Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Bear

Model Flying and the National Trust

Recommended Posts

satinet

No offence to your good self John of course. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shedofdread

On a general note, if flying is taking place from or near the car park and that car park is used by non-aeromodellers, then an offence under the relevant ANO is taking place (remember the separation that has to be maintained from any unmanned vehicle to structures, livestock and persons not connected with the operation of that vehicle). Off the top of my head, I can't remember the relevant revision of [iIRC] CAP722 but if you feel this info to be of use, a quick search should turn it up

 

I could rant about RTFs bought by people without the wherewithall to even read the instructions but I shan't... ;)  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
slippery sloper

There's no apostrophe in 'facts' (plural), by the way........ :thumbsup: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DevonFlyer

It would appear that a lot of this bother kicked off around the time I was last at Staggie in September last year.

We were flying off Coastguards, and an elderly chap had been flying an electric glider around. I was busy flying my Weasel and it was only when I landed and was walking back to my car did I realise that there seemed to be some 'discussion' going on in front of the car parked next to me. A couple of guys ( can't remember who) were telling the old boy that electric was classed as 'power' and was therefore not allowed on NT sites.

Elderly pilot was having none of it and was protesting, quite vigorously, that it WAS OK and that there was an article in the BMFA News that said as much.

At this point, my interest was aroused and I felt I had to say something.

I informed him of the agreement between the BMFA and the NT which categorically forbids 'power' flying on NT sites and that, by continuing to fly an electric model, he was in breach of that agreement.

At this point he started waving a copy of the BMFA News under my nose and pointed at an article about slope soaring. In the article was a picture of someone standing on a coastal slope site and holding an electric powered model. This was his 'proof' that powered flight was acceptable on NT sites.

When I tried to point out to him that he had no idea where the photo was taken, or if indeed it was even a NT site and that the BMFA / NT agreement was quite specific with regards to flying off Staggie, he became quite agitated and tried to convince me that I was wrong, all the time pointing at the article in the BMFA News and saying that he had always flown electric there.

I would have left it, if he had just accepted that he may, possibly, have been be wrong; but he was adamant that I didn't know what I was talking about and wanted to forcibly argue the fact.

 

I was happy to oblige him.

 

When he had eventually packed up and gone away, some of the other guys who were there 'spectating' thanked me for standing up and having a say in the matter.

 

I seem to recall a post some time ago, maybe not on this forum, presumably about this incident and reading about the elderly chap being 'bullied'. This was categorically NOT the case. Throughout the discussion, I was polite and courteous. I may have been forceful when making my point, but this was simply because he would not listen. He was ignorant of the rules and stubborn with it and appeared quite prepared to stand his ground. There were several witnesses who would verify my account.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yoyo

I'm torn here, I fly slope and have a low powered electric soarer. Being an inland wuss I'd like to have the fan as a backstop when flying over the sea. I know from experience that it cannot be heard as soon as it's launched and gets away, I've even had non flying spectators worry that the motor has stopped and I'm going to crash. But... I can also easily see that there are a lot of people who would happily take advantage of any leeway and would fly hotliners, EDFs and other noisy beasts even if the rules clearly said "quiet electric only". So I'd be happiest with a "no power at all" rule as just about the only simply enforceable rule. It's not as if it's impossible to find a power field to fly at, and there are good reasons why power fields NEED all the negotiations and agreements before people are allowed to fly power there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
isoaritfirst

There is a right and a wrong way to approach these things. 

 

As a pilot that wishes to fly power off a slope you could just ruck up and launch off and ignore everyone else and their needs.

 

You could write , phone  or whatever the landowner and hassle him, or even suggest that power is no different from gliders these days and therefore he is in the wrong for not allowing it.

 

Either one is likely to both upset the glider pilots and also create unnecessary work and hassle for the landowner. Considering that the landowner has nothing to gain from allowing model fliers on his land - and does actually have something to lose by allowing them, why would he want to also become policeman and a judge over a band of squabbling pilots arguing about what is and insn't appropriate.

It would be much easier to just say "please go away and don't come back".

Even if the Landowner is more obliging than that and prepared to put himself out - should the news of his hassles escape into the wider countryside - what chance would you have of chatting up your local farmer for a chance to fly off his land.. 

 

 

The right way, and the only way should be to fly within the clubs rules and if you dislike the rules you should gain support from others within the club and raise the issues at the AGM  where they can be openly discussed, and if it comes to blows then no one else is involved..

 

Once the majority within the club are in agreement that power is ok then the BMFA should be approached and once that is also approved an approach to the landowner with a clear proposal should be made. 

 

The club would then have to police it rigidly to ensure that no flies  outside of the designated area  and the appropriateness of the models etc being flown.

Should anyone step outside of these rules, they should be brought to task by the club and if they fail to listen (likely as they have already shown there lack of respect for the clubs rules) then the BMFA should be involved. 

