Here is a list of all the postings Bearair has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.
|Thread: How many rules does this break....discuss?|
Having never landed on a palm tree in a mini skirt I can only imagine!!!.
Got to go now off to Spain with some soothing lotion....................
Agreed opinion's are free to everyone just trying to establish if you had experience of this sort of stunt and possibly a more valued opinion.
I see this as a professional stunt carried out and filmed such that it looks more dangerous and possibly impressive than it is. If it promotes the hobby in a way that might appeal to the younger generation then i think great.
Are you a professionally trained stuntmen then? You seem to think you know better than the ones on this stunt, just wondering why?
At 3.07 it states that it was officially authorized and safety measures were taken even if not apparent.
So NONE is the answer.
No idea, not sure what the regulations are in Spain.
Im guessing none as it explains quite clearly that it was a stunt carried out by professional stuntmen and presumably women. Also it seems to have been supported, by quite a few magazines Im guessing but like RCM&E they would not associate themselves with an illegal act.
|Thread: The FrSky revolution - very worried men?|
I had one wire come of a DHT unit, but that had more to do with the operator (me) than the equipment quality.
I cannot understand what all the fuss is about. The Taranis is a traditional radio, it just has all the ability's of a high end radio at an entry price. The programming would not be any more difficult for a newbie than would a 6ex. The issue is more with people who have got so used to a programming method that they would struggle with a different structure.But that is just as true for someone changing from a Spectrum to a Multiplex for example.
When I was instructing on a regular basis I became familiar with the basics for JR Futaba and Spectrum, it came with the territory. When the first Eurgle turned up I was completely flummoxed by it.But I didn't just walk away complaining the newbie had just bought the wrong TX. I got hold of a manual and learnt. Surely instructors have got enough warning now of the Taranis to be looking into it ready for the day a newbie arrives equipped with one.
For me being an instructor wasn't just about teaching people to fly I had to have enough knowledge to advise on radio installation, programming, becs etc, Obviously there were times when I couldn't but I always knew a man who could. There is always the club guru on engine tuning or Futaba programing that I could refer the newbie to when I got out of my depth. With the amount of sets being sold you will soon have a "tony the taranis techie" in each club. At the slope where I fly we already have two!.
Standard advice I thought to a beginner was buy the best set you can afford I see no reason to change that advice now just because the best set cheap set is as good as if not better than what the experts are flying.
Edited By Bearair on 09/04/2014 12:02:46
|Thread: CAA prosecutes flyer|
This is what the man states,
On that day i had no VTX or any wiring to the camera, my lawyer said i wasnt using it for monitoring or controlling, to ad this is what my lawyer said NOT me, and its them i have to convince first
He could of course be lying, but as the CAA would of inspected the model if the above was not correct why would they have not prosecuted him under the FPV regs, IE flying without an observer, flying beyond LOS. We have no evidence that he was flying FPV whatsoever.
Lining up a model being flown solely by LOS, to overfly the bridge with such a degree of precision, from a point laterally removed from that point, would be a matter of considerable piloting skill, and probably far beyond the capabilities of an unmanned, unpiloted, uncontrolled wing in undirected flight.
Again this has all been covered in the thread, the model was fitted with a ATM which was working and would of been capable of piloting the model as seen in the video. Interestingly he insists this ATM was damaged beyond repair and so could not have the data proving it wasn't being flown by waypoint downloaded. (this is treated with scorn by some very knowledgeable on the FPVhub)I was astounded by this piece of technology!
IMHO it is either through ignorance or bias that people keep insisting this flight was piloted by FPV when as far as I can see and others who have commented with far more experience than me, that this aircraft was probably being flown by waypoint.
Continuing to focus on the FPV aspect is only serving to distract from what I consider is the much more important point for general model flyers. What constitutes a Small unmanned SURVEILLANCE aircraft.
If experienced and dedicated modelers cannot be bothered to ascertain the above fact as has been stated on this forum then it bothers me even more.
