Registration may be done through model flying association.
No requirement to sit online test if you already have competency award from your model flying association.
Fee is £9.00 per annum.
https://www.caa.co.uk/Consumers/Unmanned-aircraft/Our-role/Drone-and-model-aircraft-registration/ (https://www.caa.co.uk/Consumers/Unmanned-aircraft/Our-role/Drone-and-model-aircraft-registration/)
As I said on "From The KItchen Table"'s Youtube comments only to have it deleted....
What is the point in sitting a test which is valid for 3 years if the rules are going to change in 6 months (ish) in June 2020 anyway.
If the rules change then the test you took may mean you're not properly educated or indeed aware of correct procedures in order to fly safely. If safety really is the name of the game here then there's something amiss isn't there?
I really don't think the people setting this system up could find their own backside with both hands.
Quote from: FPVSteve on October 21, 2019, 10:08:23 PM
As I said on "From The KItchen Table"'s Youtube comments only to have it deleted....
What is the point in sitting a test which is valid for 3 years if the rules are going to change in 6 months (ish) in June 2020 anyway.
If the rules change then the test you took may mean you're not properly educated or indeed aware of correct procedures in order to fly safely. If safety really is the name of the game here then there's something amiss isn't there?
I really don't think the people setting this system up could find their own backside with both hands.
That was the main reason I did the reg and test with the French system. Article 14 and 16 says a SUA operator and pilot need only register in one member state to be legal throughout all EU states. So in France it's free and lasts 5years, by which time we will still be in the EU and I will be 72 and couldn't give a feck
Quote from: electrotor on October 21, 2019, 08:20:53 PM
Registration may be done through model flying association.
No requirement to sit online test if you already have competency award from your model flying association.
Fee is £9.00 per annum.
https://www.caa.co.uk/Consumers/Unmanned-aircraft/Our-role/Drone-and-model-aircraft-registration/ (https://www.caa.co.uk/Consumers/Unmanned-aircraft/Our-role/Drone-and-model-aircraft-registration/)
Nah, I'm good thanks.
Quote from: BigT on October 22, 2019, 12:26:24 AM
That was the main reason I did the reg and test with the French system. Article 14 and 16 says a SUA operator and pilot need only register in one member state to be legal throughout all EU states. So in France it's free and lasts 5years, by which time we will still be in the EU and I will be 72 and couldn't give a feck
Sorry BigT I clicked Edit instead of Quote ...
What I said was.... this also says the UK registration is not valid outside the UK. Does this mean you have to sit a test in other countries before you fly there in order to then register your already registered aircraft?
It's like having to sit a driving test in France having driven there from Germany. Wut?
Thats an anomaly that I have written to the CAA to clarify. Its confusing as you have to be registered to fly in the country as a visitor but Article 14 states
"UAS operators•must register themselves in the country where they live or, if the operator is an organisation, in the country where they have their principal place of business
•cannot be registered in more than one EU country at a time
•must display their registration number on every unmanned aircraft they operate that falls within the stated requirements".
This may only relate to commercial operations and just be badly written. I took it to mean that competency and registration would be treated like an UK driving license which is valid in the EU until we leave, then you need an international driving permit to go with it and a green card for the vehicle. Obviously not been thought out properly.
I'm starting to feel like even if a prosecution was brought, it would be fairly easy for any reasonably decent lawyer to find a loophole.
There's an old saying something along the lines of "if you can't explain something clearly then you obviously don't understand enough about it" ... that's basically what these regulations make me feel towards the CAA/DfT.
AFAIK the site/airspace (A3 for most) requirements have not changed from that quoted in CAP1789 page 42(150mtr horizontal clearance etc) and that's the killer.
I have questions yet to be answered, perhaps Eric can throw some light.
In this section of the Queens speech, "Police will be given new powers to tackle the "unlawful use" of drones.
This include forcing a person to land a drone and "enhanced stop and search powers" if an offence involving an unmanned aircraft has taken place.
The laws will also apply to model planes and model helicopters."
I want to know for sure wether the police will have instant access to the CAA Drone Register or not. K ow one seems to know for sure. Andy Symons, BMFA officer, is of the opinion that they will have to apply through some legal means to get access. Maybe. I am a sceptic but that seems like it defeats the object of the exercise. The police have instant access to DVLC, insurance and MOT register, Electoral Register. I can find out on line who owns a full size plane from its reg number so it just appears logical that the CAA register will be the same. Likewise, how will the LMA or BMFA establish that the reg number on a model relates to the operator or pilot if the register is not public?
Second question: is there a mechanism for de registering if the hobby is dumped by an individual or business?
If they can't, questions need to be asked why because it isn't difficult to manage and it isn't difficult to set up.
I say this as the person who wrote, as a side project, www.dronefinder.co.uk (http://www.dronefinder.co.uk) about 3 years ago. It allows you to register an account, upload your aircraft details and it automatically generates stickers for them to either download or order which are then scannable via a mobile phone if someone finds your downed aircraft. Once scanned, it will immediately recognise your aircraft and send the location coordinates to the owner or give access to the owners telephone number etc. it even allows you to choose what information is disclosed to a "finder" if you're concerned about your privacy.