 

The landowner should be at all cost kept out of the debate. 

 

But that is hard to do, I know from experience that some people seem to think that they can do what they like and have little or no respect for others needs, and their first port of call is the landowner. They simply fail to see past he end of their very spiteful nose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Feefo

I'm torn here, I fly slope and have a low powered electric soarer. Being an inland wuss I'd like to have the fan as a backstop when flying over the sea. I know from experience that it cannot be heard as soon as it's launched and gets away, I've even had non flying spectators worry that the motor has stopped and I'm going to crash. But... I can also easily see that there are a lot of people who would happily take advantage of any leeway and would fly hotliners, EDFs and other noisy beasts even if the rules clearly said "quiet electric only". So I'd be happiest with a "no power at all" rule as just about the only simply enforceable rule. It's not as if it's impossible to find a power field to fly at, and there are good reasons why power fields NEED all the negotiations and agreements before people are allowed to fly power there.

 

 

I'm the same Yoyo.

 

Seeing as I started this hobby flying electric gliders, I have a 'fondness' of them, and I also completely understand the worry of throwing something off a hill or coast without backup when flying slope/coast for the 1st few times. Members of a powered club who decide to  'have a go at this sloping business' are never going to be comfortable without a motor up front to get them out of trouble should they need it. A few posts seem to hint at the fact they are in their later years, and I'll bet a pint that most of these fella's don't fancy/can't manage a trip down the hill and back up again if things go pear shaped. Although there will probably be someone who would offer to retrieve a plane for them if needed, it might also be a pride thing in not wanting to depend on someone else.....

 

And while I completely agree about the use of jets, pushers and conventional type powered planes being banned, there are so many electric gliders that are quieter than a screaming moldie, and considerably less dangerous too.

 

The only way I can see a powered glider rule working would be through a db limit, which would be near on impossible to determine and enforce. The current rules make policing the sites so much easier, no power full stop, otherwise there's no doubt that someone will turn up with their 2kw Strega which growls loudly as the power is used.

 

So, seeing as I can fly slope and have been doing so for a while, and I'm confident throwing a plane off, I'm fine with a no power rule, but I'm not anti electric depending on the model and/or flyer.

 

Hope this gets resolved tho, I was thinking about a visit to St Agnes this year for the family hols, hate to decide to go to find the site has been lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bear

Personally I love electric models, my first one was a MFA Hummingbird so many years ago I cannot remember. I still fly electric models, mostly a Sputnik and a Flash the great thing about living in Cornwall is that there are so many places you can fly. Most people who live in Cornwall no of a deserted beach or bit of moorland where you can fly even in the height of summer without disturbing anyone.

Feefo I very much doubt that we will lose St Agnes, common sense will prevail i'm sure and even if it didn't nothing in Cornwall gets sorted that fast! It will be done drekley!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Feefo

TBH Bear, over the years I've found that losing something is usually 10 times quicker than getting something, especially where the authorities are concerned anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
satinet

There is a right and a wrong way to approach these things. 

 

As a pilot that wishes to fly power off a slope you could just ruck up and launch off and ignore everyone else and their needs.

 

You could write , phone  or whatever the landowner and hassle him, or even suggest that power is no different from gliders these days and therefore he is in the wrong for not allowing it.

 

Either one is likely to both upset the glider pilots and also create unnecessary work and hassle for the landowner. Considering that the landowner has nothing to gain from allowing model fliers on his land - and does actually have something to lose by allowing them, why would he want to also become policeman and a judge over a band of squabbling pilots arguing about what is and insn't appropriate.

It would be much easier to just say "please go away and don't come back".

Even if the Landowner is more obliging than that and prepared to put himself out - should the news of his hassles escape into the wider countryside - what chance would you have of chatting up your local farmer for a chance to fly off his land.. 

 

 

The right way, and the only way should be to fly within the clubs rules and if you dislike the rules you should gain support from others within the club and raise the issues at the AGM  where they can be openly discussed, and if it comes to blows then no one else is involved..

 

Once the majority within the club are in agreement that power is ok then the BMFA should be approached and once that is also approved an approach to the landowner with a clear proposal should be made. 

 

The club would then have to police it rigidly to ensure that no flies  outside of the designated area  and the appropriateness of the models etc being flown.

Should anyone step outside of these rules, they should be brought to task by the club and if they fail to listen (likely as they have already shown there lack of respect for the clubs rules) then the BMFA should be involved. 

 

The landowner should be at all cost kept out of the debate. 

 

But that is hard to do, I know from experience that some people seem to think that they can do what they like and have little or no respect for others needs, and their first port of call is the landowner. They simply fail to see past he end of their very spiteful nose.

