By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more
Forum sponsored by:
Forum sponsored by CML

Proposed new drone legislation/registration

All Topics | Latest Posts

Search for:  in Thread Title in  
john stones 124/07/2017 19:06:59
avatar
9236 forum posts
1412 photos
Posted by John Bisset on 24/07/2017 16:41:33:

Posted by Steve J on 24/07/2017 11:50:41:

Posted by john stones 1 on 24/07/2017 11:39:35:

Put the case for fair treatment based on our long and good record, anything else is pointless.

Correct. We need to make sure that the government give the BMFA, LMA & SAA a decent operational authorisation under article 14 of the draft regulation.

Steve

I agree. Snag is. like many, I recall what happened when CB usage arrived in UK, illegally on 27 MHz. Did we, who had paid for our radio licences, get any consideration? Nope - the authorities changed the rules, we had to move our frequencies. Cost & inconvenience ? Nobody cared.

What makes you think the current crew of incompetents, aka government, will care. Given their behaviours so far, why would they care about a few modellers?

Who said i had faith in politicians ? tell me a way out of all this and i'm happy to back you/anbody, unless it's turning on other modellers, we don't have a lot of clout and grumbling will change nowt. We've gone over this in umpteen threads, what's it changed ?

Rogue flyers/bad guys, and you can buy em anywhere, Is that all this is about ? Answers No isn't it ?

You lot want to march on Downing street n chuck our Sabots at em, name the day i'll make one....Tories Out. .

Martin Whybrow24/07/2017 19:21:34
avatar
884 forum posts
33 photos

Regardless of what you think defines a UAV, drone etc, you need to remember that the first prosecution of an idiot flying FPV recklessly was a fixed wing flyer who decided to fly over the BAe nuclear sub facility at Barrow!

Link with video

ChrisB24/07/2017 19:23:54
1179 forum posts
34 photos
Posted by Andy Symons - BMFA on 24/07/2017 18:20:09:

**LINK**

Thanks Andy, its good that Dave and the BMFA have made a statement on this issue.

Clearly there is work to be done and clearly we won't have two sets of regs (UK & European), so it makes sense that the UK and European regs align in due course.

From my point of view I'm not fussed about registration of each model, if that happens. My concern is the 400ft limit, as myself and many thousands of others like gliding, amongst other things, and 400ft would scupper it! The BMFA Club map may come in handy for any exemptions to the limit!

Cheers

CB

Essjay24/07/2017 19:38:35
avatar
578 forum posts
1 photos
Posted by Andy Symons - BMFA on 24/07/2017 19:02:19:
Posted by Essjay on 24/07/2017 18:48:18:

Quote from the BMFA document linked above by Andy basically says, if you're a Country Member of the BMFA then you're going to be lumped with the rest of the country's uneducated. Thanks BMFA!

The Government will work with model aircraft flying clubs to examine ways in which it may be possible to exempt members of model aircraft flying clubs with adequate safety cultures and practices from certain elements of registration and other educational requirements, or where their club will be permitted to undertake regulatory requirements on their behalf. Flyers of model aircraft who are not members of a club, or are members of a club not deemed to have adequate standards will, however, not be excluded from registration or other requirements.”

You missed this bit

"The DfT proposals generally align with those developed by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). The general principle is that (for those operating outside the framework of an established model flying association) the regulations for unmanned aircraft will be more restrictive than those currently in place with additional requirements for training, registration and a 400ft/120m height limit. This is comparable with the ‘Open Category’ requirements proposed by EASA."

and this bit

"Negotiations are continuing with the DfT/CAA on a positive basis, to try and ensure that we are allowed to operate largely as we do today and keep the impact of regulations written principally to deal with the ‘drone issue’ to a minimum for UK model flyers. "

Operate largely as we do today, includes country (non-club) members and not having to operate from designated club sites.

Edited By Andy Symons - BMFA on 24/07/2017 19:02:38

Thanks Andy for pointing out what I'd obviously failed to see. I guess it's a case now to put our trust in all concerned that the right decisions are made that we will all be happy with.

Steve

john stones 124/07/2017 19:50:34
avatar
9236 forum posts
1412 photos

Cheers Andy

Put your trust in our associations to get best deal they can works for me. wink

Daithi O Buitigh24/07/2017 19:53:50
avatar
1284 forum posts
43 photos

As I see it there are two problems that could possibly arise:

1: With the rush to Brexit and the repealing of almost every EU legislation, the chances are that the EASA regulations will be swept aside and we will have a 'domestic' version in its place.

2: Registration, if it's implemented, will, almost certainly, become a money tree for the government with an annual fee.

One problem with registration though would be the ability to read a 'registration number' on a model in flight (whether it be a 'traditional' one or a multi-copter). I honestly can't see P.C. Plod chasing across several fields looking for the guy flying that noisy thing over his patch, which would be the only way to check on any registration.

Erfolg24/07/2017 19:55:29
avatar
10786 forum posts
1010 photos

I am increasingly disillusioned, with respect to many aspects of this general topic.

