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

Latest CAA Update

All Topics | Latest Posts

Search for:  in Thread Title in  
Brian Stevenson 121/10/2019 08:19:06
45 forum posts
Posted by Martin Harris on 21/10/2019 01:49:55:
Posted by Brian Stevenson 1 on 21/10/2019 00:25:47:

I think comparisons with driving and pilots licences are a little 'over the top' just to fly a toy plane. This is a problem with 'officialdom', not you or me personally.

Exactly. If pre-qualification is not required for them, why [if it was ever the intention] would there be any sense in requiring it for little Johnny who wants to have a go on the buddy box. This is the sort of thing that I confidently expect the BMFA [who contrary to opinion in some quarters, I believe to have already demonstrated their effectiveness] to clarify and resolve with the CAA etc.

The intention is probably to discourage any kind of 'hobby' flying' ('They' have been doing that in the full-size flying world for longer than I can remember.)

There we were, the CAA and ourselves Both perfectly happy and rarely interacting with each other except for the minor nuisance (to the CAA) of some self-styled 'governing body'' of a small proportion of toy plane flyers sometimes asking them questions to which they had to think up polite answers in the hope they would go away, which they mostly did.

Then along came 'drones'. Devices requiring zero or very little skill (thus likely a short-term interest) with which people with what are now called 'learning difficulties', bored with their yo-yo's (to give an historical example) skateboards and rubik cubes, can take blurred and shaky videos of places in which few people, often including the operators themselves, have any interest.

These things are intrusive, make an irritating noise, often in highly populated areas, and are a minor danger to aviation. Hopefully for everyone except their operators, tey will turn out to be a 'fad' and will mostly disappear of their own account. but nevertheless the government 'how can we be seen to be doing something? process comes into action.

And we toy plane flyers are caught up in it.

Edited By Brian Stevenson 1 on 21/10/2019 08:20:19

Edited By Brian Stevenson 1 on 21/10/2019 08:21:27

Steve J21/10/2019 08:26:41
avatar
1568 forum posts
47 photos

Brian,

All the points that you raise have be discussed before. I suggest that you read this topic and the commons committee one.

Steve

Brian Stevenson 121/10/2019 09:30:38
45 forum posts
Posted by Steve J on 21/10/2019 08:26:41:

Brian,

All the points that you raise have be discussed before. I suggest that you read this topic and the commons committee one.

Steve

I know they have. But like any 'controversial' subject with limited options they keep getting 'refreshed' with new people commenting.

Whatever we post won't make any difference. The authorities won't pay any attention to this forum and nor will most model flyers, the vast majority of whom don't subscribe to this forum and have probably never looked at it.

Allan Bennett21/10/2019 11:35:24
1555 forum posts
39 photos

I've been trying hard to follow this (and other) discussions on the proposed regulations. I've read that something was going to be implemented by the beginning of October 2019, then 14th October 2019, and now I think I've read that it is 'unlikely to be before the beginning of November', or words to that effect. The last BMFA updates I saw were dated 30th September, in which they urged members not to rush into registering or taking the tests for the moment, and 11th October in which they updated us about documents published by EASA, and a report by the Science and Technology Parliamentary Select Committee.

Am I missing some important announcement, or is it fair to say that things are still in a state of flux, with scope of the regulations and BMFA exemptions still not finalised, and implementation date still not fixed (apart from the 400ft rule)?

Peter Jenkins21/10/2019 12:27:40
1281 forum posts
132 photos

You are correct with one exception. The CAA gave an exemption to members of 4 model aircraft organisations (BMFA/SAA/LMA/FPV UK) that allows them to operate above 400 ft provided the aircraft AUW does not exceed 7 Kg and they are not multi rotors. Single rotor helis up to 7 Kg can operate above 400 ft. Or, as the BMFA CEO said, with the exceptikn of MRs it is "business as usual".

The DfT/CAA will have to make a final decision shortly if their proposed timetable for registering is to be finalised. I believe the BMFA/SAA/LMA/FPV UK will then put out a note to their members giving guidance on how to proceed. The DfT/CAA were directed to get together with the 4 model organisations to thrash out a way forward that reduced to a minimum the impact of the Drone Legislation. Subscribing to the News Page on the BMFA website will keep you bang up-to-date.

