Enforcement of model flying regulations

[GaryW]

.

Edited December 9, 2023 by GaryWebb

[GaryW]

6 hours ago, Ron Gray said:

Personally I don’t think that not having ID or RID will affect an insurance claim.

 

just to add 

Penalty for flying rc models/drones without Operator ID as set out on CAA website:-

 

It is against the law to fly a drone or model aircraft without having the required IDs. You can be fined for breaking the law when flying. In the most serious cases, you could be sent to prison.

[Learner]

6 hours ago, Ron Gray said:

Do you think someone would worry about that?

Automatic warning letter from Dvla 

Soon followed by £100 fine if ignored

[Arthur Harris]

12 hours ago, Ron Gray said:

Driving a car without tax does not necessarily void your insurance, it very much depends on your insurer.

 

12 hours ago, GaryWebb said:

 

Considering you cant tax a car without  MOT AND Insurance kind of self answers that one Ron

Few laws are "absolute", in the legal sense that breaking them makes you liable, whether you knew about them or not. Most laws require an intention to break the law before we are judged to be criminals. Driving a car without an MOT is not necessarily a criminal act.

With regard to cars, most (but not all) of us have insurance cover that allows us to drive other people's vehicles for specific and limited purposes- for example driving someone else's car for a short journey for safety reasons (to take it for an MOT or drive it off the road if it is causing an obstruction). 

Similarly, if we are covered to drive works vehicles, we don't need to check ourselves if they are roadworthy- it would be reasonable for us to accept that they are. 

 

Edited December 9, 2023 by Arthur Harris

[Phil Green]

It seems to me that this hobby is heavily self-policed - when RID arrives, the only enforcement will be from ourselves. The only other pastime where I've seen such diligent self-regulation is my two nephews, both "Dungeons & Dragons" gamers, where play is absolutely 'to the book'  🙂

 

 

[Arthur Harris]

5 minutes ago, Phil Green said:

It seems to me that this hobby is heavily self-policed - when RID arrives, the only enforcement will be from ourselves. The only other pastime where I've seen such diligent self-regulation is my two nephews, both "Dungeons & Dragons" gamers, where play is absolutely 'to the book'  🙂

 

 

But it may ensure the future of the hobby. If there is a crackdown on park flyers and rogue flyers in public places, club membership will become more popular.

[MattyB]

2 minutes ago, Arthur Harris said:

But it may ensure the future of the hobby. If there is a crackdown on park flyers and rogue flyers in public places, club membership will become more popular.

So let me get this right… You believe increased regulation and a (theoretical) uptick in enforcement activities would improve participation? Can you explain this logic?

[Arthur Harris]

4 minutes ago, MattyB said:

So let me get this right… You believe increased regulation and a (theoretical) uptick in enforcement activities would improve participation? Can you explain this logic?

Increased regulation will lead to regulated flying. If rogue flying was banned by say, National Parks (people throwing gliders over cliffs or hills willy-nilly), or by councils banning park fliers, the people concerned would need to join clubs. It would be a win-win for us.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Some strange logic there Arthur.

[MattyB]

34 minutes ago, Arthur Harris said:

Increased regulation will lead to regulated flying. If rogue flying was banned by say, National Parks (people throwing gliders over cliffs or hills willy-nilly), or by councils banning park fliers, the people concerned would need to join clubs. It would be a win-win for us.

Increased regulation that is disproportionate, complex and highly unlikely to be enforced leads to increased rates of deliberate and accidental non-compliance, not higher club membership. If you think any new pilot who has bought a 150g toy with a camera on it are suddenly going to dutifully leap online to get flyer and Op IDs and join a club because the regs have changed, you’re in fantasy land.
 

As for the slope sparing example, well,  you can’t have done much sloping or met those who enjoy it… Do you really believe the average sloper is going to pack up their hobby and join a power club, or fit RID at great expense inside skinny composite fuselages that block transmission, or travel hundreds of miles to a registered slope site where RID is not required? The chance of enforcement at the average slope is literally zero - hmmm, I wonder what option people will choose…

Edited December 10, 2023 by MattyB

[GaryW]

1 hour ago, Arthur Harris said:

we don't need to check ourselves if they are roadworthy- it would be reasonable for us to accept that they are. 

