As part of their on going program to prevent undue and draconian legislation in the UK to restrict the operation of UAV and UASV, the BMFA have proactively introduced 2 new levels of competency certificates. The BPC and FPV extension. The FPV extension is still under review and discussion with the DfT and CAA, but the BPC is underway and aimed squarely at the "flight assisted models". That is models with self leveling and stabilization. In addition, and again aimed to preempt any changes imposed by the CAA, Dft and UK Gov, the BMFA has imposed a new set of questions as part of the competency certification for all classes in addition to the 6 standard questions. There will be 5 questions chosen by the examiner at random from a list of 20. A 100% score is required to pass. The object is to make all candidates aware of their legal obligations when operating a UAV or UASV. To help prime the education the BMFA have set up an on line quiz for all to try.
http://achievements.bmfa.org/mandatory-questions/mandatory-questions-quiz (http://achievements.bmfa.org/mandatory-questions/mandatory-questions-quiz)
It is expected that the LMA and other bodies will offer similar programs.
Here is an example
According to CAP 658 there are 8 'Only fly if' checks for an FPV flight of an aircraft over 3.5kg.
Which 3 of the answers below are NOT true.
The person in charge does not wear the headset or view a screen
The activity is solely for 'sport and recreation' purposes
Only 1 pilot is required.
A clear handover protocol is established
Reliable operation of the Buddy Box is established
The person in charge operates the slave transmitter
A Buddy Box system is employed
The aircraft remains within the natural unaided visual range of the person using the slave transmitter
Okay I got 4/5 on my "test":
CAA General Exemption E 4049 – permits FPV flight without a buddy box, but with a competent observer.
How must the competent observer monitor the flight?
Answer Provided: The competent observer must maintain direct visual contact with the model at all times
Correct Answer: The competent observer must maintain direct unaided visual contact with the model at all times
Is that correct? Unaided - does that mean people who wear glasses cannot be observers?
My head hurts now. :D
My eyes glazed over at the mention of the BMFA..
CAA General Exemption E 4049 – permits FPV flight without a buddy box, but with a competent observer.
What is the maximum mass of aircraft that may be flown under this exemption?
Answer Provided: The aircraft must be below 3.5kg including batteries and fuel
Correct Answer: The aircraft must be below 3.5kg including batteries and fuel
-
Who Regulates all civil flying activities over the United Kingdom, including model aircraft ?
Answer Provided: The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA)
Correct Answer: The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA)
-
Except during take-off and landing, what are the separation requirements of Article 167 – for small unmanned surveillance aircraft – excluding the person in charge of the aircraft or anyone under their control ?
Answer Provided: The aircraft must not fly within 50 metres of any person
Correct Answer: The aircraft must not fly within 50 metres of any person
-
How are the rules and regulations for flying established in law by Parliament (statute) ?
Answer Provided: As a series of Articles contained within in the Air Navigation Order (ANO).
Correct Answer: As a series of Articles contained within in the Air Navigation Order (ANO).
-
What does Article 166 of the ANO say about 'aerial work' for small unmanned aircraft ?
Answer Provided: The person in charge of a small unmanned aircraft must not fly the aircraft for the purposes of aerial work except in accordance with a permission granted by the CAA.
Correct Answer: The person in charge of a small unmanned aircraft must not fly the aircraft for the purposes of aerial work except in accordance with a permission granted by the CAA.
-
5 out of 5 for me.... but what utter bollox...
BMFA Achievement Scheme ... pah ... i actually despise these people. Sorry.
The tests will do nothing except to make sure that people who already fly safely from a safe place can continue to do so.
Yet again a complete miss-kick from the BMFA because noone who is actually causing problems will take the tests.
Brilliant.
Quote from: Steve W on April 16, 2016, 07:51:24 PM
Is that correct? Unaided - does that mean people who wear glasses cannot be observers?
I asked this question when all the rules and exemption talks started.
Glasses wearers have corrective eye sight, not aided.
I'm sure some people just like inventing tests and rules to make themselves appear more important than they are.
I mean - these are little model aircraft. I just don't see the need. They were wrong about the massive doom befalling us 5 years ago with multirotors but still this perpetual push to make it sound more dangerous than it really is - which of course benefits the BMFA because if you don't fly at some safe field (and pay your membership fee) well - are you some kind of devil?
Quote from: Gundummy on April 16, 2016, 08:49:43 PM
Who Regulates all civil flying activities over the United Kingdom, including model aircraft ?