Please accept my apologies if I have some of the terminology is wrong. As I keep repeating I am no expert on this equipment.
I've already shown in the thread how we know, please please read the thread. The model was not fitted with a video tx, How many times to how many people do I have to repeat information contained in the thread. But do you not think if the CAA thought that the model was equipped to fly FPV they would of prosecuted him for breaking those regulations aswell?
FPV is a way piloting the model we now the model was not fitted with a video transmitter so it is a fact it was not being piloted by FPV.
He claims he was not flying by waypoint but by normal LOS, but the court must of considered otherwise. Rightly in my opinion.
What I am concerned about is the other technology involved in this that I and plenty of other modelers did not even know existed.
I am even more concerned about the definition of a Small unmanned surveillance aircraft, which as far as I can see is any model equipped with video or picture capture. And therefore includes a flycam equipped model.
I would like to know how we are going to try to stop another incident like this because it damages all model flying IMHO. Or if we are going to distance "ourselves" how are we going to do it. In my mind distancing ourselves is much easier said than done. Especially when there is a massive public and press awareness of "drones" but virtually no knowledge of what a "drone" is.
I think the only one who could say for sure is the miscreant himself and to say he has been evasive in an understatement. The more I read the more I think he might of just been stupid enough to do that!
If we are going to distance this guy, then I would of thought excluding him from the BMFA might be a start.
However does the BMFA has the right within its constitution to expel members?
Who makes that decision?
If the power to refuse membership does not exist does the BMFA need to change its constitution to do so if another person breaks the rules?
What other ways should "ourselves" distance him?
And that's the problem with coming into a thread without having read it! If you go back through the thread you can find the information on why your Flycam equipped model is subject to more stringent regulations if you are recording video data! I would read it if I was you , ignorance is no defence in law as others have pointed out.
Exactly proving that the West Moreland Gazette did not contain all the relevant information to the case. What you are asking me to do is go back over all the info to provide you with the evidence of what else is relevant but not reported. Go back over the info in the thread I'm not repeating myself or others.
And theres two people who have not exactly shone you and me!
You because you have not read all the information before commenting on the thread, and me because I wasn't aware that by fitting a keyfob camera I became the operator of an "surveillance" aircraft and subject to more stringent regulations.
Nothing actually wrong, but neither of us has exactly shone IMHO
Now I am sorry but if you want anymore examples you will just have to read all the information for yourself.
Edited By Bearair on 05/04/2014 23:32:39
Personally I think judging by his attitude and comments made, he posted the video after the CAA had returned them. Somewhere in all the info here and other links I think that his lawyer made a declaration that the aircraft was not fitted with video tramsiting device or something like that. Lawyers do not generally make such declarations without checking it cannot be disproved in my experience.
Thanks for proving my point so quickly, the data being downloaded to his laptop was GPS location NOT video, if you had read the information provided in this thread you would of known that!
I'm sorry I care not one jot about whether you think its a cop out as I'm sure you care not one jot that I think you are using a very poor debating tactic. I've said everyone now which part of everyone do you not understand?
Again if you have not read all the points I think of as relevant to this case or understood them in the thread then I do not feel I need to be repeating or you would understand their relevance a second time around.
If you want an answer be specific and don't ask someone to prove a negative!
I can spot your non sequitur if others cannot.
Edited By Bearair on 05/04/2014 22:25:14
I have lots more information than the Westmorland Gazette on this case, they are not all reports and most deal with facts written about aspects of the case not covered by Westmorland Gazette it is on this thread. Have you read all this thread and info provided by the links?
There are so many parties involved in this who have not shone I wouldnt no where to start, maybe with me. Perhaps you would name some of the parties involved and I tell you why I do Not think they have exactly shone.
No not until some idiot of an journalist thinks he can fly one at Mr Mrs Football Stars wedding!
Now if I was the CAA I would be looking for some poor mug with a bit of an attitude to prosecute so I had set a precedent. Or would I wait to take on the idiot journalist backed by The Sun's legal department.
Dont know how many hundreds of these have been sold?
Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!