|Thread: Another thread closed|
Posted by Doc Marten on 22/05/2019 10:15:26
Posted by Andrew Ray on 22/05/2019 09:27:31
But warn folks and delete posts if necessary but don't close down a thread that there are obviously passions about, moderate it.
Exactly right and who suggested an unmoderated forum? For a forum to be successful with contented members there has to be a balance of self and appointed moderation.
A number of replies are saying that the Moderators allow healthy debate, well that's contrary to what's been experienced. The reason for this thread was to ask why the decision on the latest closure was taken before it got anywhere close to 'robust', the reply being that it had the potential to get heated, was likely to repeat itself and had been reported; Is that the applied thread closing criteria? The comments that the moderation is "consistent" when other threads have been allowed to run having clearly breached the CofC and have gone around in circles more times than a control line pulse jet show that there is little consistency, the EV thread being a prime example.
The responses that the the Mods have better things to do with their time is probably the worst statement to make, it's the same as hearing a Police representitive state that they have better things to do than deal with the public. It is after all, their 'Raison D'etre'.
Edited By Doc Marten on 22/05/2019 10:30:10
I detect the forum is being not being moderated with the same degree of frequency as previously. Clearly with the sad departure of BEB who was very active both as a poster and moderator, the workload on the other mods has increased and quite possibly time is relevant.
There doesn't really seem to be much point to this thread especially as the CoC you refer to also prohibits the discussion and criticism of moderators decisions on the forum. If you personally are dissatisfied with the conduct of the forum and want further answers to why any thread was locked, my view is you should PM a moderator and ask them in private.
Posted by Jason Inskip on 21/05/2019 19:46:19
Posted by Percy Verance on 21/05/2019 19:20:00
Not necessarily kc. If you e mail your MP them or write to them, they should, in theory, still read your views.........
I'm disappointed the CAA consultation thread was closed too. I would have liked to know what response people are getting from their letters. So far I've had no response - and in my book, no response = they have not bothered to read it.
I do like this forum though, and believe moderators try to do their best - just difficult to always make the right call I guess.
Edited By Jason Inskip on 21/05/2019 19:48:25
You could always start another thread just for responses. If the spiral of decline was kept out of it and it was based on what the CAA or MPs actually say it would be helpful. It might even go the distance if everyone kept their cool.
Posted by Solly on 21/05/2019 17:03:40
Unfortunately the activity is due to the same old group of Bees. The rest of us have all but buzzed off because we're sick of getting stung.
Not really true is it? Away from the controversial threads there is a huge amount of good stuff going on. People leave this forum because they don't like it and others join because they do.
|Thread: Poll for who intends to register.|
Can't see this thread lasting 41 pages.
Nor do I see a poll of this nature doing anything but damage. The old arguments being dragged out again and again will do nothing to help those agencies and individuals who are trying to get the misguided proposals changed through proper channels.
|Thread: CAA registration consulation|
When the CAA start their awareness campaign it will probably be seen by far more members of the public than just drone operators.
The public's likely perception (rightly or wrongly) is that £16.50 is a small price to pay for having a register to provide some sort of control over drones (misguided or not). Don't expect much sympathy from Jo Public for any posturing.
Those that think refusing to pay will make any difference are deluded. Those that advocate not paying are stirring things up and both are likely to do more harm than good to the modelling fraternity.
In many parts, this thread has acquired a set of responses that bear no resemblance to the consultation document or the video interview with the CAA.
|Thread: CB Mass Build|
You made a nice job of the Ghost Rider too.
Your carpentry looks impressive as well. Its a shame we did not see more of that. Perhaps you have some more photos that you could post showing the work in progress.
|Thread: CAA registration consulation|
So presumably "they" also want to squash recreational GA flying, gliding, hang gliding, paragliding, parachuting, rocketry, base jumping and human cannonballs etc to make way for the Drones. Some of these have a much larger footprint than model flying.
I can't help feeling any damage will be self-inflicted on those who will not, rather than cannot change, and therefore not really victims at all.
There is an argument that registration will ultimately facilitate the regulated sharing of airspace. It's just that they are not going about it very well.
