Model Aircraft Pilots Angry Over Drone Laws (bbc.com) 138
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the BBC: People who fly model aircraft are angry that proposed drone rules could damage their much-loved hobby. They argue they should not be classed as drone pilots. The new laws are intended to make airspace safer amid increasing drone use. The British Model Flying Association (BMFA) met the Aviation Minister Baroness Vere this week to discuss its concerns. The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) is currently consulting on proposals for a drone registration scheme that is due to become law in November. It has received 6,000 responses from BMFA members. David Phipps, chief executive of BMFA, said the proposed rules, which would see all pilots of unmanned aerial vehicles required to register, pay for a license and take competency tests every three years are "disproportionate" for model-aircraft flyers.
"We have established an excellent safety record that surpasses commercial aviation over a century of flying. European laws grant special recognition to model flying, saying it should be treated differently but the UK has not done this." He acknowledged that while "some" would regard the proposed registration fee of 16.50 pounds as "not a lot of money", it still represented "a barrier to entry" especially for young people getting involved in the hobby. He added that plans for a safety test "which will be answering a few questions on the CAA's website" were far less rigorous than his organization's own safety tests. He worried that many of his members would simply ignore the new rules and "go under the radar." "It is becoming more and more obvious that we as aero modelers are being targeted because of the commercial value of the airspace that we occupy," said Cliff Evans, a model aircraft hobbyist who's unhappy with the new proposals. "I and all other modelers that I know find this offensive and unnecessary."
"We have established an excellent safety record that surpasses commercial aviation over a century of flying. European laws grant special recognition to model flying, saying it should be treated differently but the UK has not done this." He acknowledged that while "some" would regard the proposed registration fee of 16.50 pounds as "not a lot of money", it still represented "a barrier to entry" especially for young people getting involved in the hobby. He added that plans for a safety test "which will be answering a few questions on the CAA's website" were far less rigorous than his organization's own safety tests. He worried that many of his members would simply ignore the new rules and "go under the radar." "It is becoming more and more obvious that we as aero modelers are being targeted because of the commercial value of the airspace that we occupy," said Cliff Evans, a model aircraft hobbyist who's unhappy with the new proposals. "I and all other modelers that I know find this offensive and unnecessary."
Re: (Score:2)
is it true youre not allowed to own knives so meat comes pre-cut from the store?
No.
Suck it up (Score:5, Insightful)
Your "right to fly" turned out to be a privilege, not a right.
Join the club of radio enthusiasts and dozens of other things that got regulated when they went mainstream and available to every idiot with enough money to do it.
Re: (Score:2)
Your "right to fly" turned out to be a privilege, not a right.
Join the club of radio enthusiasts and dozens of other things that got regulated when they went mainstream and available to every idiot with enough money to do it.
These are British, more specifically British anoraks. If they ever stop complaining it usually means it's time to bury them.
The UK Govt is usually pretty good about these things, there will be a framework to get a model pilots license with minimal effort... Eventually, whilst the UK govt usually works, it works at the speed of government.
Re: Law enfiorcement as a revenue stream (Score:5, Insightful)
While I agree with you, be very careful of what you wish for.
All my life I've heard " we need a non-politician or a businessman as president."
Well, unfortunately sometimes wishes come true.
Re: Law enfiorcement as a revenue stream (Score:5, Interesting)
Aside form all of the outrage about him, things are going pretty good for the most part. I think people need to realize that who is head of state of their nation matters less in their daily lives than who is mayor of their city.
In blame the news cycle for most of it. Everything has to be a breaking emergency. Everything is shocking. And everything is forgotten 5 minutes later. Don Lemon once asked an FAA expert if MH370 had flown in to a black hole. How anyone takes anything on TV serious is beyond me. Turn it off, go for a walk and perhaps go yell at city hall because the potholes aren't being fixed. The world is doing alright. Its just in absence of real strife we begin to invent it.
I know that isn't true for everyone, there is still war and famine etc in the world. But nobody suffering from those is on /.
Also personality vs policy (Score:4, Insightful)
> Aside form all of the outrage about him [Trump], things are going pretty good for the most part. I think people need to realize that who is head of state of their nation matters less in their daily lives than who is mayor of their city.