Answer Provided: The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA)
Correct Answer: The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA)
This is not quite correct. EASA regulates the majority of civil flying activities over the United Kingdom with certain tasks delegated to and certain parts of regulation still retained by the UK CAA.
Quote from: Steve W on April 17, 2016, 12:21:19 AM
I'm sure some people just like inventing tests and rules to make themselves appear more important than they are.
I mean - these are little model aircraft. I just don't see the need. They were wrong about the massive doom befalling us 5 years ago with multirotors but still this perpetual push to make it sound more dangerous than it really is - which of course benefits the BMFA because if you don't fly at some safe field (and pay your membership fee) well - are you some kind of devil?
Your posts do make me smile. Its like you live in some kind of alternative reality.
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
I cannot agree that the BMFA have got this wrong. Would it have been more acceptable if the quiz, which is designed to help learn the 20 questions that five can be chosen from, was published by the DfT? The actual test is a verbal examination, not multi choice, 1 wrong answer is a fail even if the flying was a pass.
The CAA have also asked for an FPV Extension to the regular certificates for fixed wing, silent flight etc.
There is definitely going to be further regulation, that is a statement made by Robert Goodwill, there is talk about enforcing insurance companies to garner proof of competency before issuing cover, similar to vehicle insurance. This could be in the form of membership of a governing organisation such as the LMA and that would ensure registration of the operator on a data base accessible to the authorities. The membership number would then be displayed on the model, failure to display would null and void the insurance. The organisation would then be required to show that it has a program of education and achievement in place that was fit for purpose. Hence the changes the the competency certification.
This is just one of the examples promulgated by the DfT and CAA.
Quote from: Steve W on April 17, 2016, 12:21:19 AM
I'm sure some people just like inventing tests and rules to make themselves appear more important than they are.
I mean - these are little model aircraft. I just don't see the need. They were wrong about the massive doom befalling us 5 years ago with multirotors but still this perpetual push to make it sound more dangerous than it really is - which of course benefits the BMFA because if you don't fly at some safe field (and pay your membership fee) well - are you some kind of devil?
Get your facts straight please.
You can be a Country Member of the BMFA, you do not need to "belong" to any club or fly at a club site. As far as they are concerned you are free to roam but stay legal.
The BMFA have never predicted doom regarding multi rotors, in fact the general consensus from within the BMFA is that rtf models of all kinds are a good thing that will increase the take up of the hobby.
The BMFA insurance covers FPV providing legal equipment is used. They cannot defend the use of equipment that should not be used. Much the same as a modified motor car or an unroadworthy vehicle is not insured.
Quote from: Steve W on April 16, 2016, 07:51:24 PM
Okay I got 4/5 on my "test":
CAA General Exemption E 4049 – permits FPV flight without a buddy box, but with a competent observer.
How must the competent observer monitor the flight?
Answer Provided: The competent observer must maintain direct visual contact with the model at all times
Correct Answer: The competent observer must maintain direct unaided visual contact with the model at all times
Is that correct? Unaided - does that mean people who wear glasses cannot be observers?
Well 4 out of 5 is a fail so do your homework!
Here's a link to a full list to help you
http://achievements.bmfa.org/mandatory-questions
Quote from: Ratty on April 16, 2016, 11:44:31 PM
I asked this question when all the rules and exemption talks started.
Glasses wearers have corrective eye sight, not aided.
Correct, glasses or lenses not binoculars or telescopes
Well I certainly consider my glasses when I wear them to be "visual aids". They certainly help me see. So I failed on an apparently incorrect piece of terminology? I guess I'm an unsafe pilot then due to that catastrophic failure of an answer....
Big A - thank you for your helpful, insightful contribution to the thread as usual. Remind me why you're a member on here again? Oh that's right, keeping tabs on people. I think that says more about you than it does me :laugh: Especially when you don't even come back at me with an explanation of why I'm wrong - just snarky comments.
BigT you completely ignored my point though. These tests do nothing to combat illegal and dangerous flying. They simply confirm that already safe pilots (members) can pass a test.
QuoteThe actual test is a verbal examination, not multi choice, 1 wrong answer is a fail even if the flying was a pass.
See what I mean?
Quote
There is definitely going to be further regulation, that is a statement made by Robert Goodwill, there is talk about enforcing insurance companies to garner proof of competency before issuing cover, similar to vehicle insurance. This could be in the form of membership of a governing organisation such as the LMA and that would ensure registration of the operator on a data base accessible to the authorities. The membership number would then be displayed on the model, failure to display would null and void the insurance. The organisation would then be required to show that it has a program of education and achievement in place that was fit for purpose. Hence the changes the the competency certification.
