Jump to content

This Looks very Worrying


EssexBOF

Recommended Posts

Paragraph 3.6.3 on page 25 states that it intends to  grandfather national and local arrangements with regard to model flying, This could be interpreted as we will carry on as before with a proven track record. However, I am not absolutely sure that is what it means unfortunately.

All EU countries (probably) have a national aviation authority of some sort that has their own set of regulations. I believe that in Europe EASA? harmonise flight safety regulations across Europe.

The CAA delegate authority for model flying to  a number of specialist bodies – like the BMFA > BARCS and the LMA that take responsibility for aspects of  the hobby.

CAP658 is not legislative – it is a guideline document although chapter 2 defines what a Model Aircraft is and cross references the various articles on Safety. However, there is no legislation surrounding WHAT these aircraft can do,

The EASA document (at first glance) proposes quite sweeping definitions and while grandfather legislation for aeromodelling may apply, this legislation is virtually non-existent in the UK.

For example – currently, there is no legislation on height for models under 7kg mass. There may well be. A new class on model is proposed for under 500g mass. We have nothing in the UK that is representative.

There is legislation (Article 166 and Article 167 and overarching Article 138) on where a model can be flown, which I would have hoped could have been used as a proven model and I think that is what we should be proposing as a workable solution.

I really hope I have got this wrong, but I would rather ask the stupid questions and be told to stop heckling rather than say nothing.

Happy New Year 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Robin Sleight said:

...the CAA were very much of the view that the Amazon vision of drone deliveries was pie in the sky... 

Robin

That will be the drone that 'Ginsters' are developing :)

But seriously, the CAA have been very cautious about the flight of larger drones within this country in mixed airspace, whereas a number of European countries have been less so.  I don't think Amazon would be paying big bucks to some highly sought after and very knowledgable engineers if it didn't believe it had a reasonable chance of succeeding in it's vision.  The only reason we are allowed to use lower airspace is because other than near airports it's not been of commercial value.  The same used to be true of the upper areas of the radio spectrum.  But as technology allowed its exploitation look at the huge (many billions of pounds) licence fees that the government got from the telecoms companies when it sold off the previously unused radio spectrum.

Simon

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, simon_t said:

 I don't think Amazon would be paying big bucks to some highly sought after and very knowledgable engineers if it didn't believe it had a reasonable chance of succeeding in it's vision. 

Amazon's vision doesn't make commercial or technological sense to me, but perhaps they just want to position themselves in case things change or perhaps the existence of the program gets them a few percent more discount when they are negotiating rates with couriers.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are those regulations on the NATS blog actually correct and if so when were they introduced. The reference to a general 400' maximum to all RPAS altitude seems rather dubious to say the least.

The fact that mixed units are being quoted (meters and feet) seems rather odd too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr Nats rpas expert isn't such an expert that he has read the caa rules on model aircraft and fpv flying which clearly state 400ft height as a typical height you can safely fly a drone at not a height limit.  You fly as high as you want as long as you can see the model/drone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of people are going to be agitating to get themselves made in to the corgi/gas safe/niceic/elecsa of drone flying because they see big money in it. 

What you will see is the spreading of a lot of FUD, aka fear uncertainty doubt, by those with a vested interest. 

 

The problem is the daily mail reader will fall for it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As there was little interest in this debate on the E Soaring site, I started a thread on it. Paul Newall has come back with a reply which highlights a lot of issues, notably the European perspective which seems to having even less responce, even though they would appear to be even more draconian than in the UK

We have the summary of the meeting of BMFA and UK CAA above and on the BMFA website. This explains the current position in the UK and what might happen in the near future. (An update to CAA Document CAP658 can be expected around March 2016). If what we are being told remains valid, then in the short term model aircraft operations in the UK will not be greatly affected.

Of very great concern is the intentions of EASA, the European Aviation Safety Agency who are discussing European wide regulation of 'drones'. Whatever they dictate, when accepted by the European Parliament, has to be embodied into the aviation law of each EU member state.

The discussion document from EASA can be downloaded by using the button shown on the web page with the following link.

https://easa.europa.eu/document-library ... pa-2015-10

The salient points are as follows.

Conventional model aircraft and what we understand as multirotor drones are lumped together as UAVs (Unamanned Aerial Vehicles).

The proposals suggest the establishment of three categories of UAV. For non commercial operations, most model aircraft would be classified as 'Open Category UAVs'.

The proposals include a weight limit that might affect heavier models.

The proposals apply restrictions on where UAVs can be flown.

The proposals restrict the height to which UAVs can be flown to a max of 150 metres.


This last item is the most obvious issue potentially affecting all forms of thermal soaring, including Open Glider, eSoaring, F3B, F3J, F5B/D, F5J, the various slope soaring classes and GPS Triangle Racing.

In the UK for models weighing less than 7kG we currently do not have any height restriction other than to remain in visual contact. Reading the EASA document, it seems that only the UK CAA has indicated that our sort of flying can take place at significant heights. The equivalent organisations of some other EU countries appear to have suggested that they already have much lower height restrictions in place, some even lower than 150 metres. This may be the result of a lack of clarity in differentiating between current model aircraft regulations and those applicable to 'drones'.


BMFA can work closely with the CAA and the CAA can put the model flying point of view to EASA, but if the equivalent organisations to CAA in other countries do not do the same, the UK voice will carry little weight.

Other forums show issues that are already arising world wide both within and outside of the EU, particularly in Republic of Ireland and the USA..

THIS WHOLE SITUATION REQUIRES A CONCERTED RESPONSE FROM ALL NATIONAL MODEL FLYING ORGANISATIONS VIA THEIR RESPECTIVE NATIONAL AVIATION AGENCIES.