Also, there is a big difference between personality and policy.
While Trump may be a self-important jackass and I don't like his *personality* at all, the *policies* he has put into place are objectively working quite well, and are much more mainstream than his speeches at political rallies.
Economically, there has always been the struggle between keeping inflation down while also keeping unemployment down - actions that improve one tend to make the other worse. Over the last few years unemployment has been near record lows:
https://www.macrotrends.net/13... [macrotrends.net]
With inflation also very low:
https://www.macrotrends.net/24... [macrotrends.net]
Real GDP grew 2.5 percent in 2017, 3.0 percent in 2018, and in the first quarter of 2019 grew at an annualized rate of 3.2 percent. That's solid.
So overall the economy is great under the policies Trump has signed - regardless of Trump being a jerk or not.
Re: (Score:2)
The U6 rate includes people who are employeed part time and would prefer full time.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/se... [stlouisfed.org]
In *general*, it more or less tracks the headline unemployment rate - they go up and down together, so they are mostly interchangeable when you're looking at change over time.
HOWEVER the Affordable Care Act says employers have to pay an extra $500/month for each employee who works 30 hours or more, so of course many employers started trying to keep their workers under 30 hours. A lot of people
Your own opinions, not your facts (Score:2)
If you want to be an Obama fan, that's cool.
Factually, during the 8 years of the Obama administration economic growth averaged 1.39%, well below the long-term average. The current growth rate is more than double the Obama years.
Top 2 stories on CNN "The US economy is about to (Score:2)
Well according to the top two stories on CNN right now, Trump just reached a deal to get what we wanted from Mexico lieu of more tariffs, and the second headline on CNN is:
The US economy is about to break a record. These 11 charts show why
https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/07... [cnn.com]
https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/07... [cnn.com]
That's the news according to CNN.
Re: (Score:1)
Aside form all of the outrage about him, things are going pretty good for the most part.
What? Which things?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
From my perspective here in Europe, Mr. Trump has been a disaster for international politics and USA national politics alike.
His personal behaviour has damaged many structures and organisations that we depend on for economic prosperity and security.
The people he hired to run things, and the cruel people in power elsewhere that have been allowed to run unrestrained by anything but their own competence, have done much harm to many people in the USA.
But most of all, he has shifted the goal posts, making things
Re: (Score:2)
Americans are like the guy or girl who was hot growing up. They never realized how much good-will they had gotten from past generations and some amazing PR. How much economic power they derived not from their economy, but the US dollar being the world's de facto cross-border currency. Even from their position in the Cold War, a bastion of self-styled freedom against Communism's oppressive totalitarian fist.
Now they're pissing it away for nothing. China is building soft power throughout Africa. Europe is cut
Re: (Score:1)
Man you've been in the kool aid. /. has had articles about "scientists" with non reproducible results. Wake up dude.
He's stood up for America. The US was being raped by just about every other country. Lots of example with cars, steel, etc.
About your science comment. The left has been changing data. A lot. From climate data to cancer, all kinds of other medical data. So when they push out new initiatives they're not working because it was all on fake data.
Your wealthy comment I presume you're talking about R
Re: (Score:1)
Check the 1.1 trillion of debt per year that your current incumbent is adding to the middle and working class tax bill in coming years. Don't expect corporations or the 1% to be paying off that bill. Sucker.
Re: (Score:2)
> who is head of state of their nation matters less in their daily lives than who is mayor of their city.
Unless you're black. Or gay. Or trans. Or a woman. Or anything but a straight, white dude. The Federal government has a massive influence on state governments, like it or not. From funding to the makeup of the supreme court.
Re: (Score:3)
Parkas complain? Do the British even wear anoraks? I thought that region of the world was known more for its rain than snow.
Anorak is a British slang which refers to a person who has a very strong interest, perhaps obsessive, in niche subjects.
Re: (Score:2)
Specifically an outdoor subject like bird watching, train spotting or model aircraft. Hence the need for an anorak.
Re: (Score:2)
Also train spotting.
Re: (Score:2)
The Brits definitely have Anoraks.
