CAA registration 'consultation'

Important Announcements and information
How to register on this forum
Post Reply
User avatar
Phil_G
Posts: 597
Joined: 15 Feb 2018, 23:32
Contact:

Re: CAA registration 'consultation'

Post by Phil_G »

Everybody, please respond, it only takes a few minutes.
For what its worth (though I doubt that even collectively we will make any difference at all), here are my own inane ramblings:
phil_g_response.pdf
(9.33 KiB) Downloaded 160 times

Also here's my email to Baroness Vere of Norbiton, the Aviation Minister:
(with similar content)


To:
baroness.vere@dft.gov.uk

9 May at 14:33

Baroness,

I am emailing you in your capacity as Aviation Minister.
I have some serious concerns over the content of CAP1775 and the effect it will have on the hobby of aeromodelling.

There are many worrying aspects of which you will no doubt have been made aware, but I would like to emphasise just two:

Firstly the cost of the scheme.
My lifetime career has been with British Telecom in IT, beginning long before the arrival of the first PCs in 1980. I retired as Senior Networks and Security Designer where my job entailed designing internet datacentres such as Bletchley Park, Cardiff, and Edinburgh, and the design, costing and supervision of platform implementations. I personally designed two iterations of BT.com and I can therefore state with some authority that the proposed figure of 2.8M pa for the installation and operation of such a tiny database, is absolutely ludicrous to the point that one senses criminal appropriation of public money.
The proposed charge is based on a wildly optimistic view of 170k registrations.
Realistically, we all know that this is pure fantasy and will be unlikely to exceed a few tens of thousands. If the fee is to be calculated by dividing these massively inflated costs by a massively overestimated take-up, then it will far exceed the proposed £16.50.
Further, surely those who benefit from the proposed scheme should pay for it. Hobbyist model flyers and aeromodellers are not beneficiaries, in fact the opposite is the case, they are penalised by CAP1775 and in the case of under 18s are even prevented from taking part.

This brings me to my second serious concern, which is the deliberate exclusion of youngsters into aeromodelling. Ours is a noble, honourable and rewarding hobby from which youngsters benefit greatly. It teaches the safe use of tools, principles of engineering, and electronics, and also traits such as dexterity, patience and pride. This will be taken away completely by CAP1775 when under-18s are barred from legally owning a model aircraft. I am a strong advocate of STEM in schools (stem emphasises the practical application of science, technology, engineering & maths) and previously youngsters could take up aeromodelling as a practical and enjoyable extension of their STEM learning. CAP1775 prevents this, and for no good reason. In the entire history of aviation, when has a child with a model aeroplane caused any concern?

More than ever we should respect the contribution made by hobbyists to science and technology. Sir Frank Whittle was an aeromodeller, as was Neil Armstrong. Bill Gates was a hobbyist, and his ideas founded Microsoft. Clive Sinclair was a hobbyist before he gave the public affordable computing. Apple came from two hobbyists.
Rather than barring youngsters we should be encouraging them into practical and beneficial pastimes as there is no telling where it might lead!

Thank you for your time
Yours Sincerely

Phil Green


PS Dont copy mine, everyone has his own opinion!
User avatar
RON
Site Admin
Posts: 613
Joined: 12 Jun 2017, 15:09
Location: Stokesley North Yorkshire

Re: CAA registration 'consultation'

Post by RON »

Well said Phil

I filed mine a week or so ago with a similar response.


Ron.
G0MBV Class A Radio Amateur, North Yorkshire
jackdaw
Posts: 165
Joined: 16 Feb 2018, 20:30
Location: Wet and Windy North Wales

Re: CAA registration 'consultation'

Post by jackdaw »

There is no requirement, even under the new rules, to register or take a competency test to fly any foot launched aircraft like a paraglider, paramotor, hang glider or powered hang glider etc. I have my hang glider licence and a PPL+IMC+Night but gave up GA flying due to my diabetes. I now find myself considering returning to some form of maned flight at 72 and joining the paramotor flyers that turn up at my local beach(I watch them flying from my front window). My thoughts at the moment; carry on as usual until 1st November 2019, do not register or take test and do nothing precipitously like disposing of models until April 2020 (I do not fly over the winter). Then re appraise the situation as things may well have changed by then, especially if there is a mass 'non sign-up'. There could be a relaxation of the rules as an inducement to get people to register but more likely a significant increase in the registration fee. I do not relish the thought of joining and paying for being placed on a 'suspects' list. I well remember what happened to an innocent modeller falsely accused of being involved in the Gatwick farce. Will those registered be interrogated by the police in the next incident and be required to prove their innocence and produce their models for inspection? I am not going to pay for the system that benefits commercial entities and disadvantages myself as a modeler. So, comes April 2020 it looks like I will have several options, bear in mind I am an infrequent flyer flying only a handful of times a year: sign up(only under improved terms), give up, only fly under 250gm models, break the law flying a few times a year at my friends field in rural North Wales, take up maned flying, a combination of the foregoing or possibly some other yet unknown option.
To me the cost is not the issue. Its the principle! Paying for something the comercial entities should be paying for, a scheme that will do nothing to address the publicly stated aims it is intended to achieve and being placed on a suspects register.
User avatar
Carl
Posts: 267
Joined: 16 Feb 2018, 13:26
Location: Way down in the South West
Contact:

Re: CAA registration 'consultation'

Post by Carl »

Thanks for posting the response Phil.