So someone who might be a brilliant pilot, operating safely for years, will now be prevented from getting insurance because they cannot pass a new test? Possibly due to giving a wrong answer like I did based on incorrect terminology? How is that helpful?
Now you have one more uninsured pilot who is no longer able to fly at a safe flying site -guess where he's going to go? That's right - $random_flying_location.
How is that safer than what we have now?
Steve Later when Im in front of a PC I will respond more fully. However your posts simply miss the point completely or are simply incorrect.
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
Quote from: Steve W on April 17, 2016, 10:26:46 AM
Well I certainly consider my glasses when I wear them to be "visual aids". They certainly help me see. So I failed on an apparently incorrect piece of terminology? I guess I'm an unsafe pilot then due to that catastrophic failure of an answer....
Big A - thank you for your helpful, insightful contribution to the thread as usual. Remind me why you're a member on here again? Oh that's right, keeping tabs on people. I think that says more about you than it does me :laugh: Especially when you don't even come back at me with an explanation of why I'm wrong - just snarky comments.
BigT you completely ignored my point though. These tests do nothing to combat illegal and dangerous flying. They simply confirm that already safe pilots (members) can pass a test.
See what I mean?
So someone who might be a brilliant pilot, operating safely for years, will now be prevented from getting insurance because they cannot pass a new test? Possibly due to giving a wrong answer like I did based on incorrect terminology? How is that helpful?
Now you have one more uninsured pilot who is no longer able to fly at a safe flying site -guess where he's going to go? That's right - $random_flying_location.
How is that safer than what we have now?
Firstly the achievement scheme tests have absolutely no effect on insurance. You do not need to pass a test to be insured.
Being brief as im on a phone still. The questions are simply to raise awareness of the lawful aspects of ALL model autcraft flying amongst those that choose to take the tests. Simple as that, the questions could actually have been asked previoisly anyway. The Basic proficiency certificates have been introduced because many BMFA members asked for them, the BMFA is a member led organisation after all.
What is wrong with raising awareness of lawful operation?
You have actually shown that perhaps the questions have benefit this morning anyway, you are now more aware of the requirements as you now know what the CAA consider unaided to mean.
Why am I here, well amongst some of the ill informed stuff there is some good technical info, and of course sometimes comments such as your previous one about tests and insurance, which are wholly incorrect need correcting.
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
Well - this is why I am confused on the issue:
QuoteThere is definitely going to be further regulation, that is a statement made by Robert Goodwill, there is talk about enforcing insurance companies to garner proof of competency before issuing cover, similar to vehicle insurance. This could be in the form of membership of a governing organisation such as the LMA and that would ensure registration of the operator on a data base accessible to the authorities. The membership number would then be displayed on the model, failure to display would null and void the insurance. The organisation would then be required to show that it has a program of education and achievement in place that was fit for purpose. Hence the changes the the competency certification.
The way I read that is that in order to be insured, you must be a member of an organisation (like the BMFA) and pass competency tests.
QuoteWhat is wrong with raising awareness of lawful operation?
Nothing at all - but I assume your members are already aware of this type of thing so I'm not sure how it's going to make things safer than they already are. It doesn't do anything to raise awareness amongst the people who just randomly go out and purchase an aircraft from Maplins. In short, I'm not sure what the benefits are - it just seems like an extra barrier towards getting insured which is surely a bad thing?
Quote from: big a on April 17, 2016, 10:49:22 AM
Firstly the achievement scheme tests have absolutely no effect on insurance. You do not need to pass a test to be insured.
If that is the case then I change my opinion on the matter - but... what are they for then? Simply to gain a certificate? Why would people do that if there's no benefit to them - there has to be something in it to make the test worth passing?
QuoteYou have actually shown that perhaps the questions have benefit this morning anyway, you are now more aware of the requirements as you now know what the CAA consider unaided to mean.
Hmm well I'm still not convinced that glasses don't aid sight. They certainly help me when flying LoS at distance...
Quote from: big a on April 17, 2016, 10:49:22 AM
Firstly the achievement scheme tests have absolutely no effect on insurance. You do not need to pass a test to be insured.
