On Line Quiz To Test Your Knowledge on the RC Regulations In The UK inc FPV

[big a]

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

[big a]

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

[FPVSteve]

Well - this is why I am confused on the issue:

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.

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.

What 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?

[FPVSteve]

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?

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.

Hmm well I'm still not convinced that glasses don't aid sight. They certainly help me when flying LoS at distance...

[BigT]

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.

[FPVSteve]

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.

[Ynot6]

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".

[big a]

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

[electricmick]

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

[FPVSteve]

They're protecting the hobby as long as you're part of the BMFA. Fixed that for you.

[big a]

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

[FPVSteve]

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.

[big a]

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

[Bertie]

Didn't bother with it, 99% of the people I`ve met who are part of the BMFA were condescending arsehats!

[krikey]

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.