Logo
Builders' Plan Gallery  |  Hip Pocket Web Site  |  Contact Forum Admin  |  Contact Global Moderator
June 25, 2019, 02:21:17 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with email, password and session length
 
Home Help Search Login Register
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: BMFA to see Aviation Minister concerning proposed CAA regulations  (Read 1043 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
kiwibrit
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 0
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 73

Topic starter


Ignore
« on: May 04, 2019, 04:07:53 PM »

There has been considerable concern in the UK concerning the CAA's proposed regulations on drones engulfing model aircraft.  Response has had some effect; the BMFA's CEO has been invited to meet the Aviation Minister. But British modellers need to ensure that each has made a response.

Quote
** IMPORTANT UPDATE ** CAA PROPOSALS PLEASE READ & SHARE **

We would like to thank all members who have responded to the CAA consultation at https://consultations.caa.co.uk/finance/drone-registration/ and who have written to the Aviation Minister, CAA CEO and your local MPs’

Yesterday (3/5/2019), the BMFA's CEO has been contacted and asked to attend a meeting with the Aviation Minister, Baroness Vere of Norbiton.

This has come about directly because of YOUR reaction to the CAA's proposal, completing the consultation and emailing the CAA, Aviation Minister and your MP.

YOU HAVE MADE THIS HAPPEN!

Whilst this is a positive step, we cannot stop the pressure that is being applied, the fight must and will continue.

If you have yet to complete the CAA consultation, email the CAA, DfT or your local MP, please take a few minutes this weekend and give them your views of the proposal. See UK Model Flyers - Call to Action for contact details and relevant information.

Every response to the consultation and every letter helps in this battle against pointless and unnecessary regulation. We must keep the pressure on.

 

Many thanks for your support.
Logged
Buster11
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 2
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 108



Ignore
« Reply #1 on: May 04, 2019, 07:08:30 PM »

Good news, but it is still vital that we ALL write or e-mail  the Aviation Minister, Baroness Vere, the CAA CEO and our local MPs NOW. The consultation response only deals with the means of managing the registration fee collection. What is needed is to point out to those three that Britain is proposing by far the highest fee for this of any country (some are free) and that no other air sport mandates an annual re-test.
Logged
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 51
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,488



Ignore
« Reply #2 on: May 07, 2019, 08:05:09 AM »

I just ploughed through the CAA consultation prior to responding. As a FF modeller I am a bit wary. It is quite clear that these people will have no concept of FF and I look forward to seeing the drop-down boxes and tick lists for my category of the online safety test (!). What will they make of FF when they realise what it is?
Will I be fined for not painting a number on my scale models?
We also seem to be trying to distance ourselves from drone people when we have already embraced drones in BMFA News. I had a bad feeling about that at the time, but I can't rationalise it.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2019, 08:19:42 AM by billdennis747 » Logged
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 51
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,488



Ignore
« Reply #3 on: June 12, 2019, 10:09:47 AM »

There is a good piece in the Times today, outlining the BMFA response to the proposed CAA regulations. It all goes well until the last para where the government apparatchik parrots a reply by some civil servant, lumping us all together with drones.
But what had completely passed me by was that the £16.50 fee is for EACH MODEL. So in my case, about £500 a year.
Logged
SP250
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 7
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 408



Ignore
« Reply #4 on: June 12, 2019, 10:44:28 AM »

Think you are wrong there Bill - or the journalist got it wrong.

The "operator" has to register at £16.50 and the pilot (yes they mainly will be one and the same person but not always) has to take the online test.  The restration is in UK law so we can't get around that - it is the price which will skyrocket when they don't get 170,000 registrations.

There is discussion about the Operator being a club (one £16.50 fee) and then all club members doing the test, but not having to pay - can't see it working though as someone on the club committee would be liable for the actions of the members.  And we all know that not everyone is law abiding / diligent/ capable professional and competent etc etc.

I am not too worried though as there are not enough police to do their proper job catching criminals, never mind trekking up the the slope, or to club flyinhg fields or to Barkston Heath to round up everyone and check their registration certificates.