Being brief as im on a phone still. The questions are simply to raise awareness of the lawful aspects of ALL model autcraft flying. G
You have actually shown that perhaps the questions have benefit this morning anyway, you are now more aware of the requirements as you now know what the CAA consider unaided to mean.
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
Currently you do not need any competency qualification to be insured by the BMFA, just membership.
In fact there is zero requirement by the BMFA that insurance is dependent on any qualification what so ever.
It is local clubs that put solo operation rules in place primarily to,protect its membership and preserve the flying site.
However, in the future it is muted by the DfT that government will have access to all model insurance data base and a condition of insurance will be display of a reg no on the model. Again this is why the relevant bodies are keen to be in on the discussion. From the inside I get the impression that the CAA are much more concerned about proximity flying around structures, gatherings, bridges, vessels, urban areas. Where as the DfT want to gain access to ownership details and are prone to revenue gathering.
Scary how quickly the commercial aspects of things (registration, database, insurance) etc are now weaselling their way into the hobby sector despite there being no cause for it.
i'm totally with steve on this, preaching to the converted. those of us who build stuff to fly have already gained much knowledge from forums like this one, including the ANO. those who buy RTFs from such as maplin my not have a clue about the ANO as they just go and buy it like a toy or bag of spuds from tesco. and all i hear from big a and big t is "we (BMFA) are with big brother, and you will, at some time soon, do as we say".
Sounds like paranoia to me. Can you point to anywhere the BMFA is telling you you must do something?
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
The ANOs are the law so you must comply with them to fly legally. Everything else is a guide including CAP 658 and everything that the BMFA says, albeit most of it is excellent advice.
I see nothing Machiavellian about what the BMFA are doing, I think they are trying to protect our hobby so allowing us to play with our toys.
Mick
They're protecting the hobby as long as you're part of the BMFA. Fixed that for you.
Quote from: Steve W on April 17, 2016, 02:24:55 PM
They're protecting the hobby as long as you're part of the BMFA. Fixed that for you.
Again thats incorrect. The BMFA works to protect public flying sites that are open to all too.
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
Hah - are you saying you support my ability as an FPV pilot to fly from a random field? If so, I'm shocked - because it's completely at odds with every conversation I've ever had with any BMFA member.
Quote from: Steve W on April 17, 2016, 02:56:17 PM
Hah - are you saying you support my ability as an FPV pilot to fly from a random field? If so, I'm shocked - because it's completely at odds with every conversation I've ever had with any BMFA member.
Fully support you as long as you are being responsible and lawful.
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
Didn't bother with it, 99% of the people I`ve met who are part of the BMFA were condescending arsehats!
Forgive me but I think I've stumbled across yet another hijacked thread to do with whether the BMFA are a bunch of shysters or not and whether we're over regulated. The original post was about a questionnaire and the need to "prevent undue and draconian legislation" which has got to be a good thing in my book.
Perhaps what should also happen is that such a questionnaire should also be part of each Maplins (other retailers are available) off-the-shelf flying toy, too irrespective of whether the purchaser decides to take up BMFA membership or not.
I suspect that most new pilots want to do the right thing, but simply don't know where to look first.
Heh - how long before only "BMFA endorsed" flying is allowed here in the UK?
Ever watched the MFNZ capers with Bruce Simpson?
Quote from: Steve W on April 17, 2016, 02:56:17 PM
Hah - are you saying you support my ability as an FPV pilot to fly from a random field? If so, I'm shocked - because it's completely at odds with every conversation I've ever had with any BMFA member.
Quote from: Bertie on April 17, 2016, 04:48:40 PM
Didn't bother with it, 99% of the people I`ve met who are part of the BMFA were condescending arsehats!
I think you have been getting under the skin of the wrong BMFA members..
Back to the original topic, i got 3/5, mostly because i was only half arseing it and didn't read it closely,
Surely they could of worded it a little easier? it takes me 3 attempts to read each answer because its as if it came straight from lawyer, if what they want to achieve is educating people with this, shouldn't they put it in as simple language as possible?
Quote from: big a on April 17, 2016, 01:03:30 PM
Sounds like paranoia to me. Can you point to anywhere the BMFA is telling you you must do something?
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
In fact apart from the Law of the Land, eg ANO etc all of the handbook is advisory.
[quote author=DerbyshireDrones link=topic=49355.msg247035#msg247035 date=1460908630
Back to the original topic, i got 3/5, mostly because i was only half arseing it and didn't read it closely,
Surely they could of worded it a little easier? it takes me 3 attempts to read each answer because its as if it came straight from lawyer, if what they want to achieve is educating people with this, shouldn't they put it in as simple language as possible?
