By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more

Member postings for Bob Burton

Here is a list of all the postings Bob Burton has made in our forums. Click on a thread name to jump to the thread.

Thread: Land Line Charges
23/03/2016 08:37:48

In practice I I can't see things changing much. After all, the line still has to be there for Broadband access whether or not you use the line for a 'phone. Now, if there were decent countrywide 4G coverage the situation might be different.

Thread: SatNav apps using Android 'phone
22/03/2016 14:22:29

Thanks for the feedback and information.

I value it more than reviews on the Web because on the whole the members of this forum will have no axe to grind regarding what is good/bad/best whereas I suspect that members of Android related forums will generally not have good things to say about Apple and Windows 'phones and vice versa.

21/03/2016 17:14:23

Does anyone have any experience of using SatNav apps on an Android 'phone ? Google Maps, maybe ?

I have an ancient dedicated SatNav that I cannot update the maps on (and a battery that won't hold its charge) and a non smart PAYG 'phone.

My plan is to buy an Android 'phone, transfer the PAYG SIM to it and use it as a SatNav amongst other things, although there are other apps that I am interested in.

I seem to remember that Google Maps downloaded a lot of data thus costing rather a lot of money when used out and about. Is that still the case or can map data be downloaded using WiFi for planned trips before leaving home ?

I would be interested in hearing about any experiences that you have.

Thread: Multi Rotor A and B Test Launched
17/03/2016 22:18:19

If memory serves me well there are, or soon will be, separate tests for assisted and non assisted conventional aircraft. Why should it be different for multi-rotors ?

Thread: Dash cams
26/02/2016 22:11:34

Have a browse around the Techmoan channel on YouTube for plenty of dash cam reviews

Thread: If I strapped a duvet to myself and jumped off of the cliffs at folkstone.......
26/02/2016 16:35:14
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76PJRhGr2_c
Thread: Series v Parallel
12/02/2016 11:06:56

Depending on what fails and how, a parallel configuration can provide some redundancy by continuing to provide the required voltage, whereas a failure in a series configuration is more likely to result in no power being available.

12/02/2016 08:29:47

Series or parallel should make no difference as long as the voltage and capacity of the cells are correct. After all a 4S pack is actually made up of 4 1S cells internally anyway,

Thread: Do you think some sort of registration system would protect the hobby from rogue flyers?
11/02/2016 09:00:27

No benefit whatsoever in registration because the "bad boys" will not register anyway and I emailed my MP to tell her so.

Six weeks later I got a badly laid out letter thanking me for my letter (sic), from the tone and contents of which I gather that she has totally missed the point that I was making and saying that she has written to Lord Ahmad, Parliamentary Under secretary of State at the Department of Transport asking him to look into the matter.

I am not hopeful of a satisfactory outcome.

Thread: circlips on servo linkages
05/02/2016 09:01:12
Posted by Bob Cotsford on 04/02/2016 16:58:21:

If you really must use linkage stoppers or whatever they're called then I'd recommend the ones that are held on by a 2mm nut. I do use them, but only on throttle connections in ARTFs where the throttle linkage is just a piece of piano wire.

I have never used linkage stoppers, but I presume that after you have tightened the 2mm nut the stopper can still rotate to allow the linkage to work.

Thread: BMFA News - Achievement Scheme Mandatory Questions
04/02/2016 14:51:34
Posted by Bill Michie on 04/02/2016 14:36:45:

Maybe the best solution is to REQUIRE that ALL R/C fliers are BMFA Members before flying any R/C model. And that they are automatically sent the latest BMFA handbook with a covering letter stating the basic Legal responsibilities.

Oink, Oink, Flap, Flap (as long as the pig holds the relevant certificate, of course)

03/02/2016 11:36:04
Posted by Erfolg on 03/02/2016 11:27:24:

It does seem that one area every single one of us is in agreement that we modellers should be aware of the requirements of the ANO. The difference appears to be how this knowledge is tested in the "A" test. A question of approach and presentation.

That hits the spot for me. For me it is not a matter of if we should be tested but how we should be tested.

02/02/2016 22:12:33
Posted by Dave Hopkin on 02/02/2016 18:05:23:
Posted by Ben H on 02/02/2016 17:55:29:
Posted by Erfolg on 02/02/2016 17:44:59:

The question that needs to be answered why is knowing with any precision an exact act, more important than an understanding of your responsibilities with respect to what are considered the important aspects, and the responsibilities that flow from that understanding.

Because EASA are considering European legislation that will potentially be far more onerous that what we have now, by presenting the case that there are very few accidents and that the model flying population understands the legal requirements associated with flying then the CAA supported by the BMFA and other bodies can press the case that no additional controls are required - adding these legal questions to the A and B (plus bringing in a sub test for stabilised models ie park flyers) the BMFA can demonstrate to anyone that they are ensuring we all know and understand the regulations so they have a stronger case to fight additional regulation

"adding these legal questions to the A and B (plus bringing in a sub test for stabilised models ie park flyers) the BMFA can demonstrate to anyone that they are ensuring we all know and understand the regulations"

The new questions will do no such thing. There is no requirement for existing certificate holders to take the test nor a requirement for regular testing. The only people affected are those who will take the tests from now on and even then they only have to know the regulations in force at that time.

