Jump to content
Jef Ott

This still looks worrying

Recommended Posts

PeteMitchell

I  answered the questions in the online consultation  reply document, following BMFA plea for our help, and their guidance on how to do it.

It's not that difficult to do, I just copied and pasted as required, and it took me 3  seperate 20 minute evening sessions.

And I had my own say at the end of the questions.

Some may believe  it  will be a waste of time, I don't think it is .

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve J

While I large response from the modelling community will probably strengthen the associations hand in discussions with the DfT and CAA, I do think that some of the BMFA's answers (which I am sure that a lot of people are blindly copying) are naive and will be spun by the government to support their policy objectives.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
satinet
On 21/08/2018 at 13:58, Steve J said:

No they don't. The new regulations make a distinction between the operator and the remote pilot. The age restriction is for the operator.

Steve

 

Seeing as the operator is the one who decides where and when the flight takes place I don't see much distinction.  Like everything in this process, it's based on a supposition that's isn't questioned.  Where's the evidence that under 18s cause more crashes or break more rules than over 18s?  There isn't any of course. The only reason for it is that under 18s aren't very easy to fine or prosecute compared to over 18s.  The whole basis for the rules is to have the threat of prosecution  (£$£$) hanging over the head of people who don't obey the rules. Of course, that's the people who already obey the rules (home owners that can be fined), not those who don't obey the current rules and won't obey the new rules either.

The idea that a kid can't take their park flier out for a buzz because they are not a qualified operator in some way is absolutely ridiculous.  And everyone wants to bemoan the youth of today for sitting in their bedrooms with their play-boxes.  The few under 18 glider pilots I've seen down the years were all far better pilots than their octogenarian club mates. 

To be fair to the bmfa their response does point out the fact that you can actually fly full sized aircraft at 14 and drive a car at 17, which shows up how ridiculous the proposal is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve J

My response to "Minimum age for an operator: reasons against":

Quote

There is no age limit at the moment. If you want an age limit, produce peer reviewed statistics that prove that operators under 18 are a problem.

Steve

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tonym

I've just started to complete the online form. I'll make my comments as I go through it.

4. I've ticked 'a model aircraft flyer?' and 'other?' and put 'National and International competitor'. Model flying is a recognised sport, that should be considered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tonym

What a load of bollaux FINS is!

I'll continue the form when I've chilled out a bit!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EssexBOF

Finished my form last night, did not want o waste yards of paper in printing it off, so just saved it if needed. Cant help but feel it was dreamed up by a civil servant to be as long as possible to make the average model flyer give up.

Be interesting to know, just how many responces are sent in

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jef Ott
11 hours ago, EssexBOF said:

Finished my form last night, did not want o waste yards of paper in printing it off, so just saved it if needed. Cant help but feel it was dreamed up by a civil servant to be as long as possible to make the average model flyer give up.

Be interesting to know, just how many responces are sent in

 

On 21/08/2018 at 21:02, Jef Ott said:

Is this whole process being used to prevent us from answering the form for the consultation?

We are in agreement there Brian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EssexBOF

I cannot see s to why a model aircraft that is flown using RC under line of sight, without a camera on board, are being classed as  drone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ikura
1 hour ago, EssexBOF said:

I cannot see s to why a model aircraft that is flown using RC under line of sight, without a camera on board, are not classed as  drone.

I don't fly FPV.

I fly gliders.  They are not drones.

I do not see how they can be classed as drones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steve J

facepalm.thumb.jpg.d1819fb0b3ae4e0260ba9f44c9bcfb7e.jpg

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EssexBOF
8 hours ago, Ikura said:

I don't fly FPV.

I fly gliders.  They are not drones.

I do not see how they can be classed as drones.

My apologies, have now corrected my post to mean what I intended, which is the same as you have stated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mikef

Done.  Bit of a slog but I got there in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
swarrans

Me too.  Painful but better than not doing it I think.  I've sent an email to all our club members asking them to consider doing it (I suspect abuse will follow!)

 

Simon

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simon_t

As there has been quite a lot of discussion from slope soarers regarding the 400’  “above ground” rather than “above launch point”, as the published CAA guidance shows that if you fly out from a slope you might have to descend to maintain less than 400’.  Looks like David Phipps at BMFA has got an improvement/clarification from the CAA - this is a thread on the Scalesoaring forum:

https://scalesoaring.co.uk/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=7&p=19656&sid=b6bb3deaca6a8c3cae3d8c21666438eb#p19655

Simon

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jef Ott

Completed mine with a couple of days to spare

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
satinet
On 09/09/2018 at 20:36, simon_t said:

As there has been quite a lot of discussion from slope soarers regarding the 400’  “above ground” rather than “above launch point”, as the published CAA guidance shows that if you fly out from a slope you might have to descend to maintain less than 400’.  Looks like David Phipps at BMFA has got an improvement/clarification from the CAA - this is a thread on the Scalesoaring forum:

https://scalesoaring.co.uk/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=7&p=19656&sid=b6bb3deaca6a8c3cae3d8c21666438eb#p19655

Simon

What about the exemption?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Buster46

All done, twice as I didn't save and refreshed my screen at 80%.  Arghhhhhhhhhhhh.

Eamon

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jef Ott
5 hours ago, satinet said:

What about the exemption?

Pretty sure the exemption allows us to fly anything as we have always done, up to 7kg AUW.
The slope soaring 400ft waiver is for models between 7kg and 14kg.

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.


  • 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.