April is Drone Aware month

FPVSteve · April 06, 2016, 09:41:06 PM

Are you sure Mark, that seems to be at odds with what BigT says in his post...

Cockney Boy · April 06, 2016, 09:56:54 PM

Once an industry becomes a certain size, and a benefit to an economy, it's virtually impossible to ban.

mark1975 · April 07, 2016, 12:04:14 AM

Certain Steve. ....certain.

mark1975 · April 07, 2016, 12:09:06 AM

Make sure your tune in ch4 this Sunday 8pm fingers crossed Tony Robinson tours uk with drones. .....should give a positive spin.

FPVSteve · April 07, 2016, 12:21:59 AM

Quote from: mark1975 on April 07, 2016, 12:04:14 AM
Certain Steve. ....certain.

You do surprise me.

Nice work :)

BigT · April 07, 2016, 09:53:51 AM

Quote from: mark1975 on April 06, 2016, 09:04:10 PM
like I've mentioned previously , there will never be a outright right fpv ban .............it is impossible to impose such laws, the consensus I got from my chat with the caa when I actually rang them twice now and I'm ringing them again next week regarding some questions my members have towardsme to ask they are optimistic in that a happy medium can be reached with regards to (drones) entering occupied airspace or flying / entering a nfz the latest geo fencing from dji is helping the cause . Restrictions and (*in my lifetime fpv bans will, never happen) copy and paste that bit if you like in fact I'll go on record and say I'm 1000percent certain it won't. ...I won't divulge any further but the future is looking greater by the year you just have to look around the next corner .

The CAA are on record at the meetings stating that they are happy that the current legislation (with a few tweaks) that is in place to govern UAV and UASV operation is fit for purpose. However it's not just the CAA that have a finger in this pie. Obviously BALPA has its own agenda and DfT have theirs. Interestingly both CAA and DfT have now put officials in post to directly deal with the "drone" issue. Google these people and check their background and affiliations.

General chat around the clubs suggests to me that the average club flier with his electric foam wot4 would happily throw FPV and drones to the metaphorical lions if it meant preserving their Sunday flying. In a way this is self policing, which is good, but means grassing up a club mate for having illegal kit.

Earlier points made about the lack of number of quads flying was made by Manny at the seminar. Paraphrasing here, "despite the retailers reports of many thousands being sold for Christmas, where are they all? We should be knee deep in them by now if the Daily Mails figures where correct. So where are they all?"

Actually they are relatively simple to operate for a complete beginner. 2 examples, one phantom copy turned up last weekend fresh in from BangGood and was flown straight away no problem. But what will he do with it next? The fact is basic quad flying up and down the patch is boring. Add the bother of repairing it when it's broken and it will end up in a wardrobe or bin. Second example was a very experienced FW pilot with a lot of spare cash bought a Phantom 3 pro last year to "take on holiday to Spain" which he did, getting it through security etc at Heathrow by taking a print out of the rules from the CAA web site. He took 30 mins of video in 2 weeks. It's been in its box ever since. Reasons: feels a dick when he's flying it in public, worried about getting hassle from the public, restricted in the places he can legally fly it that are interesting.

Just a couple of examples that I suspect are common.

FPVSteve · April 07, 2016, 10:31:57 AM

Just because he "feels like a dick in public, worried about getting hassle etc" doesn't make it illegal to operate.

Would it be fair to ask why the BMFA isn't doing anything to help people like him, having invested in expensive kit, by attempting to improve the public perception of drones? Everything I've seen so far is negative and pitched to the operator on why they shouldn't fly anywhere, why they're a danger to life and limb etc.

Is it too much of an ask for the BMFA to assist with off-field flying in a safe manner? We're not talking petrol-powered fixed wings here flying in the high street, but a Phantom flying near a castle to get some picturesque shots + video seems like a legitimate and enjoyable pastime to me. Is it possible for them to get behind this type of thing by publicising the good that these things can do while operated safely? Telling someone they can't do something "just because" is not the way forward. Educating them how to do it safely seems like a better approach (to me).

I think it's time to stop tarring everything with a criminal brush just because they don't fly at a BMFA field - technology is moving on fast. "Grassing" on a mate will have the net result of yet another FPVer leaving a club and flying "off-piste". Is that really what the BMFA wants? Further fragmentation?

I think there should be less legislation and far more education + positive encouragement.

Think about it.

Loopdreams · April 07, 2016, 10:46:11 AM

I don't think it's productive to pay much attention to the more vociferous old giffers at clubs because they don't represent the views of most. I've bumped into the several blokes from the club where I used to fly and not one of them has done anything except show genuine interest. That's because real enthusiasts have no truck with stifling new things that come along. The same old twats doing the moaning probably moaned about helicopters when they became popular, or ARTFs or electric or fixed wing 3D flying or basically anything that was different to what they were into.

wgt40w · April 07, 2016, 11:14:20 AM

I wonder why they choose the month of April to be Drone Aware Month ?