 

You're probably right Mike, that is a sensible, measured approach. However, no club structure exists at St. Agnes Head, so it's not quite the same as a normal situation.

 

I was probably wrong suggesting getting in touch with the NT, but then what can you do to solve the problem?  A problem I think that doesn't need to exist in the first place. It's people wanting to fly the fun jets and the like that are the ones rocking the boat by trying to get them allowed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yoyo
I was probably wrong suggesting getting in touch with the NT, but then what can you do to solve the problem?  A problem I think that doesn't need to exist in the first place. It's people wanting to fly the fun jets and the like that are the ones rocking the boat by trying to get them allowed.
I was slightly surprised at the quote from Manny Williamson - he should be very aware of the agreement with the NT as it is, i.e. no power at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DevonFlyer

Quote: FEFO

 

"The only way I can see a powered glider rule working would be through a db limit, which would be near on impossible to determine and enforce. The current rules make policing the sites so much easier, no power full stop, otherwise there's no doubt that someone will turn up with their 2kw Strega which growls loudly as the power is used."

 

 

The other point that is being missed is that allowing 'power' to be used can cause a situation where the power flyers are operating off areas of the slope which are not 'slopeable' due to wind direction. This also can cause confusion with landing areas and pilots not standing together. Total anarchy would rule, with the inherent dangers that would go with it. It's not just a noise issue.

Like many others, I have no issue with power at all. But I don't think it should be used on the slope, particulary when there is a national agreement in place that specifically bans it on NT sites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oipigface

The problem seems to be one of how one polices an existing set of rules. The NT agreed to the current rule some years ago now, having been persuaded after a negotiation in which the BMFA took the lead. I am prepared to bet, though, that in common with most NT sites, there are no signs on which the rule is displayed. It may be worthwhile asking the BMFA to fund some, if the NT agrees to them being put up. Otherwise, the kind of bad-tempered disputes that have been described on this thread will just recur.

There is a precedent for signs of this kind - at Rhossili there are signs reminding paragliders of some of their responsibilities.

P.S. I'm probably going to go flying there at last! Week beginning 15th April!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andy_B

the trouble with signs is you end up with ...no camping signs   no barbie   not motor bikes   no 4x4 no parking  no dumping ...you end up with a nice place spoiled by signs

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shedofdread

Couple of years back, I wandered over to ask a kite flyer to move as he was flying from our landing strip ("why is there a mown area, here, in the middle of nowhere? On private property - can't be anything to do with the model gliders - it MUST be for me to use; with my kite") only to find he'd ripped his kite on our 'no kite flying' sign - oh, the irony! He took it all remarkably well...  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oipigface

the trouble with signs is you end up with ...no camping signs   no barbie   not motor bikes   no 4x4 no parking  no dumping ...you end up with a nice place spoiled by signs

Better than an excellent site that can't be flown.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
isoaritfirst

I used to organize motorcycle trials. The first event I ran, I was over keen and spent the day before the event making notices. Sign in here, don't go there, this way round, no practicing, and loads of others. On one hand the event went off very smoothly, but on the other it lost the fun, the instruction was to much, it was like being at work. I resolved that day to not do the same again. Most people do shut gates etc. And will tell others that don't to do the same. Adding lots of signs can bring other problem from the few that seem to think that if it isn't expressly forbidden then it is OK. The more signs you put up the more you move away from the expected behavior and the closer you get to making loopholes for people to exploit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bear

I spent yesterday looking at alternatives to St Agnes, there are lots along the north coast, easy access with car parks and good landing areas. Only trouble is the edges are not nicely rounded as they are at St Agnes so you will have to launch through rotor. Then I thought if only there was some way to launch the glider way back from the lip and get enough height to be above the rotor..........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oipigface

I spent yesterday looking at alternatives to St Agnes, there are lots along the north coast, easy access with car parks and good landing areas. Only trouble is the edges are not nicely rounded as they are at St Agnes so you will have to launch through rotor. Then I thought if only there was some way to launch the glider way back from the lip and get enough height to be above the rotor..........

Like a little bungee?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jiberjaber

The problem seems to be one of how one polices an existing set of rules. The NT agreed to the current rule some years ago now, having been persuaded after a negotiation in which the BMFA took the lead. I am prepared to bet, though, that in common with most NT sites, there are no signs on which the rule is displayed. It may be worthwhile asking the BMFA to fund some, if the NT agrees to them being put up. Otherwise, the kind of bad-tempered disputes that have been described on this thread will just recur.

There is a precedent for signs of this kind - at Rhossili there are signs reminding paragliders of some of their responsibilities.

P.S. I'm probably going to go flying there at last! Week beginning 15th April!

 

Alternativly, why dont the BMFA print a notice in the mag, easier solution to funding signs perhaps and addressin the target audience at the same time?

Share this post


Link to post
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.   Restore formatting

  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.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.