Scale Soaring UK

Having digested all the information regarding the new rules on flying heights I could still do with a bit of clarification. Perhaps someone can help?
Our club field is outside any airport blue zone and I know that only aircraft with a mass of less that 7 Kg are permitted to fly above 400 Ft. Is it possible to get permission from the CAA to fly models above 7 Kg above 400 Ft? All our glider tugs are above 7 Kg and 400 Ft is only a two second climb for a jet!
I suspect that a permission could be obtained for a specific event but what about, say, an annual permission? If anyone knows how we might go about obtaining a permission I would be grateful for any info.
Any 1/3 scale glider will exceed 7 Kg, similarly for tugs. How do other flat-field flyers go on?

John PM sent.

BC

Interesting to see that question 3 of the consultation document differentiates between “Drones” & “Model Aircraft”. More confusion?
Brian

I have responded to the questions in the on line form. I suggested they transfer our data straight from the model associations, less chance of errors, less costs, i.e. no public websites needed. If someone isn't a member then they haven't got insurance.

There is a question there asking us if we think the numbers they've suggested are correct. If the CAA doesn't know then they need to go and find out otherwise what are they basing their costs on? I told them to go back to school!

Illegal 'drone' users will always be illegal so whats the point of asking them to register? Use your resources on that rather than making lawful pursuit followers spend time and money registering a second time.

This is a system where the user pays, a political inspired decision. I pointed out that I will never be a 'user' since I will never have access to that information or be able to use it for any purpose. This should be challenged in court.

I did add other comments about the viability of the whole system and its doubtful parentage.

M

That's pretty much what I said too.

What a complete waste of time and money.



BC

An amazingly naïve consultation document with no background data apparently available to help formulate a meaningful response to most of the questions. A pretty risible approach from a supposedly responsible Government Organisation charged with implimenting a political whim.

Richard.

Richard_A wrote: ↑27 Apr 2019, 22:39 An amazingly naïve consultation document with no background data apparently available to help formulate a meaningful response to most of the questions. A pretty risible approach from a supposedly responsible Government Organisation charged with implimenting a political whim.

Richard.

Probably because they don’t intend to pay any attention to the responses anyway!
More than likely, they are just going through the motions to be able to tick the “Consultation” box!!

That may be so but is no reason for inaction. To support the efforts of BMFA HQ, only a universal cry of anguish from the conventional model flying community is likely to change the direction of this oncoming steamroller !

Don’t worry Spike, I did my submission before I replied to the previous quote.

Here we go again, the many being punished for the actions of a few. This registration is a complete waste of time and money, and the people they are trying to catch WON,T register. All I can think is these people are thick !!!!
They will end up with a database with the same people as the BMFA, the ones responsible enough to get insurance.
Unbelievable

I have just written to my MP.....

Don't suppose I will even get the courtesy of a reply.



BC

I wrote to our MP and three Euro MPs all giving the same replies about public safety, shows you how much they're interested and how much they know.

Fair dismembering of the proposed 'system'. What Bruce Simpson doesn't mention is if the numbers do not meet the CAA estimate, costs will fall across the smaller number of those who do register. So £16.50 /year will inevitably be cranked up !

New CAA Registration coming our way.
£1000 fine if don't register apparently.

spike spencer wrote: ↑28 Apr 2019, 20:51 Fair dismembering of the proposed 'system'. What Bruce Simpson doesn't mention is if the numbers do not meet the CAA estimate, costs will fall across the smaller number of those who do register. So £16.50 /year will inevitably be cranked up !

He mentioned that Spike.....

AAAAAAAAAAAhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

All the comments I am reading just proves just how crazy this whole proposal is. We have MPs and MEPs who believe this is for public safety will stop rouge drones being flown over airport, WRONG!
Bringing in £1,000 fines for law abiding modelers who decide they won't comply with a useless scheme.

As I have said before the problem is with how drones are sold. Your mobile phone are activated when you purchase a new one,so the technology exists for a drone to be activated when it is registered. Yes some people will find a way round it, as MDev pointed out, but they will be a hardcore few.

Do we all boycott this mad idea ??

It would be interesting to hear what the BMFA have to say about this.
If I hadn't seen the youtube video how would I know this existed, were the BMFA going to notify
all its registered members as to the changes?
I wonder how this would be policed? Would a normal plod know about this?
What happens when we go to a flying event ie White Sheet, is someone going to ask are you registered?
I guess should an incident happen the first question will be, are you registered? If not what happens then?
So many questions.

Ladies and Gentlemen, if this stupidity comes to pass please DO NOT register. Look how busy the police were with the protests in London last week. The courts would be overflowing with cases of none compliance, and none payment of the fines if modellers stick together. Regards John.

I agree with all comments posted. The trouble with creating Laws is that someone has to Police it. Do our Police forces have the time and resources to drive around the countryside on the look out for rogue model operators. If not, will the charges levied have to be increased in the future to compensate the Police. This is one hell of a slippery slope and such a draconian Big Brother attitude, if the CAA make the laws then they should pay for it.

I would imagine that many modellers would ignore this legislation and the CAA target of 170,000 will fall well short, thereby requiring an upscaling of the annual charge

I think I will go back to stamp collecting until a law is made for an extra charge for use of printers ink

There is a suggestion that the BMFA could register as the drone operator and pay the £16.50, and that would cover us all. Then we register as the fliers at no cost.

Seem like a plan...



BC

Sounds good to me

Or how about -
This is all about the safety of the airspace for full size aeroplanes.
If all commercial flights (100,000 + per day as per 2014 CAA figures) paid 10 pence per flight, then that would well cover the CAA cost of 2.8+ million per annum for the registration system.
Sadly we all know it won't make any difference to the rogues who want to disrupt commercial flights and airports.
But the CAA are basing their figures on 170,000 people registering. The BMFA have 34,000 and all other air space users are about 20,000, there is a huge shortfall to reach 170,000 & £2.8m. So the registration fee won't be £16.50 more like rapidly rising to £70/80 pa.
Now is it worth writing to all and sundry and filling in the survey?
John M

With 122,000 Bobbies at last count and an alleged 150,000 drone users according to the CAA it's a good time to rob a bank.

I think I might take up model boats this hobby is getting harder. or fishing or maybe just do nothing and sit in a park with can .