I personally see the issues being discussed as potentially marking the end of model aircraft, as presently being built and operated. It has been suggested that the Lidl glider exceeds the maximum weight limit. Even flying toys are under threat.

Yet at this time, the BMFA would seem to be more interested in its NFC, by general coverage provided, and the detailed, current reports.I know the BMFA see it s a good news story.

We have been been provided with some general info, on a grouping, the internal structures and various relationships, with respect to the team engaged with the EASA. When pestering I receive generally positive feed back, that all is going well. Although there is no detail, even high level, broad brush information. Just the general. all looks like it will be OK.

In my opinion, it is the BMFA that should have made the membership aware of opportunity to make representations both to UK Government Consultation, and provided some guidance of an appropriate framework for the response.

If the lack of quality information is a consequence of not wanting to be seen as rocking the boat, and or not wishing to make public how far our representative bodies are prepared to accept restrictions, is conjecture, Or maybe they see discussions as best kept out of public forums. It is all conjecture as our body does not communicate with us, with the same passion or even frequency as shown for the NFC. These rules and regulations offer far more opportunity to engage significantly more frequently, in some depth, than it appears there is a desire.

There are approx. 30, 000 of us to be mobilised. The re are +30,000 of us to be kept informed and made aware of the issues.

Whilst on holiday in Austria I could not but observe that flying from a typical slope, that almost immediately after launch, that models would exceed a 200 ft limit, within a second. Flying away from the slope a 1,000m height above ground if measured vertically from the model, would occur for much of the flight.

ChrisB24/07/2017 19:59:05
1179 forum posts
34 photos

Just had a thought....hide quick!

According to DfT they had 213 responses from model flyers.

How many people responded on behalf of their club?

In my case I responded as an individual and on behalf of the club of 90 members. Therefore the number of responses from model flyers could be quite higher.

Martin McIntosh24/07/2017 20:02:21
avatar
2390 forum posts
930 photos

Martin W.,

I strongly disagree that the guy was a reckless idiot, he was merely flying down the channel. OK, he should not have been so close to the bridge but I doubt if any nuclear secrets could have been revealed by his action. The docks are way to the side. You can see much more of them by just standing opposite or on the other side of the channel. I was brought up near the area and know it very well. It was a case of using a sledgehammer to make a point. I very much doubt if he even realised at the time that you should not fly so close to (bridge) structures and should be pardoned.

Mark a24/07/2017 20:30:24
315 forum posts
3 photos

I'm happy to wait until things become a bit clearer until then happy flying everyone.

john stones 124/07/2017 20:37:38
avatar
9236 forum posts
1412 photos

BMFA have provided updates on this on a regular basis, i've had emails from them everytime to keep members informed, posted them on here, as has Andy n others, things have been ongoing and the deadline got extended for more consultation, i'm not interested in where we are now, only the deal we end up with.

Colin Leighfield24/07/2017 20:37:49
avatar
5380 forum posts
2199 photos

I'm not getting depressed about this. There is a stated wish to enable existing model flying clubs to continue as before, within the 400ft. altitude rule . I expect that we will be ok and I continue to trust BMFA, although there is clearly a potential issue for non club independent flyers. If they are flying in some private secluded space, they will probably get away with it anyway if they are not close to something sensitive.

While I can certainly understand the interest in FPV, I don't see how we can avoid concerns about others having the ability to overfly your private space and view it or record on camera. Whether rotary or fixed wing, that is going to be regulated and it probably should be. If anyone starts hovering over my house I will be very cheesed off and don't blame anyone else who is either.

Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator24/07/2017 20:55:15
avatar
Moderator
15136 forum posts
1407 photos
Posted by Daithi O Buitigh on 24/07/2017 19:53:50:

As I see it there are two problems that could possibly arise:

1: With the rush to Brexit and the repealing of almost every EU legislation, the chances are that the EASA regulations will be swept aside and we will have a 'domestic' version in its place.

There is no chance of BREXIT leading to a move away from EASA's proposed legislation by the UK. We are a major aviation nation with the busiest airport in Europe. We can't be outside EASA - aviation by its nature is inetrnational. No we will remain as a non-voting member - implementing all the legislation but without and say or a vote. Great eh? We will not be able to cherry pick from a EASA menu!

As I say above the original story is really a non-story in my opinion because all its doing is giving notice of the Government's intention to impliment EASA's UAS proposals in the NPA in due course - we already knew that!

BEB

ChrisB24/07/2017 21:14:48
1179 forum posts
34 photos
Posted by Daithi O Buitigh on 24/07/2017 19:53:50:

As I see it there are two problems that could possibly arise:

1: With the rush to Brexit and the repealing of almost every EU legislation, the chances are that the EASA regulations will be swept aside and we will have a 'domestic' version in its place.

2: Registration, if it's implemented, will, almost certainly, become a money tree for the government with an annual fee.

One problem with registration though would be the ability to read a 'registration number' on a model in flight (whether it be a 'traditional' one or a multi-copter). I honestly can't see P.C. Plod chasing across several fields looking for the guy flying that noisy thing over his patch, which would be the only way to check on any registration.