Could it be anything to do with April 1st being April Fools' Day ???

:P

Ratty · April 07, 2016, 11:15:31 AM

Agreed ^^^ (with Loop)

We have a few of those at my club. Moan about anything and everything different to what they fly.
The rest know who they are though, and it is all taken with a handful of salt and generally ignored.

The majority are interested, with quite a few even owning multis now, and some venturing into FPV.

electrotor · April 07, 2016, 11:16:22 AM

My thoughts when I started this thread were to find out what was actually happening to mark this out as a month different to any other. I also wanted to bring this to the attention of forum readers so that they could also be aware, but aware of what was being said or done concerning our oft bad press. Thus far I am not aware of the CAA or BMFA doing anything special. This is disappointing to say the least.
Droneaware news hasn't been updated since 31 March.
The BMFA and CAA websites appear to be equally uncluttered by updated awareness of drones.

BigT · April 08, 2016, 02:28:48 PM

Quote from: Steve W on April 07, 2016, 10:31:57 AM
Just because he "feels like a dick in public, worried about getting hassle etc" doesn't make it illegal to operate.

Would it be fair to ask why the BMFA isn't doing anything to help people like him, having invested in expensive kit, by attempting to improve the public perception of drones? Everything I've seen so far is negative and pitched to the operator on why they shouldn't fly anywhere, why they're a danger to life and limb etc.

Is it too much of an ask for the BMFA to assist with off-field flying in a safe manner? We're not talking petrol-powered fixed wings here flying in the high street, but a Phantom flying near a castle to get some picturesque shots + video seems like a legitimate and enjoyable pastime to me. Is it possible for them to get behind this type of thing by publicising the good that these things can do while operated safely? Telling someone they can't do something "just because" is not the way forward. Educating them how to do it safely seems like a better approach (to me).

I think it's time to stop tarring everything with a criminal brush just because they don't fly at a BMFA field - technology is moving on fast. "Grassing" on a mate will have the net result of yet another FPVer leaving a club and flying "off-piste". Is that really what the BMFA wants? Further fragmentation?

I think there should be less legislation and far more education + positive encouragement.

Think about it.

How can an organisation that represents the modelling community to government endorse activities that break the common law of the land?

The point I was making regarding the phantom owner was this is what has probably happened to the majority of so called drones.

The bmfa have promoted multicopters into the club scene by promulgating the multicopter tests. Whatever your opinion of the test is.

FPVSteve · April 08, 2016, 03:25:04 PM

Flying a Phantom near a castle is not against the common law of the land Big T - you know it, I know it.

So my question still stands - why don't the BMFA do more to convince the public that drones are not inherently dangerous and can be used for good purposes? Surely that is more beneficial to the hobby and its participants than them being falsely vilified in public just because it's easy to follow the Daily Mail train of thought that all drones + aircraft are deadly and should be confined to a flying field on a Sunday morning.

Come on, I'm calling you out. Answer me why the BMFA isn't more positive in its stance towards things that ALREADY EXIST in the hobby that may not actually involve flying at a BMFA field but are still perfectly legal, safe and enjoyable and, importantly, NOT GOING TO GO AWAY. You guys do have "Country Members" (I used to be one myself). Is it right that your fully paid-up members should be afraid to fly their aircraft perfectly legally and while insured? What are you guys doing to help them and their image in the public eye?

As far as I can see you are doing nothing except protect the BMFAs interests in making everyone fly at a club field at the expense of everyone else who choses not to fly like that.

It's ridiculous, out-dated and you are not giving me any answers (presumably because you didn't even read my bloody question properly).

The "multicopter test" is meaningless to anyone who doesn't fly at a BMFA field and does nothing to assure the public that Joe Phantom may not be the monster he is made out to be in the media.

The BMFA is supposed to stand for all modellers, not just ones that pay subs to fly at a field. If you guys can't do that, step aside and leave it to FPVUK or RCHA but do not try to criminalise us just because we don't subscribe to your outdated theory that all flying should be done on a Sunday morning.

electrotor · April 08, 2016, 07:00:37 PM

Two of the threads above have referred to common law. This post is simply a reminder that common law in Scotland is not the same as common law in England. There are similarities and diffrrences and you cannot necessarily apply one in the other country. For example Scots Law does not recognise common law spouses whereas English Law does.

Cockney Boy · April 08, 2016, 07:27:07 PM

If i every turned up to do a "Multicopter test" WTF is a multicoter anyway. i'd want to make sure that the person taking the exam was considerably more experienced than me, and also holds a commerical ticket.