If you are a non UK based reader of this forum, ACT NOW to make sure your own national organisation is working on your behalf.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/30/2015 at 15:54, Steve J said:

Nice ad hominen on the Irish Minister for Transport, but it doesn't really address his point. The Irish government want to encourage commercial unmanned aircraft operations in Ireland and see their registration scheme as part of doing this. How much does recreational unmanned flying in Ireland contribute to the Irish economy in terms of GDP and jobs and how much will commercial unmanned aircraft operations contribute?

Steve

Very little.  What the Govt. wants and what they get are two very different things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/30/2015 at 14:11, Fletch said:

I see that MACI have removed the news flash entry, dated the 19/12/15, on their home page stating that they were seeking clarification from IAA on the new regs. Its not even in the archive. Whats to hide?

A.........

It has now been replaced with a slightly more accurate statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read the MACI statement (  http://www.maci.ie/news-archive/?news-year=2015#277 ) and noted that they had won a few minor concessions, for now. But, the statement on the registration requirements for every RPAS(Remotely Piloted Aerial System) causes concern, quote: "However, the registration process announced on the 21st Dec 2015 will not be changed. This is expected to become a global requirement during 2016."

In all the forums and the posts that I have read on this issue both here and elsewhere along with a protracted conversation with Manny on the 21/12/15 I have found nothing to give me hope for the future, in fact quite the opposite. I believe that the writing is on the wall for many aspects of this hobby. I don't believe that it will disappear totally but in the near future will have lost many activities that due to the regulations will no longer be possible. Those that remain will be more tightly controlled by the regulations and financially by the impossition of non transferrable/non refundable(crash/loose a plane shortly after registration and you pay again to register the replacement) annual/biannual registration fees. The CAA will have no choice but to impliment the EASA rules if we are still in the EU and fees serve the dual purpose of providing a revenue stream along with control. Up the fees over time to a realatively high figure and you will induce people to give up the hobby until the small number remaining can be disregarded and the activity banned.

IMO This is all about comerciallisation and not about safety. Safety is just a convenient and emotive bedfellow used to get the real objective. All us aeromodellers and the comercial interests that serve us are no more than a childs sandcastle on the beach trying to stand against the incoming tide

I've been an aeromodeller for the past 61yrs and I most sincerely hope that my forboding is unjustified.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/31/2015 at 13:19, Jef said:


Can I still legally fly any of my thermal soarers at 200m?

Yes, as long as it weighs less than 7Kg, or at a site which has an appropriate CAA exemption up to to typically 500m.  These dispensations are for a particular site, and typically for a specific date/dates.  There are one or two examples where a CAA exemption has been granted for a site for up to a year, but these are rare.  Scale aerotow events inevitably have a CAA agreed exemption to cover their activities (and NOTAMs are promulgated covering these sites, although they are advisory and don't stop full size aircraft overflying the site).

Unfortunately the NATS advice seems to state the 400' as mandatory for all weights of aircraft, which is incorrect (but is probably what they want).  It may be that in the future we will need to register our flying sites, and obtain CAA exemptions.  There will no doubt be some sites that will not be approved by CAA for flight above 400'.  It may not be the death of our flying, but it will get a great deal more complex, and may put further unreasonable responsibilities on club committee officers.

Simon

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I am still awaiting contact from my MP, I think it is a good idea to have at hand (on this thread, as) a point of reference and build up a wealth of information pertaining to the historic importance of aeromodelling.

Just read this about the Wright brothers...

"In 1878 their father, who traveled often as a bishop in the Church of the United Brethren in Christ, brought home a toy "helicopter" for his two younger sons. The device was based on an invention of French aeronautical pioneer Alphonse Pénaud. Made of paper, bamboo and cork with a rubber band to twirl its rotor, it was about a foot long. Wilbur and Orville played with it until it broke, and then built their own.[20] In later years, they pointed to their experience with the toy as the initial spark of their interest in flying.[21] "

In the film "The Flight of the Phoenix", it is quoted that a rubber powered model flew 600metres in 1861. Have not been able to find other references to that. Does anyone here know about it? My Dad seemed to think it would have been an "A frame" twin pusher model.  

Can anyone tell me, was there ever anyone known as an aviator, that NEVER played with models? Might well be easier to remember a list of aviation pioneers that didn't play with flying models at some stage.

Thanks in advance.

Jef

PS Just found the quote in the original film The Flight of the Phoenix (1965) and apparently I had remembered it wrong. It was 1851 that Henson and Stringfellow designed the 600m record breaking rubber powered model. Back to researching that now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, pete beadle said:

Hi Jef

"Buffalo Bill" Cody? who flew at the Hendon Air Displays with his Wild West Shows - I understand from an old mate of mine who comes from the home of the free, land of the brave that the only "killer" tool Buffalo Bill picked up in his formative years was a Springfield (rifle)

A famous RC model flyer? How about Emerson Fittipaldi - Formula One  champion

Then there's always the fictional ones - Horst Bucholz in the film "The Flight of the Phoenix" - Q "What's the biggest plane you've ever designed? A Three metres.......

Have you Googled - Model Flyers who went on in later life to do something that WASN'T laughed at.......

Hey Ho

Pete

BARCS1702

Roy Orbison!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, pete beadle said:

"Buffalo Bill" Cody? who flew at the Hendon Air Displays with his Wild West Shows - I understand from an old mate of mine who comes from the home of the free, land of the brave that the only "killer" tool Buffalo Bill picked up in his formative years was a Springfield (rifle)

Pete,
I think you should read this when you get a minute...

http://wuff.me.uk/cody/P2.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • 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.