 

 Sorry to say but you are 1000% totally wrong there ,, this I know as i'm an ex-Professional driver of 15 years on anything from a 3.5T van upto class 2 HGV Lorries & PCV ( Coaches & Buses )   No matter what company you drive for and no matter how long you do it for as the driver you are responsible for making sure any company vehicle you drive as roadworthy ,, If anytime you drive a vehicle on the road whether you know it roadworthy or not you are liable and will be the one that gets prosecuted for any and all  motoring offenses  & laws you break while driving that vehicle including the vehicles roadworthyness to be on the road... The Driver is responsible for vehicle and must check the vehicle every morning before taking any vehicle on the road,, 

Edited December 10, 2023 by GaryWebb

[Arthur Harris]

6 hours ago, GaryWebb said:

 Sorry to say but you are 1000% totally wrong there ,, this I know as i'm an ex-Professional driver of 15 years on anything from a 3.5T van upto class 2 HGV Lorries & PCV ( Coaches & Buses )   No matter what company you drive for and no matter how long you do it for as the driver you are responsible for making sure any company vehicle you drive as roadworthy ,, If anytime you drive a vehicle on the road whether you know it roadworthy or not you are liable and will be the one that gets prosecuted for any and all  motoring offenses  & laws you break while driving that vehicle including the vehicles roadworthyness to be on the road... The Driver is responsible for vehicle and must check the vehicle every morning before taking any vehicle on the road,, 

That's not what this fleet rental company says. I presume they have taken legal advice:

'It is important to note that, from a legal viewpoint, a vehicle is considered to be a place of work. And companies have a duty of care responsibility to their drivers to make sure that vehicles are fit for purpose and that they are as safe as possible while out on the road, with adequate and appropriate insurance.'

Your duty of care obligatons to company car drivers - CLM

Edited December 10, 2023 by Arthur Harris

[Graham Bowers]

Careful with the vehicle analogies gents as depending on which bit of the law selected, one can make a case for being "right". When used at work, PUWER (Provision and Use of Work Reguations) apply as well as all the road traffic stuff that other posters will know more than me about.

 

So everybody can be right, and everybody is happy 😉

 

The relevance of this post to model flying regulations is that picking analogies to make a point is fraught.

[Ron Gray]

7 hours ago, MattyB said:

The chance of enforcement at the average slope is literally zero - hmmm, I wonder what option people will choose…

Exactly so and not just slopes either.

Edited December 10, 2023 by Ron Gray

[Ernie]

One day, not so long ago,  there I was tootling around over the marshes, watched by only the storks, when the gendarms arrived.

The got out of the Peugeot that slow way that they do, and pointed at my slowly circling glider. Always fancied one of these, (in french of course) I gave him a wee try.  No problems after that

ernie

[RottenRow]

9 hours ago, Arthur Harris said:

Increased regulation will lead to regulated flying. If rogue flying was banned by say, National Parks (people throwing gliders over cliffs or hills willy-nilly), or by councils banning park fliers, the people concerned would need to join clubs. It would be a win-win for us.

It sounds as though you are trying to get a job with the CAA… you seem to have their kind of mindset.

 

As a member of a couple of power clubs, and also sometimes a ‘rogue’ flying willy-nilly off cliffs (to use your terminology), I believe that the CAA shouldn’t favour one over the other, and the BMFA should back every one of its members, not just those in clubs.

 

Perhaps you could define the ‘us’ for which it would be a win-win.

 

Brian.

[Paul De Tourtoulon]

1 hour ago, Ernie said:

One day, not so long ago,  there I was tootling around over the marshes, watched by only the storks, when the gendarms arrived.

The got out of the Peugeot that slow way that they do, and pointed at my slowly circling glider. Always fancied one of these, (in french of course) I gave him a wee try.  No problems after that

ernie

You were lucky, we have the forestry lads drive past back and forwards and the 'ecolos' ( the green army ) and we have just got the places 'place' as only one that we can fly from with a few red areas as they are nesting spots for birds.

[Cuban8]

On 09/12/2023 at 01:39, Martin Harris - Moderator said:

I’m sure the Flying Squad won’t see taking on any spot checks as part of their duties but woe betide anyone involved in an incident that comes under the spotlight if they aren’t compliant. 