(also parkas, cagoules and snorkel jackets)
Re:Suck it up (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that the idiots making these decisions don't know what a drone is. A drone has automation built in to it. A RC aircraft requires constant control from a human operator. Not at all the same thing.
Re:Suck it up (Score:5, Insightful)
If you've got a hobby that you truly enjoy and are passionate about, hope that it never becomes popular.
Re:Suck it up (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, it is much like Eternal September, but, in this case, instead of wasting space or bandwidth on a trivial system, there are widespread violations of privacy and safety by any idiot with $100 and the ability to flip a switch. Regulating drones makes sense, and is absolutely inevitable.
What makes no sense is to lump traditional model airplanes in with them, simply because it is easier, and in the process destroy the entire hobby.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I'm assuming you've never flown either of them.
Go fly a drone for half a day. Three minutes of instruction, and you're off and flying. Probably enjoying it, to.
Now go fly a model airplane. Three minutes of instruction, and you're taking off the runwa-oh look you've ploughed it in to the ground at high speed and all that's left is shrapnel.
By the time you've got the knowledge and experience to fly one successfully, you've become self-regulating to a level no government-mandated registry and training system c
The danger is true if not real (Score:2)
I think that people do not appreciate just how dangerous these drones are. If a 100 ton airliner strikes a 500g drone then the airliner instantly explodes. Destroying not only itself but all other aircraft within a 1000 km radius.
The damage done at Gatwick was real. Millions of dollars lost, thousands of people inconvenienced. The fact that there was no actual drone and if there was it could do little damage is immaterial.
The truth is far more important than reality. And drones being dangerous has cert
Re: (Score:2)
Also, it only takes a few practice sessions on a simulator to learn that when flying inverted, you push the elevator control forward to climb away from the ground.
---
Re: (Score:2)
It is different because model airplanes operated under essentially no regulation, with no significant aviation safety issues and only occasional injury accidents ( in hundreds of millions of flights) over a period over 100 years. The only reason this is being threatened is due to the buy-and-fly FPV drones, which are a fundamentally different animal. FPV model airplanes, they have a point, and virtually ALL model airplane hobbyists agree and understand that this should be subject to regulation.
But regulatin
Re: (Score:3)
Definitely the same phenomena. It happens with anything that becomes accessible when before it wasn't. Look at music, 15 years ago if you wanted to cut a record you had to spend a lot of money renting time in a studio and then pay people to mix and master it. That means outside of professionals, the only people doing it were the really dedicated hobby musicians who had already been playing for a long time. Maybe at open mic nights or as a bar band. But they had in a sense paid their dues by becoming compete
Re: (Score:2)
Actually they know perfectly well what a drone is and isn't which is why their website has two completely separate sections for guidance on RC aircraft and drones and they are going about with new regulations for *both*
Re: (Score:2)
I was referring to the politicians who think drone = RC aircraft. I often leave out the obvious and find that I have to clarify for those who can't see it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Suck it up (Score:5, Informative)
I'm not sure you're that familiar much of what the hobby entails. Comparing model toy flying to ham radio is interesting but not completely valid in my opinion. Model toys are, well, model toys. Ham radios are normal radios. The folk who run ultralight aircraft are more comparable to the ham radio folk.
As for flying being a privilege and not a right, well the thing is civil aviation authorities don't generally have any right to govern the air over private property below 500 feet. Can't speak for Britain, but in Canada and the US no law has granted power over this airspace, except near airports for obvious reasons. I own some land where I can and do go flying from. Full scale aircraft are specifically prohibited from flying below 500 feet over my land (as is the case everywhere), except under certain circumstances that I as a model pilot will yield to. If I am flying my toy model aircraft on my land and have a collision with a full scale plane, the full scale pilot is operating in a dangerous and reckless manner. Yet of course I'd be the one to bear the full blame.
Adding egregious rules to model fliers is not going to increase safety, nor will it prevent idiots from doing stupid things. I don't see how you or anyone else can think it's helpful. We already have enough laws that adequately cover model flying and can censure people caught doing dumb things. For example, public parks can set their own rules over activities permitted in the park. Flying toys are banned at many parks . If a person operates a toy of any kind, whether flying or not, in a reckless manner and injures another person, we have laws already that give consequences for reckless and endangering behavior of any kind.
