eSoaring.net

The CAA has published a Consultation Document on their proposed charges for registration of model aircraft operators.

The proposed charge is significantly higher than in other countries probably because they have contracted it out to a third party organisation who expects to make a substantial profit from the vast number of operators that the CAA have estimated will register.

More details are on the BMFA website https://bmfa.org in a News item dated today, 26 April.

Use the link in the article to directly make your own views known to the CAA.

Filled my one in

https://bmfa.org/News/News-Page/Article ... ZgSE9CaTh4

Well I have sent my two pennyworth in, I have had 30 years of dealing with the CAA ( Campaign Against Aviation) let's hope they see sense !!!!!!

So the CAA is anticipating that 1 in 400 of every man woman and child in the UK is going to register as a SUA Operator and the financial model for covering registration system costs is based on this.

I live in a large village of around 5000 people and there are 4 known model flyers who would probably be classed as Operators/Remote Pilots needing to register and possibility a couple more family members who might also be required to take the on line Remote Pilot test.

Whilst there may be some multi rotor drone owners who I do not know of, there is no sign of any such flying activity other than with sub 250gm toys.

I can’t help thinking that this is a far more typical demographic that will apply to most of the UK than what is perceived by the CAA.

I hope you have all seen the latest News items on the BMFA website, https://BMFA.org

Today’s News is at least a small positive step. However all model flyers need to stand behind the BMFA and the other Model Associations who are fighting this on our behalf.

Do try to do your own bit before your eyes glaze over!

A bit of positive news



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!

If you have not filled one i, do so now

Trying to get as much help and support as possible from outside our own circles, Jon Edison (SFTC Chairman) and myself made representations on Friday, to one of our local (York) MP's.
It happens that Jon lives 4 miles from me across a Parliamentary boundary, so we are planning a second visit to my (York Outer) MP. MP's cannot represent those who are not their own constituents, so each of us is an adviser to the other!

Prior to the meeting Jon provided some of the BMFA info and it provided useful starting points during our conversations, which covered several contentious areas and were well received. To report a little; it transpired that our MP was on a transport sub committee and was interested to know the difference between "Drones" and "model aeroplanes", because she had recently heard a great deal about "drones" but never a word about "model aeroplanes". We explained what we do and with what kind of models and that there are 35,000 of us doing it! Naturally we finished on the matter of the CAA fees and "our" jilted offer to save the Government money.

In conclusion, we both thought that we had a very positive reaction and look forward to seeing copies of letters to the Minister. We certainly thought that it was time well spent and would encourage others to give it a go, preferably before the MEP elections!!!

Mike

We almost certainly have to accept that registration of drones and model aircraft lumped together is a done deal and has been in the pipe line for several years. It is in the EASA regulations that are expected to come in next year. There is a summary by Dave Phipps in the latest BMFA News.

What we can argue is that the CAA should apply a lighter touch to recreational model aircraft within an Association environment in accordance with the provisions of the EASA regulations, something that they currently appear to be riding rough shod over.

The proposed CAA registration fee is disproportionate. In the CAA consultation, the annual charge is presented on the basis that it has to be cost neutral. What we can argue is that the suggested amount is not in line with CAA charges for other branches of aviation and that model flyers are being saddled with the costs of running a system that is for the benefit of anticipated numbers of commercial users.

In France there is no charge for registering. Model flying sites are shown on the aeronautical charts. I believe I am correct in saying that the full whack of any charges and Pilot regulation only kicks in for flying away from such sites. There is certainly a (30 day) provision in the French laws for foreign flyers taking part in International competitions.

If you compare the cost of registering a full size aircraft, over a five year period at the CAA ‘s proposed rates, it would cost more to be a registered model operator.

The repeating theory test does not occur in other branches of light aviation.

The 18 year age lower age limit for being a registered operator is not in line with other government laws e.g. owning and riding a motor scooter.

This does not help. I wrote to my MP, who responded that action has to be taken due to the disruption at Gatwick before Christmas, even though no evidence has surfaced fro police investigations, of any dronesbeing there.
Then we get this guy being caight outside HEATHROW!!


https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/h ... Y0SRarrlCY

The following looks to have addressed a lot of what we have been campaigning for:-

CAA has published the exemptions for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles flying above 400 feet after the date of new rules entering in force. Because there are exmptions. By our understanding, you can fly your model above 400 feet and up to 1000 feet in FPV mode, as long as it's not a drone which declared by two conditions:

Cannot be multi-rotor (tri-, quadro-, hexa-, octocopter, etc...)
Cannot have automatic flying capabilities making the UAV able to fly on its own (like "return to home" functionality)
Thereafter, if you are member of BMFA, SAA, LMA or FPF UK, you are not flying in C or E controlled airspaces or any operational airspace at an airport, airfield or aerodrome or restriced airspaces, the model is not heavier than 7kg (excluding fuel including batteries) your are allowed to fly up as high as you can see, which means there are no legal changes on conventional (aka traditional) model flying after 30th July.

When you are flying in FPV mode with your traditional model (most likely fixed wing aircraft), you are allowed to fly up to 1000 feet, when your model is not heavier than 3.5 kg (INCLUDING fuel), you still respect the traditional model flying rules (150m and 50m rules as before - no flying in cities, above football match, cars, vessels, houses except yours), and you must be supervised or aided by a competent observer - your buddy who is able to control the airspace for you.

These great exemptions are available below. I think United Kingdom has proven again, the tradition as a word has got power in the country. Thanks to the board of UK model flying associations (like BMFA and especially Dave Phipps) and the constructive cooperation of Civil Aviation Authority these really amazing exeptions will enter in force with new UAV airspace regulations together. Therefore we will have no change even after 30th July.

UK Associations permission
UK Model Aircraft Associations Permission.pdf2.23 MB
This is the CAA published PDF containing everything about the exemptions given to members of UK model flying associations.
FPV exemptions between 400ft and 1000ft
UK Model Aircraft Associations FPV Exemption (003).pdf3.72 MB
This document contains the rules of FPV flying between 400ft and 1000ft with conventional model aircrafts