Quite some time ago I spent a week on jury service in a Coroners' Court. Let me tell you that the lady Coroner who presided over several fatal industrial accident hearings that we were asked to make a verdict on was incredible in her tenacity and ability to get to the bottom of what were in a couple of cases, very complex circumstances surrounding what on the face of it were simple accidents - 'acts of god' if you like. Taught me a lot, as I was working on potentially very dangerous equipment at the time, both for me as an engineer and its operators.

If you break the law either unintentially or deliberately or are simply careless and something goes terribly wrong, be prepared to face someone like that lady Coroner who I've never forgot.

[Arthur Harris]

1 hour ago, RottenRow said:

It sounds as though you are trying to get a job with the CAA… you seem to have their kind of mindset.

 

As a member of a couple of power clubs, and also sometimes a ‘rogue’ flying willy-nilly off cliffs (to use your terminology), I believe that the CAA shouldn’t favour one over the other, and the BMFA should back every one of its members, not just those in clubs.

 

Perhaps you could define the ‘us’ for which it would be a win-win.

 

Brian.

By 'us' I mean the model flying community. If our flying was confined to airfields away from the public view, there would be no concerns over safety and the authorities might lose interest in us.

[Cuban8]

12 hours ago, Arthur Harris said:

 

Few laws are "absolute", in the legal sense that breaking them makes you liable, whether you knew about them or not. Most laws require an intention to break the law before we are judged to be criminals. Driving a car without an MOT is not necessarily a criminal act.

With regard to cars, most (but not all) of us have insurance cover that allows us to drive other people's vehicles for specific and limited purposes- for example driving someone else's car for a short journey for safety reasons (to take it for an MOT or drive it off the road if it is causing an obstruction). 

Similarly, if we are covered to drive works vehicles, we don't need to check ourselves if they are roadworthy- it would be reasonable for us to accept that they are. 

 

As an ex-company car driver for a firm with a large fleet of engineers' vehicles, I was responsible for the roadworthiness of my vehicle as far as those checks that any driver or vehicle owner would be expected to perform. Company insurance was in place (we were issued with a certificate), I'd arranged for an MOT when needed, tyres were legal, windscreen in good order, wipers and wash fluid OK, brakes were ok and no warning lights apparent.

I've hired vans before, and I was required to sign a paper that said I was happy that the vehicle was roadworthy as far as the basic driver checks were concerned.

Ignore your responsibilites at your peril.

[Rich Griff]

This is the worry and it's coming ...

 

The easiest way for the caa to control model flying, what ever the model, a flying machine, is to ban all model flying, apart from model flying at a deserted registered flying site at least 5 miles from any "risk".

 

So anything seen flying outside of the registered area is an illegal flight.

 

Gone are all the very local sites used by country members probably, and the fantastic slope soaring sites that have not been registered.

 

So, a centralised known and registered local flying site that may be fifty miles away from you and organised at a club level probably....

 

When that situation has been achieved, caa close these "now only viable sites" one by one until only buckminster remains....

 

How long that process takes is up to your "influence"...

[Andy Symons - BMFA]

5 minutes ago, Rich Griff said:

This is the worry and it's coming ...

 

The easiest way for the caa to control model flying, what ever the model, a flying machine, is to ban all model flying, apart from model flying at a deserted registered flying site at least 5 miles from any "risk".

 

So anything seen flying outside of the registered area is an illegal flight.

 

Gone are all the very local sites used by country members probably, and the fantastic slope soaring sites that have not been registered.

 

So, a centralised known and registered local flying site that may be fifty miles away from you and organised at a club level probably....

 

When that situation has been achieved, caa close these "now only viable sites" one by one until only buckminster remains....

 

How long that process takes is up to your "influence"...

It really really really isn't coming.

[EarlyBird]

8 minutes ago, Rich Griff said:

This is the worry and it's coming ...

FUD?

[Ron Gray]

@Rich Griff you have absolutely no evidence and have provided no reasoned argument to support your ridiculous statement. Scaremongering at its very best (or worse).

[Rich Griff]

Just make sure your influence is to the max.....