Drone & Model Aircraft Code

[satinet]

12 hours ago, Steve J said:

I've done the CAA test and both variants of the BMFA RCC test. I don't recall a lot of difference between them.

 

[BigT]

On 04/12/2019 at 09:21, pete beadle said:

Hi all

I'm hoping that someone who knows his way around the CAA Registration process can help me with what I thought was a simple question but now appears to be quite problematic

I was checking out what I needed to do if I want to register as an operator using the CAA online process, but couldn't find any option to doing the CAA's test anywhere.....the BMFA says you can use your pass certificate for their test, but the CAA doesn't seem to have a provision to do this on their application process......

Anyone know how you avoid the need to do the CAA test by providing details of your/my Pass on the BMFA test? and yes, I know the first obvious option is to do the CAA test as well/instead, but why should I need to? So, anyone know how to use the exemption that the BMFA says you get by doing their test, to obtain CAA registration and obtain the registration numbers I will need to display on my model(s) please?

Any help will be greatly appreciated

Regards

Pete

BARCS1702 

The simplest and most straight forward way of complying with the requirement is to go down  the CAA route. You will get your OP and FL numbers by return email, you will not have to carry on your person when flying any exemptions or proof of membership or proof of competency.  And no, the RCC or any association achievement rating does not give an exemption on the CAA site. The 2 systems are not mutually compatible, why would they be?
For the record and to forestall any trolling. I am not anti BMFA, I have been a member for more years than I care to remember and generally I support all the initiatives they bring. However, in this particular case I cannot understand why they have muddied the waters by trying to compete with the CAA resulting in much confusion.  

[satinet]

7 minutes ago, BigT said:

The simplest and most straight forward way of complying with the requirement is to go down  the CAA route. You will get your OP and FL numbers by return email, you will not have to carry on your person when flying any exemptions or proof of membership or proof of competency.  And no, the RCC or any association achievement rating does not give an exemption on the CAA site. The 2 systems are not mutually compatible, why would they be?
For the record and to forestall any trolling. I am not anti BMFA, I have been a member for more years than I care to remember and generally I support all the initiatives they bring. However, in this particular case I cannot understand why they have muddied the waters by trying to compete with the CAA resulting in much confusion.  

https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ORS4No1331.pdf

 

Has this been revoked since November?

[Gliderchuck]

Those words and that "or" are not my words, but the CAA's. 

As I understand it, one can either register with the CAA directly or via the BMFA on renewal of membership. If one takes the latter route then they won't have the operator # for their models until later. So that creates the potential situation where one may have to explain to any enforcement person who may pop up, the absence of the number. 

I'm a long time member of the BMFA and a full supporter. I'm fully intending to make use of the >400ft exemption when I next fly in thermic conditions! Kudos to the BMFA for getting that. 

Btw, I also have half an eye out on what may come later regarding regulation. While the stupid drone incidents haven't helped us glider pilots, I think the main impetus is the desire to control and commercialise this valuable low level airspace. No country wants to be left out as others introduce similar laws (and make opportunities). It's not our registration fee £££ that they are after!....

[SilentPilot]

I guess it's how you read it...

You can be prosecuted for flying without passing the theory test.

Or

You can be prosecuted for not registering.

I agree that the word and would have been better though! 

[Jerry Lunt]

Well, a lot of the above is so much hot air to me.

I've read the BMFA advice and taken their test which was very easy (10/10).  Proves nothing about my flying ability but as far as I'm concerned gives me permission to fly my models.

If anyone questions it (which I doubt very much is likely to happen - I will take that chance) I will refer them to the BMFA. In order to question me, they should know what has been agreed.   I don't need anything additional until it is issued by the CAA in response to the BMFA submission of data.

End of . . . . .

[BigT]

7 hours ago, satinet said:

https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ORS4No1331.pdf

 

Has this been revoked since November?

Not revoked, this is the updated version which runs until 30th June 2020.  The associations are hoping that when the EASA regulations are ratified that the DfT and CAA will either renew or extend the exemption. If you went down the CAA direct route then your Ops reg will not change until renewal and your pilots for 3 years. 

[BigT]

26 minutes ago, Scram said:

Well, a lot of the above is so much hot air to me.

I've read the BMFA advice and taken their test which was very easy (10/10).  Proves nothing about my flying ability but as far as I'm concerned gives me permission to fly my models.

If anyone questions it (which I doubt very much is likely to happen - I will take that chance) I will refer them to the BMFA. In order to question me, they should know what has been agreed.   I don't need anything additional until it is issued by the CAA in response to the BMFA submission of data.

End of . . . . .