It is worth remembering that the changes to air law are to enable a way in which EU member states can exploit the market for unmanned air vehicles. The current focus on model aircraft size multi rotors is merely the result of some high profile use of such craft. It cannot have escaped your attention the hugely increased use of drone borne high definition camera shots in an increasing number of TV programmes. There are also agricultural uses (inspection of crop health), pipeline inspection, structural surveys, pollution monitoring, to name but a few, where using unmanned airborne sensors becomes economically viable in lieu of using a manned aircraft to carry the sensor. The military are already using unmanned aircraft for both surveillance and strike and would no doubt wish to use the UK for training their personnel in the use of this equipment outside the current limitation of operation only in a military range.

With the greatly increased use of such unmanned vehicles our already relatively crowded airspace becomes even busier and the risk of conflicting flight paths rises sharply. From a public safety stand point it is inevitable for there to be some impact on our activity. I'm encouraged to think that the impact on the vast majority of us who fly from existing club sites will be minimal. I might be wrong but we have demonstrated to the DfT that we have the ability to influence political leaders to make sure we don't get purely arbitrary decisions made by civil servants who have little knowledge of our hobby.

Martin_K21/10/2019 12:38:03
77 forum posts

Allan,

You haven't missed any recent announcement. As it stands registration of operators of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles of 250 grams and above is still mandatory from 30 November, although no registration scheme has yet been launched.

More concerning, we do not know what exemptions, if any, model aircraft operators will get from the rules described in Annex C to CAP1789 - Diagrammatic portrayal of the Open category and subcategories A1, A2 and A3, that are supposed to be applicable in the UK from 1 July 2020.

Allan Bennett21/10/2019 13:23:31
1555 forum posts
39 photos

Thanks Peter and Martin. I've read Annex C and it's quite useful (if it's still current !) and I think what most concerns members of the club I fly with (and probably many others) is the uninvolved people rule which will apply to all self-built and 'legacy' models.

Steve J21/10/2019 15:46:28
avatar
1568 forum posts
47 photos

UK Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Strategy

"The UK's new strategy for harnessing the economic and social benefits of unmanned aircraft, by reducing the risk posed by malicious or illegal use."

GONZO21/10/2019 15:59:46
avatar
1287 forum posts
14 photos

Better hope we don't let those behind this back in the country **LINK**

Jason-I21/10/2019 17:19:22
260 forum posts
37 photos
Posted by Steve J on 21/10/2019 15:46:28:

UK Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Strategy

"The UK's new strategy for harnessing the economic and social benefits of unmanned aircraft, by reducing the risk posed by malicious or illegal use."

Ohh whoopie, we are all soon going to be using drones as personal transport according to the minister. At least the £16.50 registration fee will be cheaper than road tax....

MattyB21/10/2019 17:24:55
avatar
1959 forum posts
30 photos
Posted by Steve J on 21/10/2019 15:46:28:

UK Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Strategy

"The UK's new strategy for harnessing the economic and social benefits of unmanned aircraft, by reducing the risk posed by malicious or illegal use."

Interesting stuff - from pg 23/24:

"Make it easier to identify illegal drone use earlier

Capitalising on safe-use initiatives

...From 30 November 2019, we will place a legal requirement on all drone operators13 to register with the CAA and receive a validated drone operator registration number which they must affix to their drone before it is flown. We will also require all remote pilots of drones to pass an online competency test and receive an acknowledgement of competency from the CAA before flying a drone. As we update the online systems that enable this we will ensure the needs of the police, drone operators and remote pilots are reflected to facilitate effective, real-time enforcement.

The government is developing its concepts for the future implementation of an unmanned traffic management (UTM) system. UTM will provide a means of preventing collisions between unmanned aircraft and other aircraft, manned or unmanned. While UTM will not be delivered in the lifetime of this strategy, we will ensure that security concerns are appropriately incorporated in early planning."

So it looks like we have at least one more month before we will be required to register.