[/quote]
That's because it is! Like most legal subjects, misinterpretation is frowned on. The quiz is a rolling selection so if you keep trying you eventually get all 20 questions. I like the way you get the correct answer given though.
It must be stated that this is an attempt to stave off draconian measures by the DfT and CAA. Already its doing a job of education. Unfortunately as is seen by earlier comments on here there has always been and always will be a section of any population that has a total disregard for any legislation. Back in Canada they usually ended up living "off grid" in a shack with no running water or electricity and an outside bog all wrapped up in tin foil.
That normally came to an abrupt volte-face when something went wrong and federal help was needed!
Quote from: BigT on April 17, 2016, 06:12:08 PM
In fact apart from the Law of the Land, eg ANO etc all of the handbook is advisory.
Or - put it another way - most of it is common sense.
I got 4/5 as i didnt realise that one required more than one tick box doh!
What conditions does Article 166 of the ANO says about where small unmanned aircraft above 7kg may be flown?
Select 3 from 4
Answer Provided: At less than 400 ft above the point of launch except with ATC permission..
Correct Answer: Clear of controlled airspace unless with Air Traffic Control (ATC) permission..Clear of any Aerodrome Traffic Zone (ATZ) unless with ATC permission..At less than 400 ft above the point of launch except with ATC permission..
-
What does Article 138 of the ANO state ?
Answer Provided: A person must not recklessly or negligently cause or permit an aircraft to endanger any person or property.
Correct Answer: A person must not recklessly or negligently cause or permit an aircraft to endanger any person or property.
-
What must be obtained before any flight within controlled airspace or an ATZ of an aircraft over 7kg?
Answer Provided: Permission from the appropriate air traffic control unit.
Correct Answer: Permission from the appropriate air traffic control unit.
-
What does Article 166 of the ANO say about the responsibilities of the person in charge of a small unmanned aircraft ?
Answer Provided: The person in charge of a small unmanned aircraft may only fly the aircraft if reasonably satisfied that the flight can safely be made.
Correct Answer: The person in charge of a small unmanned aircraft may only fly the aircraft if reasonably satisfied that the flight can safely be made.
-
Who has legal responsibility for the safety of an FPV flight conducted without a buddy box lead ?
Answer Provided: The person piloting the aircraft (SUA)
Correct Answer: The person piloting the aircraft (SUA)
Quote from: Steve W on April 17, 2016, 05:36:46 PM
Heh - how long before only "BMFA endorsed" flying is allowed here in the UK?
Ever watched the MFNZ capers with Bruce Simpson?
exactly my point.
Quote from: Steve W on April 17, 2016, 05:36:46 PM
Heh - how long before only "BMFA endorsed" flying is allowed here in the UK?
What a ridiculous statement. Hardly worth a reply but how about the LMA, GBRCAA, SMA, SSUK, BMPRA etc etc. Will they all have their own legislation and sites?
For the record perhaps you would like to tell us all about the terrible and traumatic experience you must have had at the hands of the BMFA that has scarred you for life! Perhaps we can then collectively advise you on some therapy.
Quote from: Steve W on April 17, 2016, 05:36:46 PM
Heh - how long before only "BMFA endorsed" flying is allowed here in the UK?
Ever watched the MFNZ capers with Bruce Simpson?
I don't think it will ever happen. A number of reasons, the main one being absolutely nobody, including the BMFA, is calling for that.
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
is it really so ridiculous?
Quote from: Ynot6 on April 17, 2016, 06:38:01 PM
is it really so ridiculous?
Yes
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
TBH the people I`ve met who are in the BMFA are old timer freeflyers who think mini quads are evil magic that have about right to flight as a house brick.
The field I fly in is owned by a member of the BMFA (he's the 1% so far).
I digress - the quiz...... its a bit long winded, maybe if they tamed it down to daily mail standards it would work.
Heh - how long before only "BMFA endorsed" flying is allowed here in the UK?
Just remember that the first year of the exemption was limited to FPVUK members only.
Personally I support the CAA, BMFA and DfT in their endeavours to make all flying safe and available to all through education. This quiz is another small step in the right direction. I think the BMFA try to be inclusive and certainly invite a wide range of disciplines and other entities to meetings to consider new recommendations to the CAA. They also support flying outside of clubs, I am a country member. The BMFA insurance covers members for legal flying anywhere in the UK, not just at clubs. Just ask some helicopter, pylon racing, free flight, glider aerotowing or control line pilots about the reception they get at a lot of clubs, we are not alone and the BMFA supports us all.