It did not take years and a huge budget + team to build, is GDPR compliant etc. It sits on a single server that costs me £40/month with a ton of other websites and uses next to no resources despite having an active user base (it's not like it gets a million people all scanning drone stickers at the same time as one another).
This is part of the reason why I am so sceptical about the whole setup costs for the drone register as well as the ongoing maintenance fees they quote. It just doesn't cost as much as they say it does to build a site like theirs and I can actually put my money where my mouth is because I already built more than their minimum offering years ago, at a much reduced cost and with barely any additional costs going forward.
Very astute as always Steve.
Sorry, it wasn't a plug, I wasn't trying to turn it to my advantage I'm just saying that .... it's been done. People who know how to build these systems recognise how much of a rip off it is. I'm fully aware of the differences in process between a single person working on a side project and the management process (and markup!) that goes along with government processes, regulation etc etc - but there is no way it should cost as much as they're making it out to cost and nor is it that difficult (technologically) to implement. The whole thing is simply bureaucracy at its best (worst).
Take FPVUK for instance - they have a secure membership database, they have a register of people who have passed their A test, they provide insurance and membership cards. You cannot possibly tell me that they spend over £4million per annum on maintaining that system.
It would be trivial for them to develop an application that could allow the police to instantly query whether someone was registered and insured or not.
Quote from: BigT on October 28, 2019, 09:36:12 AM
I want to know for sure wether the police will have instant access to the CAA Drone Register or not. K ow one seems to know for sure. Andy Symons, BMFA officer, is of the opinion that they will have to apply through some legal means to get access. Maybe. I am a sceptic but that seems like it defeats the object of the exercise. The police have instant access to DVLC, insurance and MOT register, Electoral Register. I can find out on line who owns a full size plane from its reg number so it just appears logical that the CAA register will be the same. Likewise, how will the LMA or BMFA establish that the reg number on a model relates to the operator or pilot if the register is not public?
Second question: is there a mechanism for de registering if the hobby is dumped by an individual or business?
It is likely the Police will be able to obtain the operators details based on the operator ID from the aircraft, also check if someone they have arrested is registered. What they will not have, according to the CAA, is access to the full list of everyone registered so they can go kicking doors in next time there is a "Gatwick" type incident.
The CAA are also bound by GDPR so yes you will be able to de-register by requesting deletion of your data.
Eh - I thought the whole purpose of the register was to find possible suspects who have registered in the area that a crime takes place, i.e. to assist in the identification of an offender.
If they're only allowed to check if the person they arrest is registered, what's the point of it???
If they arrest someone and they're not registered as a drone user are they no longer a suspect? :D That sounds like a compelling case to NOT register at all.
Quote from: FPVSteve on October 28, 2019, 05:03:13 PM
Eh - I thought the whole purpose of the register was to find possible suspects who have registered in the area that a crime takes place, i.e. to assist in the identification of an offender.
That would be a fishing expedition and sounds legally very dubious and is possibly a breach of human rights - I'm sure Liberty would be interested in those kind of shenanigans. They would need a warrant I suspect to access larger parts of the database.... as indeed they should require one.
So explain to me what the point of the register is then? Presumably if someone has been arrested, they've been (or are about to be) charged with a crime anyway and them being a registered drone pilot (or not) is a moot point.
*cough* tax *cough*
Quote from: FPVSteve on October 28, 2019, 09:22:16 PM
So explain to me what the point of the register is then? Presumably if someone has been arrested, they've been (or are about to be) charged with a crime anyway and them being a registered drone pilot (or not) is a moot point.
*cough* tax *cough*
The point is if a suspect is not registered it is very easy to prove once they have been arrested. Also if an individual is registered he cannot claim to be unaware of regulations as he has to have shown some knowledge of regulations to be able to register.
DRES is still deeply flawed though.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Maybe that's it - it will be much harder to claim ignorance during a prosecution if you've passed a test that deems you knowledgeable. No more claiming ignorance of the laws.
Quote from: FPVSteve on October 29, 2019, 02:25:49 AM
Maybe that's it - it will be much harder to claim ignorance during a prosecution if you've passed a test that deems you knowledgeable. No more claiming ignorance of the laws.
Ignorance of the law has never been an accepted legal defence in the UK since Magna Carta. At best it an excuse and never accepted to defer prosecution. I E " sorry officer I didn't know my tail light was not working".
Quote from: FPVSteve on October 28, 2019, 09:22:16 PM
So explain to me what the point of the register is then? Presumably if someone has been arrested, they've been (or are about to be) charged with a crime anyway and them being a registered drone pilot (or not) is a moot point.
*cough* tax *cough*
https://bmfa.org/News/News-Page/ArticleID/2626/CHAIRMANS-STATEMENT-CAA-DRONE-AND-MODEL-AIRCRAFT-REGISTRATION-AND-EDUCATION-SCHEME-DRES
The associations our now slightly changing their position and admitting for the first time that the current arrangement is only a stop gap until July 2020 when the whole thing is up for yet another change.
Quote from: urbanfpv on October 28, 2019, 05:45:22 PM
That would be a fishing expedition and sounds legally very dubious and is possibly a breach of human rights - I'm sure Liberty would be interested in those kind of shenanigans. They would need a warrant I suspect to access larger parts of the database.... as indeed they should require one.