As a model flyer, I, nor any commercial user of UAVs, oppose regulation for commercial drone operations. I question whether special rules are needed for most small drones, though. Like I said we already have laws for liability and personal injury.
I can only surmise that the root of most of these bizarre attempts at regulation come because people in the aviation industry feel under economic threat from what these toys are now capable of. Aerial photography, etc. I've seen quite a bit of aerial cinematography in films and TV shows of late that were clearly taken from a small drone.
Here's how absurd things are getting. Canada just brought in new regulations that affect all model aircraft from 250g to 25 kg (pretty broad stroke there). It seems like someone at Transport Canada thought it would nice and simple if all flying objects were treated the same. So they now not only require registration of all aircraft (including toys), tail numbers, id info on the airframe, a special license, but also they require model flyers to keep a log of all their flights, and a maintenance log as well, including keeping a copy of all instructions the manufacturer give with the part. Some parts of that make more sense than others for my little 640 gram balsa wood kit pattern flier. Clearly these regulations are intended for certain classes of commercial aircraft, but make little sense for the hobby flier flying a balsa ARF, or a Flitetest foam board plane (awesome planes btw). And apparently as it is written the Canadian regulations prohibit crashing of model aircraft. Neat! Except that in model aircraft, which are toys, learning is the point. there will be crashes and the odd structural failure.
In the end, is it a right or privilege? I think private land ownership laws are pretty clear that under that conservative ceiling it is a right. Unfortunately those of use who care about it don't have the resources to fight it in court, which is where these regulations need to end up.
Am I opposed to all rules and regulation? Does anything go on my own property? No of course not. But we have to ask ourselves, what is the purpose and what's important. Public safety is paramount. I've yet to see a drone rule that actually does that. And holding toy operators accountable is good and all but the full scale boy
Drone Classification (Score:3)
I thought the term "drone" only applied to aircraft that are flying autonomously or semi-autonomously?
Re: (Score:2)
I thought the term "drone" only applied to aircraft that are flying autonomously or semi-autonomously?
Its come to describe any kind of small remotely controllable aircraft.
Re: (Score:3)
I thought the term "drone" only applied to aircraft that are flying autonomously or semi-autonomously?
Its come to describe any kind of small remotely controllable aircraft.
Only by people that don't actually fly RC models.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Considering the original drones were towed behind aircraft, autonomous does not seem to be a requirement.
There was no one in them controlling them. Being towed is a form of remote control. I'd say it sticks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So that would make flying a kite operating a drone too.
Maybe, depends if being powered is a requirement. Being (technically) tethered to the ground might kill it too.
Re: (Score:3)
Expected... and stupid (Score:2, Insightful)
The model aircraft people have always been a fairly conscientous lot. If only because losing a homebuilt model means losing tens or hundreds of hours of work. But also because they tend to play in groups and so have a group-thing going on. Their efforts also predate on-board cameras by many years and so their models tend to be direct visual control only, no out-of-sight anything. Not so much, or at all, with drone pilots.
It saddens me that "regulation" is too often, and also in this case, nothing more than
Re:Expected... and stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
it seems like as soon as few idiots do dumb things (as all idiots eventually will), the politicians feel an irresistible pressure to "stop that from ever happening again", and seem to always assume that "more regulation" will accomplish that.
All more regulation ever usually accomplishes is criminalizing the stupid behavior, at a cost of criminalizing a lot of other innocent behavior, along with inconveniencing everyone in the general vicinity. It doesn't actually stop the bad behavior, which was the intent of the regulation.
A perfect summary of this process can be traced all the way back to one of B Franklin's more remembered sayings, that basically said "It's a bad idea to curb a basic freedom in the hopes that it will provide you with an added grain of safety". And that's essentially the problem with a lot of the added regulations we see lately. The regulation is just a bad trade-off for what little it accomplishes. And I suspect it's more about the politicians paying lip-service to be able to say "we're doing something about it" when something unfortunate happens. There are other ways of responding, and sometimes doing nothing is best correct response.