Mick
Riiiiiiight.
So when the insurance companies require evidence of competency in order to give out a policy (as stated in a previous post), where will that evidence come from?
BMFA testing - Noone else does it, so you could argue that no-one except a BMFA-qualified pilot is competent enough to be insured.
Quote from: Steve W on April 17, 2016, 07:01:41 PM
Riiiiiiight.
So when the insurance companies require evidence of competency in order to give out a policy (as stated in a previous post), where will that evidence come from?
BMFA testing - Noone else does it, so you could argue that no-one except a BMFA-qualified pilot is competent enough to be insured.
There is no indication whatsoever from anywhere that insurance companies, well certainly not the BMFA insurers, or any other body are going to require any certification at all.
I agree and by the way you are wrong again Steve, LMA are much hotter on testing than the BMFA and quite right too given the level of risk.
So what was BigT on about then?
How many drone pilots (Professional) are members of the BMFA or have even heard of them?
In my line of work ........ not one to my knowledge!
In fact... I'll bow out of a futile argument ....
Quote from: Gundummy on April 17, 2016, 07:24:03 PM
How many drone pilots (Professional) are members of the BMFA or have even heard of them?
In my line of work ........ not one to my knowledge!
In fact... I'll bow out of a futile argument ....
Quite a few I would suggest. I woud even go as far as to say the majority. I know quite a few. Many were BMFA members for many years before becoming professional drone pilots.
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
Lol...
I got 4 out of 5 because of a bloody double negative in the question!
I should try read a little slower:)
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
Quote from: Steve W on April 17, 2016, 07:01:41 PM
BMFA testing - Noone else does it, so you could argue that no-one except a BMFA-qualified pilot is competent enough to be insured.
Incorrect.
The SAA safety achievement scheme parallels the BMFA scheme. I have SAA Bronze which was accepted by the BMFA as equivalent to their 'A'.
QuoteQuite a few I would suggest. I woud even go as far as to say the majority. I know quite a few. Many were BMFA members for many years before becoming professional drone pilots.
..
In my line of work, you don't know what my line of work is, so to say the majority you would be wrong. Not one (to my knowledge) is a member of the BMFA and the rules and regs of the CAA are taken as a guide not verbatim.
so figure that one out smart arse...
You asked how many professional drone pilots had heard of the BMFA I am suggesting the majority, ie more than 50%. I dont see how whatever your line ofbusiness is matters. Maybe you should define your concept of a professional drone pilot. For me its anyone using a drone for financial gain.
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
Quote from: Steve W on April 17, 2016, 07:21:11 PM
So what was BigT on about then?
To clarify the insurance issue: it was discussed that as a method of securing data for the CAA, BALPA and DfT of UAV and UASV pilots, the insurers could be forced to record the insured details on a data base which would be accessible by the governing bodies. Exactly the same as motor vehicles.
If this was enforced it is expected that the insurers would introduce a 2 or 3 tier insurance level and premium depending on the type being operated, this in turn would require some form of proof of competency for that class being insured with associated no claims discounts for competency and a low claims record.
Both the BMFA and LMA are dead against this for many reason. In particular the BMFA advocate a much more Laissez-fair attitude, resisting licensing and individual registration, stating that the current system of insurance works well with the level of claims exceedingly low which has resulted in a drop in premiums for the current year. The largest number of claims are reported to be for damage to members motor vehicles and several serious personal injuries caused by untethered models.
Let's be clear, something will happen, further restrictions will be placed on UAV and especially UASV operations.
In my opinion no other single body is fighting harder against these restrictions than the BMFA and LMA who have well regarded aviation experts on the board. My own club have asked all members to lobby their individual MP pointing out that further restrictions are not needed as current legislation works fine.
Quote from: Gundummy on April 17, 2016, 11:23:32 PM
.. In my line of work, you don't know what my line of work is, so to say the majority you would be wrong. Not one (to my knowledge) is a member of the BMFA and the rules and regs of the CAA are taken as a guide not verbatim.
so figure that one out smart arse...
I think I have an idea. My nephew flew FPV from RAF Waddington up until a few months ago. He was definitely not a member of the BMFA. Warm or cold?
Be careful, once you know BigT, he may be required to blow you up :)