I don't agree, my best guess is that it will be written into the drone act which was item 20 in the Queens speech. Which also gives draconian powers to the police in all matters SUA. I E stop and search, confiscation on suspicion, seizure of equipment, forcing suspected illegal operation of drones to cease by enforced landing. (Don't quite see how that one will work). Take into account that as a BMFA member I can access the membership portal and check the status of someone who tells me they have an A, I will also be able to check their DRES number belongs to them. It's also easy to check full size aircraft registration ownership.
Quote from: BigT on October 28, 2019, 09:36:12 AM
I have questions yet to be answered, perhaps Eric can throw some light.
I think big a has pretty much answered to the best of the BMFA's knowledge at the moment. This whole business has been flawed from the start so I would quite reasonably expect there to still be flaws when it becomes law. I'm sure the Police could well do without yet another burden when we know damn well that registration, by its very nature, will fail to catch the baddies. So in that respect it is utterly pointless. The only real advantage I can see is increased awareness that there such things as the rules of the air. Model flying associations, to their great credit, have been plugging this for years.
Quote from: BigT on October 28, 2019, 09:36:12 AM
I have questions yet to be answered, perhaps Eric can throw some light.
In this section of the Queens speech, "Police will be given new powers to tackle the "unlawful use" of drones.
This include forcing a person to land a drone and "enhanced stop and search powers" if an offence involving an unmanned aircraft has taken place.
The laws will also apply to model planes and model helicopters."
I want to know for sure wether the police will have instant access to the CAA Drone Register or not. K ow one seems to know for sure. Andy Symons, BMFA officer, is of the opinion that they will have to apply through some legal means to get access. Maybe. I am a sceptic but that seems like it defeats the object of the exercise. The police have instant access to DVLC, insurance and MOT register, Electoral Register. I can find out on line who owns a full size plane from its reg number so it just appears logical that the CAA register will be the same. Likewise, how will the LMA or BMFA establish that the reg number on a model relates to the operator or pilot if the register is not public?
Second question: is there a mechanism for de registering if the hobby is dumped by an individual or business?
The Police will not have instant access. And they can't search by area or anything like that.
They will be able to confirm an operator number is valid by typing it in, along with one personal detail - such as postcode or DOB. They will get a Green tick to show it's valid.
They will only be able to look up details of a specific operator if it is in reference to a valid investigation into that person.
Quote from: FPVSteve on October 28, 2019, 11:42:49 AM
Sorry, it wasn't a plug, I wasn't trying to turn it to my advantage I'm just saying that .... it's been done. People who know how to build these systems recognise how much of a rip off it is. I'm fully aware of the differences in process between a single person working on a side project and the management process (and markup!) that goes along with government processes, regulation etc etc - but there is no way it should cost as much as they're making it out to cost and nor is it that difficult (technologically) to implement. The whole thing is simply bureaucracy at its best (worst).
Take FPVUK for instance - they have a secure membership database, they have a register of people who have passed their A test, they provide insurance and membership cards. You cannot possibly tell me that they spend over £4million per annum on maintaining that system.
It would be trivial for them to develop an application that could allow the police to instantly query whether someone was registered and insured or not.
We spent £2.4m building the 'A' Certificate test... Not really.
We have this facility for clubs/ events/ insurance providers, etc. to check a membership number is valid: https://members.fpvuk.org/membership-check It wouldn't be much more than that.
Mind you, as per my previous post, the Police won't have direct access to the CAA's database. They will have to make requests in writing to the CAA inititially. Eventually it is envisaged that it will be part of the PNC and they will be able to do specific lookups as long as they're operating under a specific crime investigation (each lookup would then all be logged against that specific crime reference number).
The Police will not be able to search for all drone owners within 10 miles of a postcode or anything along those lines. We have been assured of that. (The technical guys were adamant that definitely was not even possible with this system, never mind permissable).
I maintain my original opinion; drone and model aircraft registration is pointless. Hopefully it will be scrapped fairly quickly. (EASA regulations may prevent that happening for longer than would ordinarily be the case).
I have been trying, as yet without success, to establish why a SUA operator pilot who is registered in and EU state, such as France or RoI, has to register in the UK when it is specifically noted in the EASA regulation that it is illegal to register in more than one member country. Who in the CAA is the person to answer this?
Make what you will of it - not exactly rocket science or even proof of your competence to fly.
Time to complete (pass) = <5 mins. and with no reference to the support material.
https://register-drones.caa.co.uk/
What I find annoying about this whole debacle, is the BMFA.
They have effectively agreed to a number of things they really had no right to do:
1) ALL Radio Controlled Model Aircraft are now officially recognized as "Drones". Why oh why did the BMFA agree that this is the case on behalf of its members everywhere??? Radio Controlled models have been flown since the early 1950s and suddenly, these aircraft all fall under the heading of "Drones"....Really?
2) The BMFA have agreed to collect this Tax on behalf of, and for free for the Government....Why?
3) In their defense, its my understanding that the £9 annual fee (and Registration) will be voluntary and not compulsory. However, this notion is offset by the fact that ALL official BMFA flying sites, GPS locations will be handed over to the powers that be. If they ever employ the Drone Police, its not unrealistic to assume they will regularly patrol these sites looking for easy victims. How long before this £9 fee turns into a much higher figure?