I think I have read through all the thread and kept up to date and it seems that one aspect of the discussion might be missing.
I am not UK resident but I always thought model flying was registered as a sport and therefore would be under the brief of another MP whose name is Mims Davies. Her responsibility must include protection for those who want to enjoy their legal and well established sports and if she was to become involved in this important mission it should at least provide some defense against the alleged desire that governments and organisations want rid of us. Also another point of entry into the legislators that presumably can only help.
I think there are two different scenarios playing out. One is the political response to be seen to be doing something as a result of the airport chaos (conspiracy theories included) and this provides as useful excuse for whatever they want to do. The other is the longer term view that paves the way for extensive commercial drone use whether it actually happens or not. Drones used for commercial delivery will be sophisticated and will be geo fenced from airports and other sensitive sites and there is no reason why registered model flying sites should not be geofenced either. How many drone deliveries are going to be required on flying sites unless of course you forgot to bring your batteries or your fuel!
And what about those competition flyers arriving from other countries for events and championships. Will they have to register or will their native country registration (assuming they have one) be enough. What then would stop me from registering all my models in France and it is a genuine question?
Posted by trebor on 03/05/2019 07:17:58
If Amazon drones want to buy my back garden airspace they can but if one of those drones fly into it, it won't be flying out in one piece.
Public forum Trebor. You don't own the airspace in your garden so you can't sell it. If you interfere with the Amazon drone and damage it, that would likely be a criminal act. I imagine Amazon could wield some considerable legal clout.
You might get some personal satisfaction but in my view it is not a mature statement and certainly not helpful to improving the outcome which is all we can do.
Posted by Philip Lewis 3 on 02/05/2019 23:10:02
it would cost me about £50.00 to set up a new Ltd company, being a Ltd company that never traded it would have no assets and no income so the only assets would be the planes it owns for which of course there is no market anymore, there would also be no liability on me personally.
The company would have to have at least one director and that would be you. Setting up a Ltd company used to provide a high degree of protection but not any more. If you act illegally, negligently or even immorally you are out there on the parapet and you could be hung out to dry just the same as anyone else.
Seems to me there are quite a few people who are advocating this kind of behavior. As had been said before, rogue elements in the modelling community will cause just as many problems as the rogue elements are alleged to have caused this situation.
Posted by Martin Harris on 02/05/2019 10:01:56
Perhaps the CAA might see the benefit of devolving the registration of the majority of active and committed model flyers to the BMFA differently if this was (or had have been) the case?
It's a good idea Martin as the duplication of systems already in place seems silly and a waste of time / resources. At the moment I suppose we are stuck because the government has tasked the CAA to deal with it . Honestly I doubt the powers to be at the CAA are running around with glee about this new milk cow. Maybe the CAA might yet have the ability to and be persuaded to partly devolve as you say so that anyone registered with one of the recognized associations is already covered. The choice could be that you either join one of the recognized associations or you have to go use the CAA process. If that option was part of the awareness campaign they will be embarking on, it could be a brilliant recruiting drive for the BMFA and all the others.
I also like the idea of putting the levy on air fares despite being a frequent flyer for business reasons. I expect however that it would raise a political stink of equal proportion to some other debates going on at the moment.
The silver lining - I have already taken a fresh look at the classifieds and look to snap up some bargains. Who knows, when the dust has settled some people may even want to buy them back, at a suitable price of course
Posted by Steve J on 02/05/2019 08:36:07
Posted by Kevin 216 on 02/05/2019 08:19:30:
Many of the 'old & bold' club flyers are unlikely to register and will walk away, I estimate that in my club we will lose 40%.of our members.
I'm surprised that so many people are prepared to give up their hobby over £16.50 / year and and a multiple choice test. I costs me the best part of £16.50 in fuel every time that I go sloping.
Me too. As often the case with this type of subject there seems to be thread drift. Lots of reactions to earlier posts and not so much debate on the actual content of the CAA discussion document.