Re: (Score:2)
Safety record (Score:1)
When learning to fly actual aircraft, I crashed exactly zero times and all aircraft I learned on are still flying. Nearly all the pilots I know had the same experience. This is not the case with nearly any model airplane flyer.
Unless you're talking about deaths, in which case I'm sure remote control cars cause even less proportional deaths compared actual cars than model aircraft compared to actual p
This is why we can't have nice things (Score:5, Insightful)
While I'm sure that the people who belong to the model flying club are very responsible, we need some kind of regulation in terms of who can fly. A decade ago there was a huge barrier to entry simply from the fact that you probably had to build your own model or shell out a significant amount of money to buy a plane that could fly. Now small drones are very easy and cheap to obtaion, there should be some kind of certification to ensure that pilots are being responsible. £16.50 isn't a huge amount of money, and if the online test is so easy, they should have no problem passing it. Maybe they could submit proof of passing their own test if the ministry deems it equivalent or more rigorous than their own test. But the small fee for filing the paper work really isn't too much to ask.
Re:This is why we can't have nice things (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the more significant factor is what was hinted at toward the end of the summary. The long game is for Amazon and the like to take over the air space for drone delivery (WTF?!?, seriously you lazy sacks of crap? Go get yer own sh*t.). This will almost certainly require severe restriction of hobbyist pilots and their airspace.
Re: (Score:2)
Except during Amazon-sanctioned tournaments where fleets of drones are available as targets, and shooters compete for the best prizes. Amazon Prime Targets Day.
Re: (Score:2)
Ultimately, the airspace will be easily shared.
If drones from Amazon and other deliverers require clear airspace, they won't succeed. There are many kinds of birds that will intentionally attack drones. When deployed in mass, if they can't detect and dodge these birds, the number of crashes due to bird fights will be large. It is also likely that some bird species not attacking now will learn to attack as the interference with their airspace increases.
If they conquer these obstacles and wires, they will be
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not just that, model airplanes are _hard_ to fly (Score:2)
Drones can be DANGEROUS! (Score:2)
I don't want drones near where I live. Will drones be allowed near where Jeff Bezos of Amazon lives?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
An online test is wholly worthless. You could have someone else take it for you, or you could look up the answers and put them into the blanks while taking the test. Consequently this is just a cash grab.
Kids Wanting to Fly (Score:1)
"targeted... (Score:2)
Well, in the states uncontrolled airspace (class G) is less than 1200AGL. Class G airspace is basically available for all flight operations, no clearance nor permissions needed. Part 107 require that UAS operations fly no more than 400AGL or 400 above a building and the operator must maintain visual line of sight. There's not a whole lot of commercial value below 400GL. If you're flying in class G airspace, you're responsible to fly in a ma
It is a quality of life issue (Score:2)
Perspective... (Score:1)
Children with TOYS and Adults playing with expensive TOYS are upset they don't have an easy time playing with their TOYS as they used to. Because of new tech that has real use beyond a TOY is pushing into their world... like all new tech available to humans living near each other (still increasing population density) more rules are needed so they can peaceably and effectively coexist.
Keep in mind that the few hobbyists were limited in uses, technology, and had to invest time and $ to be pretend pilots (wh
Re:Perspective... (Score:4, Insightful)
Overreach (Score:2)
The FAA thinks that "drones" include kites and control-line models (both of which have neither radios, nor "ground control stations", nor can they freely fly with intent). This is overreach, and when pressed, they agree that these are not threats. But, they can't be bothered to actually write this down.
Note that this is a matter of punishing the responsible users - and make no mistake, the FAA rules as currently constituted will end the entire activity - while doing absolutely nothing to stop
Re: Overreach (Score:4)
How it is BS, genius? Here is the wording of the FAR:
S101.13 Operating limitations.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person may operate a moored balloon or kite --
(1) Less than 500 feet from the base of any cloud;
(2) More than 500 feet above the surface of the earth;
(3) From an area where the ground visibility is less than 3 miles; or
(4) Within five miles of the boundary of any airport.