EASA is not a matter for the EU and brexit will not result in us leaving the EASA partnership

ChrisB24/07/2017 21:53:03
1179 forum posts
34 photos
Posted by Erfolg on 24/07/2017 19:55:29:

I am increasingly disillusioned, with respect to many aspects of this general topic.

I personally see the issues being discussed as potentially marking the end of model aircraft, as presently being built and operated. It has been suggested that the Lidl glider exceeds the maximum weight limit. Even flying toys are under threat.

Yet at this time, the BMFA would seem to be more interested in its NFC, by general coverage provided, and the detailed, current reports.I know the BMFA see it s a good news story.

We have been been provided with some general info, on a grouping, the internal structures and various relationships, with respect to the team engaged with the EASA. When pestering I receive generally positive feed back, that all is going well. Although there is no detail, even high level, broad brush information. Just the general. all looks like it will be OK.

In my opinion, it is the BMFA that should have made the membership aware of opportunity to make representations both to UK Government Consultation, and provided some guidance of an appropriate framework for the response.

If the lack of quality information is a consequence of not wanting to be seen as rocking the boat, and or not wishing to make public how far our representative bodies are prepared to accept restrictions, is conjecture, Or maybe they see discussions as best kept out of public forums. It is all conjecture as our body does not communicate with us, with the same passion or even frequency as shown for the NFC. These rules and regulations offer far more opportunity to engage significantly more frequently, in some depth, than it appears there is a desire.

There are approx. 30, 000 of us to be mobilised. The re are +30,000 of us to be kept informed and made aware of the issues.

Whilst on holiday in Austria I could not but observe that flying from a typical slope, that almost immediately after launch, that models would exceed a 200 ft limit, within a second. Flying away from the slope a 1,000m height above ground if measured vertically from the model, would occur for much of the flight.

I know your not a fan of the BMFA Erfolg, but they don't sit around in their ivory tower dreaming up the next scam to con the membership. A lot goes on behind the scene that you aren't aware of and to be honest you and I don't need to be aware of. Dave Phipps sits on the Europe Airsports panel which represents aviation sports. Rob Buckley, the secretary of the LMA regularly goes to various meetings across Europe, probably with Dave and others to represent modelling interests. Furthermore there is the domestic CAA liaison that is also on-going. Similarly, if you're in a club, I'd hope the club made representations or suggested individuals make representations on the clubs behalf.

If you've missed the consultation then that's unfortunate. There is the EASA consultation which closes on 15th September, so you have time to comment on that if you wish.

I agree that perhaps, at times, communication could be more frequent, but certainly with the DfT and EASA regs, nothing moves quickly, as with all regulations its a matter of years not even months and certainly not weeks.

I may have missed it but is there an email update service provided by the BMFA and has the BMFA thought of doing a weekly/monthly blog type thing that people can subscribe to? However, is enough going on to warrant the time and effort to do it and would it detract from the magazine?

Colin Leighfield24/07/2017 22:15:02
avatar
5380 forum posts
2199 photos

I receive news emails from BMFA with the appropriate attachments, the latest being the update on the drone regulatory situation. I feel well-informed enough and so far haven't seen anything that worries me particularly.

Steve J24/07/2017 22:15:44
avatar
558 forum posts
27 photos
Posted by ChrisB on 24/07/2017 21:14:48:

EASA is not a matter for the EU and brexit will not result in us leaving the EASA partnership

EASA is an EU agency. Its membership comprises 28 EU and 4 EFTA member states.

Steve

Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator24/07/2017 22:18:52
avatar
Moderator
15136 forum posts
1407 photos

True - but he's still right that Brexit won't result in EASA going away for us!

BEB

Steve J24/07/2017 22:34:53
avatar
558 forum posts
27 photos

From annex C of the DfT response -

"The Government is considering carefully all the potential implications arising for our aviation industry from the UK’s exit from the EU, including the implications for the continued participation in the EASA system."

I will be surprised if we don't end up with some sort of EASA membership, but at the moment, I wouldn't rule anything out.

Steve

Martin Whybrow24/07/2017 22:52:42
avatar
884 forum posts
33 photos
Posted by Martin McIntosh on 24/07/2017 20:02:21:

I strongly disagree that the guy was a reckless idiot, he was merely flying down the channel. OK, he should not have been so close to the bridge but I doubt if any nuclear secrets could have been revealed by his action.

Fair enough, but that wasn't the point I was trying to make!

All Topics | Latest Posts

Please login to post a reply.

Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!

Find RCM&E! 

Email News - Join our newsletter

Love Model Aircraft? Sign up to our emails for the latest news and special offers!

Latest Forum Posts
Support Our Partners
electricwingman 2017
Airtek Hobbies
Overlander
Expo Tools 14 July
CML
Slec
Wings & Wheels 2018
Gliders Distribution
Advertise With Us
Sarik
Latest "For Sale" Ads
What is the main brand of transmitter you use? (2018)
Q: What is the main brand of transmitter you use?

 FrSky
 Futaba
 Graupner
 HiTec
 Jeti
 JR
 Multiplex
 Spektrum
 Other

Latest Reviews
Digital Back Issues

RCM&E Digital Back Issues

Contact us

Contact us