02/02/2016 14:46:51
Posted by Andy Meade on 02/02/2016 14:07:39:

Quite right Bob, I would have. Now remedied.

It may be a bit hard to structure a question without leading to the answer, as they are so simple. How could you word that question, in fact? Multiple choice? Fill in the blanks?

Not easy, I agree, but the "What does Article 137 of the ANO state ?" is very stark. Questions 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 are examples of how it might be done differently. Perhaps "What does Article 137 of the ANO state in relation to endangering an aircraft or person in an aircraft ?"

02/02/2016 13:45:22
Posted by Andy Meade on 02/02/2016 13:26:02:

I wasn't sure of the numbers, but I knew the content.

Then you would, of course, have failed if you were taking the test. Does it actually matter where exactly the law is laid out as long as you know the law ?

Surely we would all agree that "A person must not recklessly or negligently act in a manner likely to endanger an aircraft, or any person in an aircraft." and "A person must not recklessly or negligently cause or permit an aircraft to endanger any person or property." but does it matter that we know the ANO article numbers where this is laid out ?

02/02/2016 12:28:40
Posted by Martin Harris on 02/02/2016 12:10:07:

Bob,

I suspect that the vast majority of candidates fly at clubs which require an A to fly at their sites so numbers shouldn't reduce dramatically. As to retesting, I think this is a subject that has been discussed previously and found to be unreasonably demanding on clubs, members and the scheme - after all, it's entirely voluntary and clubs that adopt it as a "licence" should be perfectly capable of monitoring their pilots' performance - there is a mechanism within the scheme to withdraw the rating if absolutely necessary.

Edited By Martin Harris on 02/02/2016 12:12:10

It's not the number of current flying members that I am predicting will fall but the number candidates putting themselves forward for the test which will reduce the number of people flying over a period of time.

Just noticed that the results of the recent "Which certificate do you intend to try and obtain in the next 12 months ?" poll are in the sidebar. I would be interested in a re-run of the poll under the new conditions, particularly for the FW - A cert or a poll of how many people have changed their mind with the introduction of the new regulations.

The numbers in the poll are, of course, made up of fairly committed fliers because they are members here. The reaction from a member of the public enquiring about flying at a club and finding out about the requirements would, I think, be worse.

02/02/2016 11:59:56

I wonder if there are any figures available for the number of people taking the A, B, C tests for a period, say a recent year. I am willing to bet that the numbers will reduce when these new questions are introduced, not necessarily because they are difficult to answer, but because they appear much more daunting than the current requirements.

It would be interesting if the certification slate were wiped clean and everybody had to take the tests again to the current standards, or how about a yearly test to current standards ? I suspect that if either of these were introduced then attitudes would be different amongst established flyers.

02/02/2016 07:36:23
Posted by John Privett on 02/02/2016 00:12:10:

BEB, yes it is common sense essential that we should all know that;

‘A person must not recklessly or negligently cause or permit an aircraft to endanger any person or property’

and that;

'A person must not recklessly or negligently act in a manner likely to endanger an aircraft, or any person in an aircraft’

(plus of course the other 2 relevant ANO's)

But is there any value at all in knowing that one of those (which one?) is ANO 137 and the other is ANO 138?

No value whatsoever.

01/02/2016 22:55:03
Posted by Mr.B. on 01/02/2016 22:35:17:

most of the people taking the test drove themselves to the field so they must have been able to learn the highway code.

To me the Highway Code is equivalent to the BMFA handbook. Common sense rules written down, whereas the new questions are the equivalent of a test on the Road Traffic Act.

01/02/2016 14:05:48

Having looked at the questions I suspect that many people will be put off taking the test which is surely not what we want. The questions are framed such that they seem to need precise answers and I am wiling to bet that many competent, safe existing pilots could not answer them to the required standard.

The existing questions taken from the information in the BMFA handbook are more amenable to being answered in a more informal but no less testing manner and most/many are common sense applied to local site conditions and practices.

Latest Forum Posts
Support Our Partners
CML
electricwingman 2017
Subscribe now
Sussex Model Centre
Slec
Advertise With Us
Sarik
Latest "For Sale" Ads
NEW POLL - has the pandemic altered your event safety perceptions?
Q: Has the covid pandemic deterred you from attending shows and events in 2021?

 No, I'll be attending just as many as I usually do
 No, but I'll choose my event with greater care
 Yes, I'll attend fewer events going forward
 Yes, I wont attend any where previously I have

Latest Reviews
Digital Back Issues

RCM&E Digital Back Issues

Contact us

Contact us

Magazine Locator

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

Find RCM&E!