Firstly there is no "if" about the registration scheme. It is already the law and includes drones and model aircraft. If this is unacceptable to any individual on principle then of course that is their right. But getting bogged down on principles can lead to cutting the nose to spite the face. Other countries that pay less or nothing due to subsidies are lucky. We are £16.50 a year unlucky and I wouldn't let that kill any hobby I was passionate about.
Secondly, in their document the CAA make it quite clear that they are not intending to gain from this government obligation so if they have a surplus they say they might extend the period to three years and if they undershoot, they do not say they will attempt to recover the shortfall by raising the fee. The actually say they will defer improvements and features that are already factored in until the books balance again and additionally they go on to say that changes to the fee structure would be subject o further consultation. These are words from a respected regulatory body not politicians but it seems that plenty want to turn it into a political argument which does nothing to help.
Personally I agree with many other that the legislation is deeply flawed but as modellers we are not unique in being adversely affected by bad laws.
As far as funding is concerned my preference would be a small levy on all drone sales regardless of size. In that way I could see that they would hit the numbers. Here I do make the distinction between drones and model aircraft as in terms of what is attempting to be achieved as it better suits the principle of "user pays"
|Thread: Aircraft grade Plywood?|
Like Dennis says.
My local model shop only stocks birch ply up to 3mm so if I want something thicker I laminate 2 or more pieces together.
Post some photos of your build. It will be interesting.
Welcome to the forum. What is your latest build?
There are lots of different types of ply and what you are searching for as "aircraft grade" may well be over the top.
|Thread: C No Ohmen|
Where are you now based?
I shall be looking out for my next Peter Miller build but have to finish Oodalally and Grumpy Tigercub first.
the Ohmen has great reviews.
|Thread: Electric power options. Sonata E kit.|
Yes Gordon it is a pretty aircraft.
This was a photo I picked up from the internet. My colours are different but I am keeping the transparent sections. This one also has the spoilers in the top of the wing.
I will take some more photos over the next few days and post them for you with a few explanations.
Good luck with yours and post some progress photos if you feel inclined.
I have nearly finished build a standard Sonata that I have converted to electric.
The nose block has been substituted for a 38mm diameter spinner which suits the fuselage profile very well. I must have got the 3 degrees downthrust from somewhere. It is a Clatk type wing section and I probably got the advice from this forum.
I made a motor mounting plate put of some birch ply and the slot is to allow the wire to go back to the ESC.
Here the mounting plate is set back to accommodate the motor (bolted directly to the ply as there is no room for an adaptor.
The motor is 28mm diameter E-Flite Park at 890 kv. It is unlikely that a 35mm would fit and have enough clearance to get it through the nose.
I have a 20amp ESC and a Graupner 10 x 5 folding propeller in the alloy spinner. I can't remember if it is going to be 2s or 3s.
I am far from being an electric flight expert so take my set-up with some caution and maybe someone could check my out on this. It would be easy to change the ESC and Prop if necessary but is shows that the basic installation is quite easy.
Mine has spoilers on the wing and I have made the rear end as light as possible, including keeping the single elevator because the new gear up front is lighter than the original E design.
|Thread: Engine choice for a Veron Super Robot|
Lovely model PatMC
Interesting how going electric tidies up the nose.
Here is mine
Following the Box Art which I don't normally do. I didn't have any white solatex so went for the linen.
The OS 26 nestles in very well.
I did thin down the nose cheeks and tapered them inwards in a curve to just leave a small radius outside the spinner. A cover over the fuel tank was about the only other mod.
|Thread: Loss of trim due to moisture and temperature.|
Slightly off topic (except that I shall heed all the warnings)
I have one of those engines destined for a Multiplex Aeronca C3.
Must admit I have been lazy and been using snakes but have also made lots with pushrods. Yet to try closed loop.
|Thread: Engine choice for a Veron Super Robot|
Thank you everyone.
Going on the consensus I will stay with the Irvine. I would rather not be overpowered and the 52 can wait for something more suitable.
I did manage to shave off some weight on the Robot and their is more scope to do that on the Super. All I have to do now is find the safe place where I put the drawing and the instructions.
Great advice as always.