John M
Logged
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 51
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,488



Ignore
« Reply #5 on: June 12, 2019, 10:50:30 AM »

I'm sure you're right John but it says £16.50 a year for each one and with the 'average hobbyist having 15 models, that's a yearly bill of about £250.
Logged
Pinto
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 2
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 22



Ignore
« Reply #6 on: June 12, 2019, 11:35:00 AM »

I think the registration fee is the least of our problems as the next stage will be all drones & models
will have to be fitted with transponders so that they can be identified and tracked the same as full sized
aviation.There even talking of drones & models below 250grms having to carry them as well.
I think where all stuffed!


Chris
Logged
fred
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 6
Offline Offline

Canada Canada

Posts: 476



Ignore
« Reply #7 on: June 12, 2019, 12:11:16 PM »

Increasingly Interesting country indeed.
 Emigrate?
Logged
FreeFlightModeller
Russ Lister
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 64
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,566


Russ Lister



Ignore
« Reply #8 on: June 12, 2019, 12:59:56 PM »

I hope that some kind of sense is applied to this in the end .... little hope in the current political climate, I fear.
Logged
vintagemike
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 7
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 126



Ignore
« Reply #9 on: June 12, 2019, 01:37:36 PM »

Are you sure it will be ok in the end, I mean look at the cock up polititians have made of brexit
Logged
SP250
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 7
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 408



Ignore
« Reply #10 on: June 12, 2019, 03:32:00 PM »

VM

Don't get us started on that one.
I specifically don't discuss it with my friends because it is so divisive and the friendship is more important to me than politics or Brexit views which may be different to mine.

John M
Logged
Squirrelnet
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 26
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 434




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: June 12, 2019, 04:47:19 PM »

I wrote to my MP who passed my letter on to Chris Grayling the Transport minister.

In his reply forwarded to me by my MP he writes

 " I would like to reassure [your constituent] that I do support his and other BMFA members' hobby and recognise the strong safety culture by the majority of model aircraft flyers and clubs" ... so that's alright then

However he goes onto say

"Any alternative approach for model flyers must be achieved without imposing undue burden on the state and the taxpayer, whilst also being efficient and enforceable, without compromising the integrity of the policy. A blanket exemption from registration and competency tests or having the associations register their members into the registration system, as suggested in many of the consultation responses submitted by model fliers, will not meet these criteria"

Maybe he could get Seaborne Freight to run it  Huh
Logged
Pinto
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 2
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 22



Ignore
« Reply #12 on: June 12, 2019, 04:54:41 PM »

Have you all seen the drone debate in parliament,its on the bbc player.
Also there is a interview with the CAA which gives you more idea about what is going on.
Fred in Canada do you know that your goverment has just introduced some of the most demanding drone regulations
of all.

  Chris
Logged
Pinto
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 2
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 22



Ignore
« Reply #13 on: June 12, 2019, 04:58:31 PM »

Forgot to say the interview with the CAA is on U tube,

  Chris
Logged
cvasecuk
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 211



Ignore
« Reply #14 on: June 12, 2019, 05:31:53 PM »

I posed this question to CAA but have not yet had a reply!!!!!
Ron
Can you please explain what will be achieved by a CAA administered registration system?
Anyone flying their SUA legally will almost certainly be a member of their appropriate national body and these organisations have offered to share their data bases with the CAA. This would satisfy the EASA requirements.
Anybody intending to fly their drone or other SUA illegally, such as near an airport or to smuggle contraband into a prison will not of course register with any organisation!!
Logged
Pinto
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 2
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 22



Ignore
« Reply #15 on: June 12, 2019, 06:00:10 PM »

If you watch the interview with the CAA on U tube your question will be answered.
It seems the goverment decided not to use the BMFA membership list along time ago

 Chris.
 
Logged
JohnOSullivan
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

Canada Canada

Posts: 200


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #16 on: June 12, 2019, 06:04:58 PM »

Have you all seen the drone debate in parliament,its on the bbc player.
Also there is a interview with the CAA which gives you more idea about what is going on.
Fred in Canada do you know that your goverment has just introduced some of the most demanding drone regulations
of all.

