Jump to content
pete beadle

Meeting with Baroness Vere of Norbiton on 4th June 2019

Recommended Posts

pete beadle

Hi all,

The BMFA Chief Exec. has published a report of the meeting with the Minister for Transport on Tues 4th June.

https://bmfa.org/News/News-Page/ArticleID/2588/Meeting-with-the-Aviation-Minister-–-Baroness-Vere

Well, that's it guys, and if you can find ANY good news in there, you're a better man than I am!

Read it and weep:(

Regards

Pete

BARCS1702

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Redbird

I have yet to add my comments as a response to the CAA charging proposal but I hope that there could be established a distinction to help us.

The distinction would be between powered and unpowered model aircraft. If the main fear is that of  hard lumps entering jet engines and it could be recognised that while a powered craft,  (multirotor or plane) could  continue to climb or hover at height if control is lost, but a glider is most likely to  descend, then perhaps pure gliders could be exempted. Am I being too fanciful here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Marc Sinclair

Best news I found in that article:

"The Minister strongly believed that an ‘insignificant’ fee and mandatory test would not be barriers to participation."

14 minutes ago, Redbird said:

The distinction would be between powered and unpowered model aircraft. If the main fear is that of  hard lumps entering jet engines and it could be recognised that while a powered craft,  (multirotor or plane) could  continue to climb or hover at height if control is lost, but a glider is most likely to  descend, then perhaps pure gliders could be exempted. Am I being too fanciful here? 

Unless of course the glider gets caught in a massive thermal and then further up  into a good stretch of wave lift with the likelihood of it taking out an engine of a large fully loaded passenger jet? 

 

:)

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pete beadle

Hi Redbird

Firstly, don't bother to waste your time sending your response to the CAA proposals, Baroness Vere was effectively our last hope as she seemed to be tending towards favouring our side of the argument, and seemed to want to be helpful

When push came to shove it appears she isn't:no:.....so, back to square one!....... All that wasted effort! RATS!......Can't wait to see what SteveJ makes of it!

Regards

Pete

BARCS1702

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Redbird
23 minutes ago, Marc Sinclair said:

Unless of course the glider gets caught in a massive thermal and then further up  into a good stretch of wave lift with the likelihood of it taking out an engine of a large fully loaded passenger jet?  

Ho ho. Whose side are you on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sloper

Well the truth is they want to tie us all with the same brush as its easier(cheaper) for them to manage as their intentions are not to help us but to focus on paving the way for commercial drone flights/activities. The economic opportunities are too big for them to even care how it affects the rest of us, its as simple as that! We never had a chance

Heres whats coming:

 https://techcrunch.com/2019/06/05/a-first-look-at-amazons-new-delivery-drone/?fbclid=IwAR0zJj-adCGpjcBVrWvt56ISt_O02jVEiNeFFUlhjVYFukpCKz__C3Wx_ME&guccounter=1&guce_referrer_us=aHR0cHM6Ly9sLmZhY2Vib29rLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_cs=mao8RCNSzmrzgeb3oR0dgg

Amazon-Prime-Air_reMARS_June-2019.jpg?w=

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
douglas851

Just looking for some clarification...

After reading the CAA Drone Code website

Is there an exemption for slope soarers to the 400 ft rule? Obviously after I have launched my glider off a 600 ft hill it quite quickly is more than 400 ft from the surface.

And, its not clear if the 150ft from the public applies to all drones/models or just those equipped with cameras.

I have flown slope soarers since the mid-seventies, started with a Veron Impala, and I am concerned that it will soon become illegal

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Marc Sinclair
42 minutes ago, Redbird said:

Ho ho. Whose side are you on.



On that poor little innocent child's final thoughts/views as the plane plummets in a vertical dive over London  Redbird... ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wookman
5 minutes ago, Sloper said:

Well the truth is they want to tie us all with the same brush as its easier(cheaper) for them to manage as their intentions are not to help us but to focus on paving the way for commercial drone flights/activities. The economic opportunities are to big for them to even care how it affects the rest of us, its as simple as that! We never had a chance

 

 

It's a shame but I have a feeling you are right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phil.Taylor

Bmfa membership fee £38 - bmfa thinks thats ok - and wants all model flyers to be members 

Drone registration £16.50 - Bmfa thinks thats too much

Drone delivered pizza - £15 ?

Phil.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Graham Woods
1 hour ago, wookman said:

Well the truth is they want to tie us all with the same brush as its easier(cheaper) for them to manage as their intentions are not to help us but to focus on paving the way for commercial drone flights/activities. The economic opportunities are to big for them to even care how it affects the rest of us, its as simple as that!

I can't really see it, commercial drones delivering pizza. What if you live in a block of flats?  A Deliveroo burger on the 15th floor balcony in Hackney, London? How are these drones going to navigate telephone wires, aerial electricity cables and street furniture in towns and cities where the income is likely to be. Seeing that cars, mopeds, bikes etc are often stolen why would one suppose drones landing carrying any Amazon 'valuable cargo' would be any safer. It might be even a 'fun' thing to do for 'bad actors' to bring them down.