So you have taken the RCC and passed. You’ve downloaded your certificate? You’ve uploaded that to the Portal and opted in to allow the BMFA  to register your details with the CAA and perhaps paid your membership and your £9?  Well done! Now the ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS  you will need to have with you to remain legal if you wish to fly between now and when you get your Operators and Flyers  numbers sometime in February or later 2020  are:

BMFA membership card

A copy of any of the Exemptions that apply to the activity you are engaged in. Either hard copy or digital will do. I would also carry some form of photo ID to prove you are who the documents apply to. Links to the exemptions can be found on the BMFA web site.  Link below. 
https://rcc.bmfa.uk/exemptions

[Gliderchuck]

Scram, agreed, but it looks like you would be wise to carry a copy of the exemption, your membership and your certificate as per paragraph 3: "A copy of this exemption, along with a copy of the relevant documents (membership and award certificate) referred to in paragraph 2 above must be carried by the remote pilot when making use of this exemption."

So that exemption covers the "competency" requirement, but what about the "registration" requirement? Well, that's covered under this exemption: 

https://rcc.bmfa.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/1332-1.pdf

but only until Feb 2020. And again, you should also be wise to carry a copy of it. 

[Gliderchuck]

Exactly. Looks like my post crossed with Big T's. 

 

[BigT]

2 hours ago, SilentPilot said:

I guess it's how you read it...

You can be prosecuted for flying without passing the theory test.

Or

You can be prosecuted for not registering.

I agree that the word and would have been better though! 

The reason for the word OR not and is that Operators don’t need to prove competency although they are legally responsible in law for the SUA. Flyers have to prove competency but are only legally responsible for the flight, IE infractions of the ANO etc. So for example Granny buys a 1 kg multi for 13 year old grandson who cannot legally be an operator so an adult has to be the Operator and it’s the operators number that goes on the model. Grandson had to register as a flyer and pass the competency. 

[SilentPilot]

I thought that too but it starts off by saying flying not operating 

[BigT]

1 minute ago, SilentPilot said:

I thought that too but it starts off by saying flying not operating 

i u detest and the confusion, it was simpler in the original proposal where  both operators and flyers had to do the test 

“If you’ll fly your own drone or model aircraft, you’ll need to register and take the test to get both IDs. Or you can just get the ID you need.“

 

of course this is the important bit that Tesco and the like are failing to pass on

 

[Gliderchuck]

Big T looks to be the man on this. I defer to him on everything.

 

[satinet]

39 minutes ago, BigT said:

The reason for the word OR not and is that Operators don’t need to prove competency although they are legally responsible in law for the SUA. Flyers have to prove competency but are only legally responsible for the flight, IE infractions of the ANO etc. So for example Granny buys a 1 kg multi for 13 year old grandson who cannot legally be an operator so an adult has to be the Operator and it’s the operators number that goes on the model. Grandson had to register as a flyer and pass the competency. 

So who carries the can if little jonny decides to have a flight over a submarine base?

 

[satinet]

39 minutes ago, BigT said:

The reason for the word OR not and is that Operators don’t need to prove competency although they are legally responsible in law for the SUA. Flyers have to prove competency but are only legally responsible for the flight, IE infractions of the ANO etc. So for example Granny buys a 1 kg multi for 13 year old grandson who cannot legally be an operator so an adult has to be the Operator and it’s the operators number that goes on the model. Grandson had to register as a flyer and pass the competency. 

So who carries the can if little jonny decides to have a flight over a submarine base?

 

[Gliderchuck]

Assuming it's restricted airspace, I guess lil Jonny, as the age of criminal responsibility in the UK is 10 and you must be 13 to take the test and get a flyer id. His proceedings would be as a youth offender. (Dunno to what extent there's strict liability for any of the offences) Then there's the separate question of whether the adult responsible for the child should have any liability. Granny may not be that person, even if she has the operator id.... Not sure exactly what responsibility the operator has for drones not flown by them. Granny should have bought one under 250g!!

But then, if it was under 250g, how would lil Jonny know about the Drone and Model Aircraft Code and not to fly in the local park that sits in a FRZ or restricted airspace? 

Which harps back to my OP on this thread. Perhaps retailers have to give purchasers info about the Code?

[SilentPilot]

I thought it said the operator was responsible for ensuring only those with a flyer ID can fly the drone.

If that's the case then granny should be watching every flight, else she wouldn't know if someone without flyer ID had a go, so if it did end up in restricted airspace then granny could be in trouble too. 

[Gliderchuck]

Here's another one. 9 year old Jimmy flys his 200g drone unsafely over people in the park that happens to sit in a FRZ. Who carries the can for that? Jimmy's parents/guardian I suppose.  

But I'm now really puzzled about the retailers and manufacturers.... Don't they need to give information to purchasers? What was the result about them?  If they have no obligations then that seems like a big hole

OR newly retired 60y old Arthur or Agnes, finally gets around to building that 230g balsa RC glider and flys it in their local common, which now sits plumb on the extended runway portion of a FRZ. 

[Andy Symons]

The exemptions are in the BMFA news that is about to drop on your doormat in a handy A5 size booklet that can live in your flight box or glove compartment of your car.