  Chris


Yes indeed Canada has imposed some very onerous and ridiculous requirements on model fliers, including registration of each model, height restrictions, mandatory recording of each flight and incident and a whole bunch of unnecessary red tape.  
However, the good news is that members of the Model Aeronautics Association of Canada (MAAC) flying within MAAC regulations are EXEMPT from these onerous regulations. On Or MAAC registered fields we have no height restrictions and outside our MAAC fields we only need owners permission and if within controlled airspace, obey height limits and notify the controller.      MAAC has done a marvelous job of coming to a workable situation with Transport Canada.
Logged

John O'Sullivan
MAAC 5401
MACI 26
Jez Wilkins
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 1
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 63



Ignore
« Reply #17 on: June 13, 2019, 08:14:14 AM »

Chris/Pinto

You are well ’clued up’. Smiley

I, too, have been keeping abreast of developments.  Following the BMFA’s ‘call to action’, I emailed Baroness Vere of Norbiton [who is, I think, maybe two (or one?) below, the Rt Hon Chris Grayling, the Secretary of State for Transport] Richard Moriarty (Chief Executive of the Civil Aviation Authority) and (an) MP (not my constituency one, for reasons which are too involved to go into here).  I received the ‘standard’/’generic’ replies from the Department for Transport and CAA which a lot of other people have, apparently, also received and have emailed Baroness Vere and Mr Moriarty again on 30 May, without further response, so far.  Had to use a different email address for the second email to Baroness Vere, as the one supplied by the BMFA did not ‘send’ (got ‘stuck’ in my ‘Outbox’) although it had worked the first time.  The Department for Transport/CAA, have, apparently, received 6,000 responses, between them, on ‘drone registration’.

To anybody who didn’t see/hasn’t yet seen the first oral evidence session of the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee, I would strongly recommend that you do so.  Chris/Pinto has already alluded to the fact, but it is clear from the evidence to the Committee of Tim Johnson (Policy Director, CAA) that the ‘drone users registration scheme’ is not intended to stop ‘baddies’ flying a ‘drone’ into a full size aircraft – that is, and will remain, the job of the police – as will be enforcement of registration to the scheme, when it comes into force in the U.K., in November 2019.

The point that I have mainly been making, because I fly control line models, is that, because of the direct physical link between pilot and model and the limited flight envelope, such models are not ‘drones’, should not be classed as such and should, therefore, not be included/should never have been included, in the requirements for a ‘drone users registration scheme’.  But, because of the current definition of an ‘unmanned aircraft’, if a control line model weighs more than 250 grams, then it is a ‘drone’.

There were several references, during the oral evidence at the Committee session, to ‘model aircraft’ but I got the impression that these were to R/C aircraft, rather than to anything else.  After watching the Committee session and to try to get the point made about C/L models, I emailed one of the Members of the Committee and received an automated reply, advising that they could only deal with matters if I was a constituent of theirs.  I replied, advising that I had contacted them in their capacity as a Member of the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee, about a national matter and not as my constituency MP.  I also asked for advice about how I could get my point to the Committee, if not through him/her, direct.  No substantive reply, as yet.

Bill, I do not really fly FF, either ‘competitive’, or ‘sport’.  So, I decided to leave it to the people with expertise in these areas, to make the points.  But, I have given some thought to it, around the minimum 250 gram limit, to be classed as a ‘drone’.  P30, coupe d’hiver, exempt?  How much does an F1B model weigh?  F1C, presumably, over 250 grams?  Small wingspan scale model – under 250 grams?  Larger wingspan scale model – over 250 grams?

For those interested, the attached ‘link’, is to the written evidence submitted by the BMFA (and others) to the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee. http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/science-and-technology-committee/commercial-and-recreational-drone-use-in-the-uk/written/99572.html?fbclid=IwAR2T42u0ZXC3w6JPv1rnVJI9IiL3ute8zm203m6w1L9fnd2oBydzUCC8n6Y

Cheers,

Jez Wilkins
Logged
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 51
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,488



Ignore
« Reply #18 on: June 13, 2019, 08:32:01 AM »

Bill, I do not really fly FF, either ‘competitive’, or ‘sport’.  So, I decided to leave it to the people with expertise in these areas, to make the points.  But, I have given some thought to it, around the minimum 250 gram limit, to be classed as a ‘drone’.  P30, coupe d’hiver, exempt?  How much does an F1B model weigh?  F1C, presumably, over 250 grams?  Small wingspan scale model – under 250 grams?  Larger wingspan scale model – over 250 grams?
Jez, most FF duration models will be under 250g but not FAI gliders and power models. My FF scale models are over 250g. However, as I said in a previous post, I don't think these people have any idea what FF means and God help us when they do.
And what about indoor?
Logged
DavidJP
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 43
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2,734




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: June 13, 2019, 08:56:23 AM »

So far there has been no decision on whether the registration fee is payable for the model or a fee paid in respect of the operator but the signs are that it is a one off for the operator each year.  So don’t let us give out ideas. Possibly by fake news Phipps has been misquoted in the Times article but  on Facebook the BMFA have not challenged it. 