Kites. Go to John F. Kennedy park in Napa, California, and fly a kite, and you are in violation of the above FAR. Do you think this serves a legitimate purpose?
Re: (Score:2)
Which part of what you quoted classifies kites as drones?
Just that I see a prohibition on flying kites there, no mention of drones.
Do you think this serves a legitimate purpose?
Yes. Aircraft safety, which benefits pretty much everybody.
It's why flying kites above 200 feet in the UK is regulated, and flying them above 300 feet causes a NOTAM to be issued.
Next will be RC cars requiring a driver license? (Score:2)
I used RC planes 30 years ago and didn't need anything, friends have big heavy helicopters and don't need anything!
The next thing is that using my RC car will require an exam or a driving license? You know they can easily reach 100mph? They can cause accident and injury? What the governement is waiting for?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The next thing is that using my RC car will require an exam or a driving license? You know they can easily reach 100mph?
Easily? No. It takes work and/or money to get an RC car that will go over 50 or 60 mph, and it takes either a very large (and thus uncommon) RC car or a very smooth surface to reach 100 without having the thing bounce off a pebble and go into a cartwheeling frenzy of self-disassembly.
Another reason to "Remain" (Score:2)
European laws grant special recognition to model flying, saying it should be treated differently but the UK has not done this.
This type of UK independence is exactly why people voted to leave the EU. Enjoy it, my lords.
Happening in the USA too - it sucks (Score:1)
Model Aircraft are not drones. Model Aircraft require line of sight visibility to fly. Drones typically have some sort of advanced stability component that make them require far less skill, attention and space to fly. Model Aircraft typically require a dedicated space to fly where as drones don't and folks abandon ALL Sense and fly them where ever they want including into the airspace of large airports...they have ruined it for everyone else.
More worried about Deep Fake Drone Vids (Score:2)
How many other people out there realize that WW3 could be started by some well put together Deep Fake Drone Videos, showing Cuba attacking Mar-a-Lago?
Seriously, this keeps me up at night.
Either it's that or the 25 cups of coffee - not sure which
Nothing to do with commercial value (Score:2)
Sorry Cliff, but the regulations are a result of idiots who do things like shut down airports delaying millions of people.
https://techcrunch.com/2019/05... [techcrunch.com]
Canada's new rules (Score:2)
Drones: 0.250-25 kg
Recommended: Drone flight school before taking the exam.
Basic exam: $10. The Small Basic Exam features 35 multiple choice questions. You have 90 minutes to complete the exam. A score of 65% or higher is considered a pass.
Small advanced exam: $10 + in person review at drone school. Then $25 to get your certificate. (Electronic copy.) The Small Advanced Exam features 50 multiple choice questions. You have 60 minutes to complete the exam. A score of 80% or higher is considered a pass.
Fees ap
Re: (Score:2)
The new rules apply to Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS), or “drones,” that: weigh 250 grams (g) up to and including 25 kilograms (kg), and are operated within the drone pilot’s visual-line-of-sight
So does that include my RC helicopter? It's not a drone, but is probably a RPAS.
Members of the Model Aeronautics Association of Canada (MAAC) may be exempt from Part IX of the Canadian Aviation Regulations if they meet the conditions set out in Exemption NCR-011-2019.
I am not a membe
Re: (Score:2)
Looking at how most folks drive cars, I wouldn't want the average person flying an actual plane....
Re: (Score:2)
Looking at how most folks drive cars, I wouldn't want the average person flying an actual plane....
False equivalency. Getting a private pilot's license is much more difficult than getting an automobile driver's license.
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/og7UFem... [ytimg.com]
Re: (Score:2)
If you're Stateside, "who" is the congressmen and senators who passed the Air Commerce Act of 1926.
Re: (Score:2)
You are right and you are wrong.
I've flown RC planes on-and-off since elementary school. Currently, I fly both camera drones like DJI's line and acrobatic/racing drones. Camera drones don't require constant attention and will just sit patiently in the air waiting for user input. The same isn't as true of acrobatic/racing drones.
Unless a drone has some sort of GPS-enabled position hold, it will drift in position (including altitude) and orientation without constant stick input, and probably quite quickly