIA killed JFK
• the monarchy killed Diana Princess of Wales
• the earth is flat

 

I have no issue with people believing what they want - just keep it to yourselves.

 

1 hour ago, steve too said:

 

“Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you.”

 

Neither does it mean you're not ill.

 

 

Anyway, enough, let's get back to talk of models.

[Geoff S]

2 hours ago, GrumpyGnome said:

 

Apart from the cases where that's not true:

 

• moon landing
• CIA killed JFK
• the monarchy killed Diana Princess of Wales
• the earth is flat

 

I have no issue with people believing what they want - just keep it to yourselves.

 

 

Neither does it mean you're not ill.

 

 

Anyway, enough, let's get back to talk of models.

 

I occasionally watch YouTube videos (particularly in poor weather 🙂 ) which debunk flat earthers.  It's amazing the different varieties and theories they (flat eathers) have and are readily debunked.  Because I've watched a few I get recommended more, alongside ones about aviation, sailing and motor and pedal cycling 🙂  

 

Back to toy aeroplanes!

[Erfolg]

The increase/event was predicted some time back, when registration was first put forward. The idea that price increases would follow in the future was pooh, poohed, by many. Those who said the night follows day, were often derided.

 

The reasons given, are typical civil service, in that it does not have to believed, just has to sound and feel, for what it is.

 

As to eliminating us hobbyists, probably not today, could happen in the future.

 

Those who suggest that it is paranoid to recognise reality, could be considered naïve by others.  

 

To continue legally flying, we will have to bite the bullet.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

6 minutes ago, Erfolg said:

The increase/event was predicted some time back, when registration was first put forward. The idea that price increases would follow in the future was pooh, poohed, by many. Those who said the night follows day, were often derided.

 

The reasons given, are typical civil service, in that it does not have to believed, just has to sound and feel, for what it is.

 

As to eliminating us hobbyists, probably not today, could happen in the future.

 

Those who suggest that it is paranoid to recognise reality, could be considered naïve by others.  

 

To continue legally flying, we will have to bite the bullet.

 

No one pooh poohed comments re future price rises, they just tired of the doom mongers, we all know night follows day, but some revel in perpetual gloom and love to depress others.

 

[Ron Gray]

13 minutes ago, john stones 1 - Moderator said:

and love to depress others

 

 

[Paul De Tourtoulon]

Thanks Ron, I didn't know that song, and at 80 + years old they still have it,,,😇

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Paranoia and reality ?

Some seem to think they have insight others lack, you could not be more wrong. The real issue is some drone on and on plus wade into those fighting our corner, disagreeing as a formality with any stance they take or guidance they give, having done this, they then go on to offer nothing themselves.

 

Here's my reality. We have few cards to play, so stick together and get the best we can, no matter how long we've done XYZ for, those days are ending, those are facts we can all see.

 

Constant negativity will only achieve one thing, a decline in our numbers.

[RottenRow]

Getting back to the original topic of this thread (the proposed 8.3% increase), the 3% proposed for 'innovation' works out at 31p for the year. It's really not worth getting hot under the collar about.

 

Home broadband and mobile phone prices go up each March / April by 3.9% above the rate of inflation, with no mention of where that 3.9% is going. On an annual broadband cost of around £400 that is approaching £16 a year on top of inflation... the same again for a 'phone contract. Perhaps anyone who is concerned about the 31p going to the CAA should instead direct their efforts to the 'phone service providers, where there are potentially much greater savings to be made.

 

Brian.

[2.4g Shaun]

9 hours ago, Andy Symons - BMFA said:

I have to say that is some advanced level doom-mongery. If the powers that be wanted us out of the shared airspace we would already be out of it.
 

Cheers Andy, I was becoming. Increasingly worried after reading all the predictions from the wielders of the Swords of Damocles that the only way I would be able to fly in the future was glue my three 1/3 scale models into one airframe and take my PPL. Phew..

Edited December 3, 2023 by 2.4g Shaun
Typo

[FlyinFlynn]

 

 

20 hours ago, GrumpyGnome said:

 

I have no issue with people believing what they want - just keep it to yourselves.

 

 

Why?  this is a public forum where views are freely expressed is it not?   You are advocating censorship. Do you not think your post was hypocritical as you are expressing your preference that not everyone wants to see.

 

 

22 hours ago, Andy Symons - BMFA said:

I have to say that is some advanced level doom-mongery. If the powers that be wanted us out of the shared airspace we would already be out of it.

 

We are already out of it, or at least quite a large part of it (remind me, what is the maximum height we are allowed to fly at and what did that height used to be 10 years ago?) As sure as night follows day there will be further restrictions because money talks and, as a tiny cohort, aeromodellers don't have enough of it to fight those influential organisations with designs on the rest of the airspace. Cold, hard facts trump head-burying every time.

 

15 hours ago, john stones 1 - Moderator said:

Some seem to think they have insight others lack, you could not be more wrong.

 

I agree with you, but no one claims to have more insight, it is a case of coming to a different conclusion when examining all the data available to them at the time and tying that in with historical facts.

 

22 hours ago, Peter Jenkins said:

the cock up theory is almost always the correct one. 

 

While I would agree that the cockup-ery is undoubtedly present, even commonplace, for me it simply doesn't  explain away all the atrocious decisions made by the powers that be. The only thing that does explain all of those is 'vested interests' . Always follow the money.

 

 

15 hours ago, john stones 1 - Moderator said:

Here's my reality. We have few cards to play, so stick together and get the best we can, no matter how long we've done XYZ for, those days are ending, those are facts we can all see.

 

Well said John, that is the only course of action, fruitless as it will inevitably be. 

 

 

 

[Ron Gray]

8 minutes ago, FlyinFlynn said:

Why?  this is a public forum where views are freely expressed is it not?   You are advocating censorship. Do you not think your post was hypocritical as you are expressing your preference that not everyone wants to see.

Because it has been done to death, is frankly now just tiresome and boring. You've had your say why not just leave it at that unless you have something more constructive to say?

 

9 minutes ago, FlyinFlynn said:

We are already out of it, or at least quite a large part of it (remind me, what is the maximum height we are allowed to fly at and what did that height used to be 10 years ago?)

Are we really? Up to 1500' (with 'permit') isn't that enough for you? OK so a permit is needed, so what, if you need it, get it.

 

11 minutes ago, FlyinFlynn said:

it is a case of coming to a different conclusion

No, it's more a case of pouring more doom and gloom just of the sake of it (see the first point above).

 

12 minutes ago, FlyinFlynn said:

Always follow the money.

Stating the blessed obvious. It's always been the same and will continue to be the same.

[GrumpyGnome]

14 minutes ago, FlyinFlynn said:

Why?  this is a public forum where views are freely expressed is it not?   You are advocating censorship. Do you not think your post was hypocritical as you are expressing your preference that not everyone wants to see

 

Not at all. All views on model flying are welcome in a forum about...... model flying.

Edited December 4, 2023 by GrumpyGnome

[Ron Gray]

32 minutes ago, FlyinFlynn said:

that is the only course of action, fruitless as it will inevitably be. 

Maybe a more positive approach would be to engage with flying buddies who are not members of this forum and raise their awareness to the situation. I know that at my club's last meeting out of 30 present only 3 said that they frequented this forum, the rest were unaware of what is happening right now!