Edited By MattyB on 21/10/2019 17:26:20

MattyB21/10/2019 17:26:40
avatar
1959 forum posts
30 photos

More from page 24...

"The drone industry

...Many commercially-available drones already include geo-fencing capabilities – software that can restrict a drone from flying in certain areas, such as airports. The government is engaging directly with drone manufacturers and industry on how these capabilities can be improved. We are working with airspace managers and regulators to understand how best robust data on permanent and temporary airspace restrictions, such as those around airports and other critical national infrastructure sites, can be made available in a format that manufacturers and technology developers can easily use, in order to improve safety and help drone users fly in accordance with the rules.

The government will consider what further product standards or restrictions within the drone sector could reduce risks associated with the misuse of drones without disproportionately affecting legitimate users, setting new international standards with likeminded partners such as Five-Eyes nations and the European Union Aviation Safety Agency."

A quick search of the document shows they have not used the term "conspicuity" or "electronically conspicuous". Based on the bold statement above it certainly seems to remain firmly on the table, though at least they have softened it with "without disproportionately affecting legitimate users".

Steve J21/10/2019 17:35:46
avatar
1568 forum posts
47 photos
Posted by MattyB on 21/10/2019 17:26:40:

A quick search of the document shows they have not used the term "conspicuity" or "electronically conspicuous".

Funnily enough, I did exactly the same search. Interesting contrast with the US where things seem to be moving on regarding electronic IDs. Last week the FAA Drone Advisory Committee indicated that the ASTM remote ID standard may be published in the middle of next month.

Steve

Dickw21/10/2019 17:48:51
avatar
480 forum posts
76 photos

CAA website now updated.

Makes interesting reading!

Dick

Edited By Dickw on 21/10/2019 17:55:12

Steve J21/10/2019 17:57:29
avatar
1568 forum posts
47 photos

£9 / year.

Register through the associations.

'A' equivalent to online test.

john stones 121/10/2019 18:11:03
avatar
10704 forum posts
1480 photos
Posted by Dickw on 21/10/2019 17:48:51:

CAA website now updated.

Makes interesting reading!

Dick

Edited By Dickw on 21/10/2019 17:55:12

Thanks Dick. yes

GONZO21/10/2019 18:43:25
avatar
1287 forum posts
14 photos

At £9 / year it's still 5X the cost in the states, not forgetting it's free in France

Peter Jenkins21/10/2019 18:46:46
1281 forum posts
132 photos

Excellent outcome, Well done the BMFA and the other model aircraft organisations.

Bit of a blow to the doom mongers though! Perhaps those who think the BMFA is a waste of time might like to remember what has been achieved by the BMFA working in concert with the other UK model organisations and might be less inclined to think that joining the BMFA, or other organisation, is a waste of time.

Having had a go at the on-line test, I doubt it would trouble any one capable of reading a short article and then answering some questions about what you have just read. Each section follows the same process so it is quite a benign test.

Jason-I21/10/2019 18:47:12
260 forum posts
37 photos
Posted by Steve J on 21/10/2019 17:57:29:

£9 / year.

Register through the associations.

'A' equivalent to online test.

So they have ignored the advice of the science and technology committee that registration should only be every three years then I see.

Steve J21/10/2019 18:47:34
avatar
1568 forum posts
47 photos
Posted by GONZO on 21/10/2019 18:43:25:

At £9 / year it's still 5X the cost in the states, not forgetting it's free in France

I agree. £9/year is still excessive and I don't care about not having to do a trivial test or being able to register through the BMFA.

Steve

All Topics | Latest Posts

This thread is closed.

Magazine Locator

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

Find RCM&E! 

Latest Forum Posts
Support Our Partners
Wings & Wheels 2019
electricwingman 2017
Pepe Aircraft
Cambridge Gliding Club
CML
Gliders Distribution
Slec
Sarik
Advertise With Us
Latest "For Sale" Ads
Do you use a throttle kill switch?
Q: This refers to electric-powered models but do you use a throttle kill switch?

 Yes
 No
 Sometimes
 Rarely

Latest Reviews
Digital Back Issues

RCM&E Digital Back Issues

Contact us

Contact us