4) As someone who flies FPV at a BMFA site, I feel almost sorry for my fellow members who have all been tarred with the dreaded Drone brush..How long before the BMFA hand over their Membership listings?
5) As we all know, the Criminal fraternity, ANTIFA, Tree Hugging loonies and general imbeciles will still cause trouble, but of course wont be on any Registers anywhere. Im waiting for the Christmas Drone crisis at the next Airport to kick off.
Why didn't the BMFA just tell them to get lost..? Especially when you consider how badly they were treated initially.
:vulture:
Quote from: English Turbines on November 09, 2019, 07:30:40 PM
What I find annoying about this whole debacle, is the BMFA.
They have effectively agreed to a number of things they really had no right to do:
1) ALL Radio Controlled Model Aircraft are now officially recognized as "Drones". Why oh why did the BMFA agree that this is the case on behalf of its members everywhere??? Radio Controlled models have been flown since the early 1950s and suddenly, these aircraft all fall under the heading of "Drones"....Really?
The BMFA hasn't agreed at all that all model aircraft are drones. They are all small unmanned aircraft though.
Quote from: English Turbines on November 09, 2019, 07:30:40 PM
2) The BMFA have agreed to collect this Tax on behalf of, and for free for the Government....Why?
The BMFAs have pushed to be able to deal with registration for their members as a service to their members, one that many wanted.
Quote from: English Turbines on November 09, 2019, 07:30:40 PM
3) In their defense, its my understanding that the £9 annual fee (and Registration) will be voluntary and not compulsory. However, this notion is offset by the fact that ALL official BMFA flying sites, GPS locations will be handed over to the powers that be. If they ever employ the Drone Police, its not unrealistic to assume they will regularly patrol these sites looking for easy victims. How long before this £9 fee turns into a much higher figure?
Indeed if you don't want to register through the BMFA you don't have to, its entirely optional. No idea at all where you get the idea that all "BMFA" flying site locations are getting handed over comes from, simply not the case and has never even been considered.
Quote from: English Turbines on November 09, 2019, 07:30:40 PM
4) As someone who flies FPV at a BMFA site, I feel almost sorry for my fellow members who have all been tarred with the dreaded Drone brush..How long before the BMFA hand over their Membership listings?
No they haven't been tarred with any brush at all and the BMFA will not be handing over membership listings full stop. Members can if they choose register through the BMFA if they wish, the only data that will be passed to the CAA in those cases is the exact same data that you would give the CAA if you registered directly with the CAA.
Quote from: English Turbines on November 09, 2019, 07:30:40 PM
5) As we all know, the Criminal fraternity, ANTIFA, Tree Hugging loonies and general imbeciles will still cause trouble, but of course wont be on any Registers anywhere. Im waiting for the Christmas Drone crisis at the next Airport to kick off.
We actually agree on this bit, it's also why that Police wont be knocking on anyones door (apart from the fact they don't have access to a list of those registered) of those who have registered because they are almost certainly not the ones causing an incident.
Quote from: English Turbines on November 09, 2019, 07:30:40 PM
Why didn't the BMFA just tell them to get lost..? Especially when you consider how badly they were treated initially.
Because it would have been an incredibly stupid thing to do, an exercise in shooting themselves in the foot, there is a lot of horsetrading still to do over the registration debacle as well as the upcoming introduction of the EASA regulations in June. Walking away from the table would be a collosally idiotic thing to do.
Here's a useful link on staying legal and the exemptions the associations have negotiated so Far
https://rcc.bmfa.uk/exemptions
Quote from: big a on November 09, 2019, 10:30:42 PM
The BMFA hasn't agreed at all that all model aircraft are drones. They are all small unmanned aircraft though.The BMFAs have pushed to be able to deal with registration for their members as a service to their members, one that many wanted.Indeed if you don't want to register through the BMFA you don't have to, its entirely optional. No idea at all where you get the idea that all "BMFA" flying site locations are getting handed over comes from, simply not the case and has never even been considered. No they haven't been tarred with any brush at all and the BMFA will not be handing over membership listings full stop. Members can if they choose register through the BMFA if they wish, the only data that will be passed to the CAA in those cases is the exact same data that you would give the CAA if you registered directly with the CAA.We actually agree on this bit, it's also why that Police wont be knocking on anyones door (apart from the fact they don't have access to a list of those registered) of those who have registered because they are almost certainly not the ones causing an incident.
Because it would have been an incredibly stupid thing to do, an exercise in shooting themselves in the foot, there is a lot of horsetrading still to do over the registration debacle as well as the upcoming introduction of the EASA regulations in June. Walking away from the table would be a colossally idiotic thing to do.
*********************************************************************************************
I still dont think you are getting it are you..?...The BMFA would have been quite within their rights to not agree with ANY of these proposals at all...For a start, Drones or small UAVs, they ALL now have to be registered, in the same manner using the same system.
Radio Controlled Models have been operated by BMFA members for years and years, responsibly, Insured, on official sites etc, even Flying competency tests...but suddenly they are all "Small UAVs" and need a test a fee and paid licence is applied?