"The drone registration scheme is a top priority for the Government. It is just
one measure in a package to address the safety and security challenges
unmanned aircraft pose and will help enforcement agencies to tackle the
misuse of such aircraft, alongside further Police powers to be introduced in
the forthcoming Drones Bill."


So they still don't get it. The ones who misuse drones (I say drones as no one misuses aircraft but drones) won't register. It also hits the nail on the head that the registration system is really a suspect list, but the real culprits won't be on that list. So hope none of us live anywhere near an airport as we'll be hauled in like that poor couple for recent events for which there was no actual evidence.
Carl

------------------------------------
STILL LEARNING
------------------------------------
Spike S
Posts: 181
Joined: 16 Feb 2018, 14:59
Location: Salisbury UK

Re: CAA registration 'consultation'

Post by Spike S »

29 May BMFA meeting with CAA, update here:
https://bmfa.org/News/News-Page/Article ... -and-share
Spike S
(Tune for maximum smoke)
MJF
Posts: 81
Joined: 12 Jun 2018, 15:22
Location: Ontario Canada

Re: CAA registration 'consultation'

Post by MJF »

In Canada as of June 1, 2019 we have new laws in place regarding Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS) You can bet more time, thought, effort, coffee and doughnuts were consumed to come up with a name no one else has!
These new regulations were aimed squarely at multi-rotor Drones and model aircraft fliers were also lumped into them.
These new regs are aimed at models over 250 grams. The new regulations are very close to full size aircraft operator licensing, reporting and registration requirements. Far too draconian to go into in detail here.

To make it short
Our national organization Model Aeronautics Association of Canada (MAAC for short) got involved on our behalf (approx 13,000 members) and worked with Transport Canada. I believe they did a very good job given the circumstances. MAAC has a very good if not excellent safety record. As long as we are MAAC Members flying from either MAAC approved fields or sites laid out in accordance with MAAC recommendations, follow MAAC rules, stay with our airspace limits we are exempt from most of the new regulations.We do not need to pay for and write the 90 minute on line pilots license exam, nor do we have to pay for registration of our models. We do have to have our MAAC number and MAAC contact info (phone number & web address) visible on our models. MAAC even provided a label suggestion of what would be acceptable for our no fee registration requirement. I have attached a copy.
I believe "drones" have become the new modern day UFO sighting phenomena.

Good luck in protecting our valuable & educational hobby.
John D MAAC Avery5262AddressLabels.pdf
(97.9 KiB) Downloaded 130 times
Martin
Posts: 744
Joined: 16 Feb 2018, 14:11
Location: Warwickshire

Re: CAA registration 'consultation'

Post by Martin »

I like that the MAAC contact info is the phone number of the organization, not the individual flyer; and that even the flyer's name is optional. I hope the BMFA are able to negotiate a similar deal. We don't want crooks with notepads wandering up and down our flight lines (or maybe using binoculars) harvesting a list of addresses where they can burgle expensive modelling gear.
Pchristy
Posts: 413
Joined: 16 Feb 2018, 13:57
Location: South Devon, UK

Re: CAA registration 'consultation'

Post by Pchristy »

Yes, but it sounds as if Canada - and indeed most other countries - had officials who were willing / able to negotiate. Here its all down to "Failing Grayling", who has issued an edict that the CAA has to follow.

Looking at his previous (expensive) failures - The Probation Service, train timetables, Brexit Ferries, etc - I see little hope for optimism. Except that given the current state of British politics, there might well be a general election before this comes to pass, and the idiot may find himself out of a job!

Rant over! :evil:

--
Pete
User avatar
Mike_K
Posts: 669
Joined: 16 Feb 2018, 06:35
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: CAA registration 'consultation'

Post by Mike_K »

I had read all the post here and on the BMFA site about the proposed drone registration scheme (and done the online questionnaire), without actually reading the CAP 1775 document. I finally got round to it yesterday evening and what I read was appaling. The proposed costs are a joke, how they estimated the numbers of people expected to sign up is flawed and their comparison to other licence fees being more expensive just plain wrong. And this from a government-sponsored statutory corporation responsible for civil aviation in the United Kingdom. All I can assume is that they got an intern to do it. Actually, all interns could do a better job, so goodness knows who wrote it.

If you want to read it yourself you can download it from this link:

https://consultations.caa.co.uk/finance ... cument.pdf

I have written to the head of the CAA, the Aviation Minister and my local MP asking for it to be withdrawn or at least corrected. I'm now working my way through the recent amendments to the CAP1763 ANO, which don't make good reading. Knee jerk and ill thought through are my initial reaction.

The consultation period for the CAP1775 document finishes tomorrow, so if you haven't already written to the CAA, Aviation Minister or your local MP, can I urge you to write before it's too late.

Mike
Attachments
Comments on CAP 1775_01.pdf
(421.33 KiB) Downloaded 150 times
Martin
Posts: 744
Joined: 16 Feb 2018, 14:11
Location: Warwickshire

Re: CAA registration 'consultation'

Post by Martin »

BBC article about how model flyers are upset about the proposed new registration scheme.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-48541783
Post Reply