I have an idea that control line may not be caught because I remember something in the early disclosures when all this business started. The CL model was considered tethered and thus not unmanned.  Like a kite!  And so far kite flyers have not been involved.
Logged
Jez Wilkins
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 1
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 63



Ignore
« Reply #20 on: June 13, 2019, 09:50:46 AM »

Bill, I do not really fly FF, either ‘competitive’, or ‘sport’.  So, I decided to leave it to the people with expertise in these areas, to make the points.  But, I have given some thought to it, around the minimum 250 gram limit, to be classed as a ‘drone’.  P30, coupe d’hiver, exempt?  How much does an F1B model weigh?  F1C, presumably, over 250 grams?  Small wingspan scale model – under 250 grams?  Larger wingspan scale model – over 250 grams?
Jez, most FF duration models will be under 250g but not FAI gliders and power models. My FF scale models are over 250g. However, as I said in a previous post, I don't think these people have any idea what FF means and God help us when they do.
And what about indoor?

Hi Bill.  Thanks for the information.  I will send you a private message.

Cheers,

Jez Wilkins
Logged
Jez Wilkins
Bronze Member
***

Kudos: 1
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 63



Ignore
« Reply #21 on: June 13, 2019, 10:38:44 AM »

I have an idea that control line may not be caught because I remember something in the early disclosures when all this business started. The CL model was considered tethered and thus not unmanned.  Like a kite!  And so far kite flyers have not been involved.

Hi DavidJP.

I contacted the BMFA, between them sending out the 'information leaflet', with the latest BMFA News and sending my first round of emails to Baroness Vere and Richard Moriarty, which was on 15 May 2019.  The person that I spoke to at the BMFA advised that control line models, of over 250 grams, were, as things stood at that time, classed as 'unmanned aircraft' and, therefore, for the purposes of the 'drone users registration scheme' are 'drones'.  I have seen/heard/read nothing since, to persuade me that anything has changed, in this regard.  Are you, please, able to point me to anything (since 15 May 2019) from the Department for Transport, CAA, BMFA, or anywhere else, that confirms anything different?

Cheers,

Jez Wilkins      
Logged
DavidJP
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 43
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2,734




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: June 13, 2019, 12:37:32 PM »

Hello Jez.  No, sorry,  not since 15th May I have to say.  Again though this is perhaps another example of the (lack of) thought that has gone into it all. A C/L model cannot be a threat in anyway because even if both lines broke I doubt it would stay airborne for more than a few seconds.     
Logged
cvasecuk
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 211



Ignore
« Reply #23 on: June 13, 2019, 01:04:46 PM »

Bill, there is no problem mwith indoors. This is on CAA site....

Indoor use - The applicability of the regulations regarding flights within buildings has been clarified recently.  Under the CAA Act 1982, the Air Navigation Order is made for the purposes of regulating air navigation.  Flights inside buildings have nothing to do with air navigation because they can have no effect on flights by aircraft in the open air.  As a result, flights within buildings, or within areas where there is no possibility for the unmanned aircraft to ‘escape’ into the open air (such as a ‘closed’ netted structure) are not subject to air navigation legislation.  Persons intending to operate drones indoors should refer to the appropriate Health and Safety At Work regulation
Logged
JohnOSullivan
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 4
Offline Offline

Canada Canada

Posts: 200


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #24 on: June 13, 2019, 02:24:44 PM »

To add to this ridiculous regulation situation, I would suggest (with tongue in cheek) that indoor models be included under the regulations as they could escape up the chimney.  Whatever happened to our  hobby which for the last 100 years or more has inspired and resulted in full size aviation successes?
Logged

John O'Sullivan
MAAC 5401
MACI 26
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!