Collecting funds (Tax) on behalf of Members is NOT something the BMFA should be involved in at all....Its the thin end of the wedge..The people who run the BMFA should know better.
Ask yourself this question, if the Government fail to collect the funding they anticipate by getting EVERY BMFA member to register, What do you think will happen to that £9 annual fee..?
:vulture:
Quote from: English Turbines on November 10, 2019, 04:19:02 PM
*********************************************************************************************
I still dont think you are getting it are you..?...The BMFA would have been quite within their rights to not agree with ANY of these proposals at all...For a start, Drones or small UAVs, they ALL now have to be registered, in the same manner using the same system.
Radio Controlled Models have been operated by BMFA members for years and years, responsibly, Insured, on official sites etc, even Flying competency tests...but suddenly they are all "Small UAVs" and need a test a fee and paid licence is applied?
Collecting funds (Tax) on behalf of Members is NOT something the BMFA should be involved in at all....Its the thin end of the wedge..The people who run the BMFA should know better.
Ask yourself this question, if the Government fail to collect the funding they anticipate by getting EVERY BMFA member to register, What do you think will happen to that £9 annual fee..?
:vulture:
I think the CAA system will not fix any issues with safety or people doing illegal things with any SUAV. The problem is that the politicians think it will or at least it will reassure the public it will make things safer.
The politicians made the changes to UK law.
The BMFA don't have ANY rights to disagree with a law. They can lobby politicians and get their member to do likewise but that's about all they can do. As far as I am aware they tried to exempt model aircrafts but failed.
As for collecting the fee, you are quite right BMFA didn't need to assist the gov in collecting the tax. I would even go as far as saying it will actually cost the BMFA to collect the tax (credit card charges, bank transfer charges, not to mention IT system changes). So I can only imagine they did it for maybe 2 reasons. 1 to make it easier for it's members and or 2 to give them a bit more bargaining come July 2020.
Remember the BMFA, FPVUK and others did manage to get the TAX reduced to £9 even though the CAA predictions suggested they 'needed' £16 per registration to run the system at a cost neutral state.
Overall I think it's a stupid system that wont change anything other than cost us law abiding citizens!!!! Especially as the EU system will come in in June 2020 and that is a nasty system!!!!
PS I'm not a member of BMFA. The above is only my opinion.
Quote from: English Turbines on November 10, 2019, 04:19:02 PM
*********************************************************************************************
I still dont think you are getting it are you..?...The BMFA would have been quite within their rights to not agree with ANY of these proposals at all...For a start, Drones or small UAVs, they ALL now have to be registered, in the same manner using the same system.
Radio Controlled Models have been operated by BMFA members for years and years, responsibly, Insured, on official sites etc, even Flying competency tests...but suddenly they are all "Small UAVs" and need a test a fee and paid licence is applied?
Collecting funds (Tax) on behalf of Members is NOT something the BMFA should be involved in at all....Its the thin end of the wedge..The people who run the BMFA should know better.
Ask yourself this question, if the Government fail to collect the funding they anticipate by getting EVERY BMFA member to register, What do you think will happen to that £9 annual fee..?
I understand what you are saying, I just don't agree with you and I gave reasons why too.
June next year the EASA regulations will be implemented, they make specific provision for arrangements for model aircraft flying to be arranged on a National level (with the exception of registration which is the only thing definitely mandated) so it is important to have a constructive workable relationship with the CAA. Walking away from the table and having nothing to do with DMARES would pretty much be the definition of cutting your nose of to spite your face.
Also they are not getting every BMFA member to register, many don't have to, the rest it is a matter for the individual to opt in if they want.
Without any fanfare (or even notification through their usual channels) the CAA have now published CAP1804, their response to CAP1775 (the consultation on the charging proposal for the 'Drone Registration and Education System - DRES)'. You can read the response here: https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP1804_DRES_consultation_%20response.pdf
Specifically states that the current regulations are only a stop gap until July 2020. Also a climb down on charges and reg numbers going forward
Does anyone actually know what the hell is going on?
Regulations, stop gaps, climb downs, exemptions - it's nothing short of a complete farce at this point.
Quote from: BigT on November 11, 2019, 03:58:01 PM
Without any fanfare (or even notification through their usual channels) the CAA have now published CAP1804, their response to CAP1775 (the consultation on the charging proposal for the 'Drone Registration and Education System - DRES)'.
Yep, what happened to the usual channels? It all seems a bit chaotic and ill thought out, but we kind of realised that some time ago.
OK so this may be a long shot but with parliament (illegally) suspended and then suspended for general election did the drone bill actually get passed and receive Royal Accent?
If not then there would be no legal reason to register???
Is this the bill? https://services.parliament.uk/bills/2017-19/droneregulationno2.html (https://services.parliament.uk/bills/2017-19/droneregulationno2.html)
It does say No2 (2017-2019)?
Looks like the first version https://services.parliament.uk/Bills/2017-19/droneregulation.html (https://services.parliament.uk/Bills/2017-19/droneregulation.html)
didn't progress through parliament either!!!
Anyone know any difference?
As per other forum, this is the Bill:
https://services.parliament.uk/Bills/2019-20/airtrafficmanagementandunmannedaircraft.html
It has not progress through the house of lord and is therefore not law.