No, there's a more sinister security or surveillance reason they want to control airspace up to 500ft. only we don't know what it is yet. Why is it worldwide? I can see why with EASA encompassing the 27/28 EU federal states +4 Non EU but Canada, NZ, USA and Oz as well, at the the same time, why would that be? And large parts of those latter countries are uninhabited deserts, outback, mountains, wilderness etc.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sloper
37 minutes ago, Graham Woods said:

I can't really see it, commercial drones delivering pizza. What if you live in a block of flats?  A Deliveroo burger on the 15th floor balcony in Hackney, London? How are these drones going to navigate telephone wires, aerial electricity cables and street furniture in towns and cities where the income is likely to be. Seeing that cars, mopeds, bikes etc are often stolen why would one suppose drones landing carrying any Amazon 'valuable cargo' would be any safer. It might be even a 'fun' thing to do for 'bad actors' to bring them down.

No, there's a more sinister security or surveillance reason they want to control airspace up to 500ft. only we don't know what it is yet. Why is it worldwide? I can see why with EASA encompassing the 27/28 EU federal states +4 Non EU but Canada, NZ, USA and Oz as well, at the the same time, why would that be? And large parts of those latter countries are uninhabited deserts, outback, mountains, wilderness etc.

Simply its about money, didnt you see the statement from the Gov in the consultation last year on the 400ft ruling?:

''Since the end of the Department for Transport's drone consultation last year, there has been considerable activity which has further highlighted the potential benefits that drones can bring to the UK. In November, the industrial strategy set out how we are building a Britain fit for the future, with significant opportunities for new modes of transport to revolutionise how we transport people and goods around the country. In February, Nesta announced the 5 cities selected as part of the Flying High Challenge, working together to develop aspirations for drone use based on local community needs and ambitions. In May, PwC announced that the social and economic benefits of drones in the UK by 2030 could be as much as £16bn in net cost savings, adding £42bn to GDP, with over 600,000 drone sector jobs. ''

So if you think about that carrot dangling infront of the Gov. just think of the pressure off them to improve infastructure, carbon immissions etc..

here is the report from Nesta: https://media.nesta.org.uk/documents/Flying-High-full-report-and-appendices.pdf

About how this will all work?  just do a google search on UTMs (unmanned traffic systems) theyve got all this in hand and is fast developing, it has become a race to see which country gets this implimented first, the US obviously running fast on it

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pete beadle

Sloper is right

We're looking down the wrong end of the telescope, drones are not a hobby, drones are the next BIG  income stream, it's how the'll get hold of the money they're thinking about NOT  the technology OR the safety OR the planet.....come on chaps move on, find something else to do in your spare time....I hear pond yachts are fun.....cheating the wind! now that's JUST like flying, isn't it grandad! so they say!........go on, get out of the way and move on!:cry:

Mind you, they WILL foul it up, governments always do........

Regards

Pete

BARCS1702

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Graham Woods
2 hours ago, Sloper said:

> here is the report from Nesta: https://media.nesta.org.uk/documents/Flying-High-full-report-and-appendices.pdf

254 pages... A lot of it already exists: mapping,  farming, forestry, police, surveillance, fire brigade, monitoring, pipelines, electric pylons and so on so nothing new here.

Heavy lift delivery drones and aerial taxis are another thing. 

By 2030 I'll likely be a handful of ashes in any case, possibly even scattered by drone; now that's a business opportunity I should tell Nesta about. :)

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dave Elam

I've got thousands of quid invested in my hobby. Am I really going to give that up just because of an extra £16.50 a year?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pete beadle

Hi Dave

The way things are going, you'll be able to own them, but not fly them, under pain of possible arrest and/or a fine!:(

I hope that you, like me, intend to continue flying your/my models, safely, outside restricted areas, and wait and see if anyone arrests me for breaking a rule intended to be directed at drones - which, as you will know, I will not be flying:yes:

Finally, if I have to, I will happily put my trust in a jury of my peers to allow me to leave the court without a stain on my character....or a fine......or any other restriction to continuing to do it again.....and again.....and again:) Isn't it lovely to live in a country  which tries every one of its cases on their merits and more importantly with the presumption of innocence we are entitled to expect.......

Regards

Pete

BARCS1702

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
isoaritfirst
35 minutes ago, Dave Elam said:

I've got thousands of quid invested in my hobby. Am I really going to give that up just because of an extra £16.50 a year?

Probably not, but being charged to add your name to a "most wanted" list is more than a little annoying.

Especially when we all know, that its not me they want, or even the irresponsible drone flier, its just our money.

The Gatwick incident just lost us any sympathy, and gave a perfect time to make their move.

CAA and the gov. seem to me to be the modern equivalent of a Highwayman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cirrusRC

Our niche hobby has happily existed, having comparetive free rein of the skies.

With the advent of autonomous multi rotors, the hobby was thrust into the mainstream.  As with anything gaining popularity comes tighter regulation.

This coupled with the commercial aspects of selling off the airspace, leaves us sidelined.

Unless you can uniquely identify each model back to its owner I can't see the point of this registration scheme.  Or perhaps this is just a stepping stone to compulsory use of transponders for all models.

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.