Originally Posted by
Nige321
Not sure about the rioting but the BMFA has been looking out for the model flyers for a long time on this subject. Trying to persuade EASA and the CAA that 'traditional' R/C flyers are different from the nutter with a drone at the end of Gatwicks runway is an uphill task - they are all 'drones' as far as the lawyers are concerned. (Exactly the same argument is happening in Germany with their DMFV)
Having said that, a couple of CAA officials I've spoken to understand that BMFA members aren't the problem - one of them was a member himself...
It was unfortunate that the original consultation on 'drones' was not well advertised or understood either amongst the radio control model fraternity or the light aviation world. I am surprised at the difficulty EASA and the CAA are having with the definition, though I suspect this is down to lawyers wanting precise statements- which they will then spend fortunes picking apart if given the chance!
To me 'Line of Sight' is the obvious criterion; if outside that it's a 'drone'. Inside it can be a radio control model. The slope soaring r/c folk have the greatest problem there - LoS can be a fair distance.
While drones around large airports are an obvious danger, I'm also concerned about any spread of drone use generally at low level. While we ought to be able to define the main commercial use low level areas adequately, I doubt that the many light aircraft and microlight strips around the country will be well enough surveyed to ensure drones stay clear of active circuits. Will they have adequate avoidance mechanisms? I doubt it.
I think another snag here is that the CAA no longer have enough people left to carry out all the tasks they are assigned, especially practically experienced and knowledgeable ones.