Hence it will not be illegal to fly without being registered on 30th Nov.
Quote from: urbanfpv on November 13, 2019, 08:07:36 PM
As per other forum, this is the Bill:
https://services.parliament.uk/Bills/2019-20/airtrafficmanagementandunmannedaircraft.html
It has not progress through the house of lord and is therefore not law.
Hence it will not be illegal to fly without being registered on 30th Nov.
It is law. Was ANO (amendment) 2018. Things like fixed penalties havent been passed but that just .means a potential day in court and potentially bigger fines if you are unlucky.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Actually, it is the police ability to enforce it which has not been passed as law. If you're not registered, there's nothing they can currently do.
Quote from: urbanfpv on November 13, 2019, 10:42:24 PM
Actually, it is the police ability to enforce it which has not been passed as law. If you're not registered, there's nothing they can currently do.
I disagree with you.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Well that's that settled then :+
Not to mention you don't need to register until January if you're a member of the association.
Quote from: big a on November 13, 2019, 11:17:18 PM
I disagree with you.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
:yarn: Of course you do.
So lets be specific shall we. From the Bill:
Schedule 8:
- Power of constable to require an unmanned aircraft to be grounded - They don't have the power
- Power of constable to stop and search persons or vehicles - They don't have the power
- Power to enter and search premises under warrant - They don't have the power
etc... until the end of schedule 8
Same with powers relating to schedule 9 "REGISTRATIONAS SUA OPERATOR AND COMPETENCY OF REMOTEPILOT"
and Schedule 10: FIXED PENALTIES FOR CERTAIN OFFENCES RELATING TO UNMANNED AIRCRAFT
[/list]
Having read through this bill, the powers they want to grant appear to be grossly disproportionate and are very likely to be abused by the police force. It should be noted the use of the word "constable" in relation of the powers. PCSOs are not constables or though they like to con the public into thinking they have powers they don't have.
Air Navigation Order Articles 94D and E exist now, they are current and relate to registration and competency.
Breach of the majority of the provisions ANO are an offence for which the offender is currently liable to a fine of up to £2,500 in the Magistrates' Court. However, breach of the requirement not to endanger a person or property is treated differently and can be dealt with at the Magistrates' or Crown Courts. For this offence, conviction at the Magistrates' Court will result in a fine, whereas in the Crown Court the punishment is higher, potentially a fine or imprisonment not exceeding two years or both.
It is incorrect, misleading and very irresponsible to suggest that there is no legal requirement to register that can be enforced, any breach of an ANO article can currently be prosecuted.
You are correct that thr Drone Bill is ridiculous and over the top though.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Quote from: big a on November 14, 2019, 10:32:13 AM
Air Navigation Order Articles 94D and E exist now, they are current and relate to registration and competency.
Breach of the majority of the provisions ANO are an offence for which the offender is currently liable to a fine of up to £2,500 in the Magistrates' Court. However, breach of the requirement not to endanger a person or property is treated differently and can be dealt with at the Magistrates' or Crown Courts. For this offence, conviction at the Magistrates' Court will result in a fine, whereas in the Crown Court the punishment is higher, potentially a fine or imprisonment not exceeding two years or both.
It is incorrect, misleading and very irresponsible to suggest that there is no legal requirement to register that can be enforced, any breach of an ANO article can currently be prosecuted.
You are correct that thr Drone Bill is ridiculous and over the top though.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
You've completely mis-interpreted what I have said. I have said the police have no powers to enforce the drone bill. It is quite clear. Please read the bill here: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2019-2020/0017/20017.pdf, before commenting further. It has not reached royal assent therefore it is not law. Note this is the enforcement powers bill - not the drone bill. They are two (or more) seperate bills.
Dry interesting, however, the DMARES is a legal requirement, it will be a personal choice whether to comply or not, just like RFL, Compulsory Vehicle Insurance and paying the council tax and Child Support. The current backlash from the modelling community it's a storm in a tea cup compared to what will happen in July 2020. Last night I attended a club AGM, 34 members turned up, average age 60, 80% had no proper idea of Exemption Certs, no idea if they need to put reg numbers on planes they keep in storage, if grandkids needed to register, some even assumed that the BMFA would just do everything without being told to etc etc.
PLUS 100% new nothing about CAP 1789. http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP1789%20EU%20UAS%20Regulations-Guidance.pdf (http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP1789%20EU%20UAS%20Regulations-Guidance.pdf)
BigT, so how many of these do you think will stay in the hobby once the reality hits them? Then how many after they are hit by the reality of July 2020? Lastly, of the remaining few how many will stay once they see what's coming in 2022? Plus, to these disincentives one must add the undoubted increases in registration fees(model tax) that will add to the reduction in modelers. IMO it will be a gradual decline followed by a collapse as the numbers fall below the critical number required to sustain the hobby, both in clubs and retail.
