Legislation guide - help needed

[BigT]

The document CAP1789 is very badly worded(must have failed their GCSE English). Clarification and possibly some concessions will be required to turn this gibberish into a working document/guide. Always assuming they don't just want to eliminate us by fiendishly difficult rules and regulations as opposed to just banning us.

As a person who obtained an A level in Basic English Law, albeit many years ago, I find 90% plus documents issued by the state and quangos open to interpretation. This is why test cases are brought, and usually escalated to higher courts, to obtain clarification.  It still amazes me that there are quite a number of RC pilots who maintain that "it wont affect me" or "it wont happen" or "I dont fly a drone". They used to be called "flat earth believers" before Columbus sailed the seas of blue. LOL

[BigT]

Go to feel for the kids of tomorrow.. Crazy world we live in.

Love your spreadsheet BTW. If you would allow it I would like to post it on my club web site when its finished?

[FPVSteve]

As a person who obtained an A level in Basic English Law, albeit many years ago, I find 90% plus documents issued by the state and quangos open to interpretation. This is why test cases are brought, and usually escalated to higher courts, to obtain clarification.  It still amazes me that there are quite a number of RC pilots who maintain that "it wont affect me" or "it wont happen" or "I dont fly a drone". They used to be called "flat earth believers" before Columbus sailed the seas of blue. LOL

That's as maybe but

a) I remember when you could participate in the hobby without having to read a rulebook
b) I remember when people first started going commercial, and shafted hobbyists by insisting flying was dangerous if you collected money thus paving the way for the BNUC-S
c) Said commercial operators were so determined to protect their "investment" (read: an Inspire) that they fought tooth and nail to make it even more difficult for hobbyists to fly (i.e. supported the NQEs who pushed for rules because it had become THEIR business), and painted themselves as the lord and saviours in everything related to aerial operations.

I think what people need to remember is this: illegal != dangerous.

I think what you'll find is that most hobbyists who claim it won't apply to them are basically the ones who never fly dangerously, have never had an accident, know their stuff and understand just how utterly ridiculous the whole sham of registration is.

And it won't apply to them - because they'll either give up the hobby or take it back to its roots - underground. Before Joe Public ruined it with their grand business plans.

I find it slightly annoying that one the one hand, BigT you're part of the hobby and have flown well beyond LoS many times in the past despite your law "a-level" which implies you should have known better, but then claim you won't fly again having been tapped up by the police for something you didn't even do.

Then before you know it, you're involved in testing the very thing that hobbyists are totally against - the registration system.

Pick a side man. Would be it be so hard for you to say "you know what, these guys are doing nothing wrong - I refuse to endorse or assist you with your agenda".

*something something principles*

[BigT]

I agree that the back in the day when FPV was a new and exciting adventure there where many times when the envelope of legality was pushed by many. Either in ignorance or stupidity. But for me that is in the past. Its become far to fresh in the public's mind, but the biggest threat would be from club members dobbing another member in. My 1 hour uncomfortable brush with the law 2 years ago put me wise to that, so no, I wont fly outside LOS again.  So I agree that it will go underground and by and large will stay within LOS where a club is involved. 

I attended the registration testing, as did several others from my clubs, to gain first hand knowledge of the system and try to input some common sense.  Looking at the changes made I think we did make a difference. However, as its now on the statute books it will happen.  Its up to the individual to examine their conscious and decide if they are going to comply or not. Its always been that way, whether its paying the old Poll Tax, registering to vote, having no car insurance or a valid EA rod license.  Sorry Steve I dont see it as picking sides and for the record I think the registration system is flawed and wrong and I am much more concerned by the EASA legislation due in 2020. 

[FPVSteve]

Then why the "flat earther" comment? The fact is the regulations won't affect the majority of modellers whether they're in a club or not because there simply aren't enough police to go around.

What will happen is though an unlucky few will be pinned to a wall and flogged, based on misleading arguments, flawed regulation and an absolute lack of respect for the umpteen years of safe operation they've previously demonstrated.

It's pretty sick to be honest - changes mean nothing, the system doesn't need to exist in the first place and it's only coming into place because of the above reasons. It's nothing to do with safety, and everything to do with someone, somewhere making bank.

You ridiculing people is a bit below the belt considering you are, and have historically been one of the people who the new regulations are apparently designed to fight against in the name of safety. I'd bet good money that when you flew you operated safely albeit illegally. That's because the law is flawed.

Laws with flaws get ignored - that's exactly what this regulation and registration system is going to be up against. Merely entertaining its existence means you accept it.

I personally do not like having my rights taken away from me, especially when it's for no good, demonstrable reason.

[BigT]

Steve I have obviously offended you, for which I sincerely apologise. The flat earth comment was as a result of many one to one conversations I have had where the comments has been made that as they don't fly a "drone" it won't involve them. And one specific person on another forum who refuses to accept that there is any forthcoming legislation and it's all false news and scaremongering. Not aimed at you btw.
I fly at public displays and take part in FIA competitions, if I want to continue to do so  I will have to register. I have already registered in France so I can fly with the team. Also there is the issue of insurance validity, which is a requirement for said events.
Luckily, individuals can do as their conscience dictates. As the saying goes, we live in interesting times. I am told that In countries where registration has been imposed the numbers of registrations has fallen well below expectation.
Lastly, I agree that we didn't need any further legislation, neither did the CAA, it was the DfT that imposed the act on the CAA.

[FPVSteve]

You didn't offend me I just wanted to bring it up because as much stick as we get as FPVers, there's not one person on here who flies dangerously that I know of. It's been that way since I've been a member. I like to think that members here have each others back when it comes to the regulations but sometimes I wonder who is on who's side.

[BigT]

https://bmfa.org/News/News-Page/ArticleID/2608/An-update-on-the-UK-regulations-for-model-flyers

[FPVSteve]

Wow - CAA have shown their true colours for sure.

[Shikra]

Of course - more than welcome!

Love your spreadsheet BTW. If you would allow it I would like to post it on my club web site when its finished?

[BigT]

News from the BMFA. Basically the instruction is DONT REGISTER UNTIL WE TELL YOU TO.
https://bmfa.org/News/News-Page/ArticleID/2610/An-update-on-the-UK-regulations-for-model-flyers-a-bit-of-good-news-at-last

[Shikra]

Yeah we had this from our club sec yesterday too. First positive sounding news for a long time. Interesting change of approach.