We have to remember we dont know what the reality of June next year is Artucle 16 of the EASA regs effectively means with the exception of registration it is possible, and i would syggest even probably that model flying in clubs is barely effected.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
Quote from: ORCA on November 15, 2019, 09:52:33 AM
BigT, so how many of these do you think will stay in the hobby once the reality hits them? Then how many after they are hit by the reality of July 2020? Lastly, of the remaining few how many will stay once they see what's coming in 2022? Plus, to these disincentives one must add the undoubted increases in registration fees(model tax) that will add to the reduction in modelers. IMO it will be a gradual decline followed by a collapse as the numbers fall below the critical number required to sustain the hobby, both in clubs and retail.
I have a real feeling that you are correct. If you look at the demographics of the hobby its dying already, literally. At our AGM on Thursday we had 34 out 40 members present. The youngest was 55 the oldest 75 and this is a club that welcomes all and sundry from autogyros and hovercraft and over 7kg fixed wing, with a private site with hut and charging points etc. As I explained the intricacy of the registration, exemption certificates, July 2020, etc I was met with puzzled looks. In 3 years I will be 70, I am still trying new things and will try not to give up but what do we do if club sites have to be certified by the CAA to determine what can be flown and by whom? Perhaps model flying will continue as we know it. I fly a bit in Germany and France and I can tell you its so different over there. All the clubs we fly at have hard and grass runways, get subbed by the local councils, brick club houses, flush toilets, electricity. Membership is cheaper than the UK. Our small club here is £178 p a including BMFA, thats abiut average in the Home Counties. About double the average in Germany and France.
PS
following the total confusion with exemptions and delayed registration through the BMFA etc and because I am a BMFA examiner and fly at public displays I elected to not delay, registered and took the really silly on line test. Job done.
The CAA's recently published plan for their 'final solution' to recreational drone flying. (download the .pdf)
https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/modalapplication.aspx?catid=1&pagetype=65&appid=11&mode=detail&id=9307
Quote from: ORCA on December 04, 2019, 08:21:39 PM
The CAA's recently published plan for their 'final solution' to recreational drone flying. (download the .pdf)
https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/modalapplication.aspx?catid=1&pagetype=65&appid=11&mode=detail&id=9307
Cheers for posting. I found that clear as mud......
(https://zokstersomething.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/4118796_o.gif)
Don't worry, the BMFA are adamant that they will be given an exemption to operate outside the EASA legislation because they have a gentleman's agreement that they will get a general exemption for members in June 2020. Their representative has posted elsewhere that is why the current exemptions expire in June 2020. So I take that to mean that regardless of model type approval and Subcategories of operation it will be Carry on Flying!
This chap seems to have more of a realistic view https://youtu.be/Lf9X1nXjq-U
Quote from: BigT on December 14, 2019, 11:33:13 AM
Don't worry, the BMFA are adamant that they will be given an exemption to operate outside the EASA legislation because they have a gentleman's agreement that they will get a general exemption for members in June 2020. Their representative has posted elsewhere that is why the current exemptions expire in June 2020. So I take that to mean that regardless of model type approval and Subcategories of operation it will be Carry on Flying!
This chap seems to have more of a realistic view https://youtu.be/Lf9X1nXjq-U
Thats a gross misrepresentation of what was said.
EASA have made specific provision for model aircraft flying that takes place under the umbrella of a national association.
They have said
QuoteGENERAL
Unless differently provided by national regulation, a model aircraft club and association may obtain from the national competent authority an authorisation that is valid for all their members to operate UA according to conditions and limitations tailored for the club or association.
The model aircraft club and association will submit to the competent authority the procedures that all members are required to follow. When the competent authority is satisfied with the procedures, organisational structure and management system of the model aircraft club and association, it may provide an authorisation that defines different limitations and conditions from those in the UAS Regulation. The authorisation will be limited to the operations conducted within the authorised club or association and within the territory of the Member State of the authorised competent authority. The authorisation cannot exempt members of the club or association from registering themselves according to Article 14 of the UAS Regulation; however, it may allow a model club or association to register their members on their behalf.
The authorisation may also include operations by persons who temporarily join in with the activities of the club or association (e.g. for leisure during holidays or for a contest), as long as the procedures provided by the club or association define conditions acceptable to the competent authority.
I added to that by saying
QuoteEssentially with the exception of registration everything else is to be negotiated. The current exemptions give a very big clue as to what the CAA consider acceptable.
and
QuoteThe quote is direct from EASA nothing suggesting the BMFA having more power than EASA, we were very lucky that the BMFA CEO managed to have enough influence to ensure there was specific provision in the EASA propsed regs to allow a specific provision for model flying to be arranged with the CAA rather than have model flying stuck in the Open categories.
Negotiating that provision which will be happening over the next 6 months is actually complying with EASA.
Mr Symons lets just agree that you have an alternative agenda and biased opinion of European law and the power that the BMFA may have over the DfT, CAA, EU and EASA and take a delight in trying to undermine anyone who has a different point of view, expresses any criticism of the BMFA or may have different intel. But you are an employee of the BMFA so why would you bite the hand that feeds you.
Please consider this: you are not the only person on the planet that has contacts or family members placed in positions of security or power within governing and regulating bodies in this country and others and privy to information not generally available to the general public. If you would take another look at the original video that was tagged it is mainly about the OPEN category of UAV operation for financial gain and the ending of the PfCO. As other have already commented there are very sound reasons why it may be better to be regulated in that way.
" The authorisation will be limited to the operations conducted within the authorised club or association and within the territory of the Member State of the authorised competent authority.
Quote from: BigT on December 16, 2019, 03:05:16 PM
Mr Symons lets just agree that you have an alternative agenda and biased opinion of European law and the power that the BMFA may have over the DfT, CAA, EU and EASA and take a delight in trying to undermine anyone who has a different point of view, expresses any criticism of the BMFA or may have different intel. But you are an employee of the BMFA so why would you bite the hand that feeds you.
Please consider this: you are not the only person on the planet that has contacts or family members placed in positions of security or power within governing and regulating bodies in this country and others and privy to information not generally available to the general public. If you would take another look at the original video that was tagged it is mainly about the OPEN category of UAV operation for financial gain and the ending of the PfCO. As other have already commented there are very sound reasons why it may be better to be regulated in that way.
" The authorisation will be limited to the operations conducted within the authorised club or association and within the territory of the Member State of the authorised competent authority.
It's not my opinion of European Law. Its EASA's opinion, it was a direct quote from EASA I produced above. I know the video was about Open category UAV operation for commercial gain. Which it's why its important to inform members that it's contents is highly unlikely to relate to non-commercial UAV operation under the umbrella of National associations.
Not sure why you object to your opinions being challenged or how providing further information is undermining anyone.
Well I for one absolutely refuse to pay the 'model flying tax' or apply for a pilot exemption on my BMFA achievement rating. I never did CL(totally exempt) when a young(er) modeller so I'm going to try it in 2020. Then comes June/July it will be interesting to see what 'shakes' out of any discussions and maybe get a handle on what will be the situation in June/July 2022 re electronic conspicuity etc. Another indicator will be the increase(its never going down) in the 'model flying tax'. I wish I was younger and could join in with the sub 70kg foot launched motorised para gliders I often see on the beach near me.(NO pilot or air craft regs what so ever and no 'TAX'. Only than it must be sub 70kg and foot launched)
It doesn't have to be foot launched.
[/youtube]
http://www.peabee.co.uk.flylight.co.uk/peabee-2/ (http://www.peabee.co.uk.flylight.co.uk/peabee-2/)
Quote from: ORCA on December 16, 2019, 10:03:34 PM
Well I for one absolutely refuse to pay the 'model flying tax' or apply for a pilot exemption on my BMFA achievement rating. I never did CL(totally exempt) when a young(er) modeller so I'm going to try it in 2020. Then comes June/July it will be interesting to see what 'shakes' out of any discussions and maybe get a handle on what will be the situation in June/July 2022 re electronic conspicuity etc. Another indicator will be the increase(its never going down) in the 'model flying tax'. I wish I was younger and could join in with the sub 70kg foot launched motorised para gliders I often see on the beach near me.(NO pilot or air craft regs what so ever and no 'TAX'. Only than it must be sub 70kg and foot launched)
You may find this video interesting as it a simple breakdown of the legislation. Especially interesting at 3:57 when he explains more about the subcategory A3. Also, in the light of recent postings on other forums re the Lidl and Aldi et al "drones", and the failure of retailers to advise buyers of the Current legislation it has further explanations of the type approval rating that will need to be displayed on the Retail packaging of UAS and SUAV. At least someone's trying to inform us of the practical implications.
Quote from: BigT on December 23, 2019, 07:07:00 PM
You may find this video interesting as it a simple breakdown of the legislation. Especially interesting at 3:57 when he explains more about the subcategory A3. Also, in the light of recent postings on other forums re the Lidl and Aldi "drones", it has further explanations of the type approval rating that will need to be displayed on the Retail packaging of UAS and SUAV. At least someone's trying to inform us of the practical implications.
I don't think the link is working!
U.S. Department of Transportation Issues Proposed Rule on Remote ID for Drones https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=24534&fbclid=IwAR1lXISIn42oQiNWtzX8XuQrAtCT6YnvrDE4z5GnOAcK5pDJ2uejkNOTicQ (https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=24534&fbclid=IwAR1lXISIn42oQiNWtzX8XuQrAtCT6YnvrDE4z5GnOAcK5pDJ2uejkNOTicQ)
Quote from: ORCA on December 27, 2019, 11:29:32 AM
U.S. Department of Transportation Issues Proposed Rule on Remote ID for Drones https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=24534&fbclid=IwAR1lXISIn42oQiNWtzX8XuQrAtCT6YnvrDE4z5GnOAcK5pDJ2uejkNOTicQ (https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=24534&fbclid=IwAR1lXISIn42oQiNWtzX8XuQrAtCT6YnvrDE4z5GnOAcK5pDJ2uejkNOTicQ)
That is also part of the EASA regulations but is not implemented until 2025 I think?
I'm not registering. I couldn't care less any more. Literally been flying safely for years with no issue - I'll risk getting a fine.
All of this regulation is absolutely ridiculous. It's out of proportion, impossible to make head nor tail of and I refuse to have any part of it.
I can pay a £1,000 fine... IF I get caught. So be it. At that point I'll simply pay up and quit the hobby entirely because that will be the end of the road.
I am tired of worrying about this stuff now, it feels like it's been the subject of FPVHub for the last 5 years and I've fallen into the trap of letting it already ruin my fun.
Have fun folks.