Thread: CAA Information

Originally Posted by Zeeflyboy

It does potentially become problematic there - as the FPV UK insurance covers you for all flying, FPV or otherwise... thus you do run into the problem of overlapping policies.

There's no problem realistically with an overlapping policy. I checked recently due to my having both RCHA and BMFA insurance. It's unlikely to effect a claim, in fact its more likely to aid a claim. The insurers would share costs should a claim arise - it should be transparent to the claimant.

Pete,

Quote from post #5....
*Anything* that can gather data from the air (that's video, stills, data sniffers, whatever) is classified as a UAV - NOT a model. However, for non-commercial *hobby* uses, Ofcom has granted the BMFA permission to issue exemption certificates for those wishing to use models for aerial photography, etc.

[snip]
(And incidentally, FPV will come within this, I believe, as it sends video back from on high!)

This isn't quite true. If I could draw attention to the following paragraph on the legalities section on the FPVUK website FPV Legality | FPV UK:

At first it would appear that FPV flying would fall under article 167 for small unmanned surveillance aircraft because the ANO definition of an unmanned surveillance aircraft is as above in 167(5) [of the ANO]. However in situations where a camera is used for the sole purpose of controlling the aircraft the flight is not considered surveillance or data acquisition. (Use of that data for other functions could be though). CAP 722 (CAP 722: Unmanned Aircraft System Operations in UK Airspace - Guidance | Publications | CAA) article 3.6 in Section 3 Chapter 1 page 4 refers to this, copied here: “The provision of image or other data solely for the use of controlling or monitoring the aircraft is not considered to be applicable to the meaning of ‘Surveillance or Data Acquisition’ covered at Article 167 for Small Unmanned Surveillance Aircraft.”


Paul

As said under CAA rules its quite legal if you stay within the rules as Paul has pointed out and as originally attached.

CAA have now put out the General FPV Rules for all

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ORS4_945.pdf


Big thumbs up to RCHA and FPVUK Guys who got this for us all


(Thats right the BMFA get Zip as they were not there for FPV Flyers)

That sounds very sensible. I hope it satisfies the FPV flyers. It keeps FPV within the same area as conventional models.

Many thanks to the BMFA for their work on this change following their meeting with the CAA.

BMFA News : PRESS RELEASE – FIRST PERSON VIEW

The exemption was built on the work by ALL parties not just one or the other. However special acknowledgement should be given to the FPVUK for if they hadn't fought to get the FPV allowed in the UK we wouldn't have all been around the table to discuss the options for 2013.

Lets just ensure that we ALL abide by the rules and not ruin it for others some. People are taking timeout in there already busy schedules to make this happen for everyones benefit.

The RCHA owes its thanks to Simon who represented the RCHA at the meeting and we will both be attending the CAA annual meeting in December. There are alot of things on the go and in 2013 will see another step in the right direction.

Originally Posted by ChrisB

Many thanks to the BMFA for their work on this change following their meeting with the CAA.

BMFA News : PRESS RELEASE – FIRST PERSON VIEW

All I will say is BMFA Reps did not go for the Benefit of FPV Flying...

BMFA would have us all on Buddy leads if they had the chance

Line of sight can be a long way...

They tend to define it as 400m, but of course depending on where you are that's 400m infront and behind, so a circle with 800m diameter.

That gives you a fair bit of room to play.

Of course you and I both know perfectly well that there are models which would be an unflyable speck at 400m and models which would be easily flyable LoS out to well, well in excess of 400m. I think a common sense approach is a good one and the most important bit - don't take the mickey. If you do insist on taking the proverbial, then it's probably fair to say don't post video evidence of said proverbial taking.

We're not there yet in my opinion, but that's not to belittle the efforts made at all - the guys have done a fantastic job of promoting our goals. For me the minimum acceptable goal longer term is to have parity with LoS models since we're being told to fly within LoS anyway....

That means up to 7Kg, no altitude limit (currently FPV is limited to 400ft while LoS is unlimited in the weight class, strange given that both have to be flown within LoS anyway no?) and no buddy box, just a competent observer. Above 7Kg, LoS models have extra restrictions so it's only fair FPV does too - 400ft as per LoS models, no flight in controlled airspace without prior authorisation, and a buddy box would seem a reasonable compromise.

The MAAC in Canada (along with Transport Canada) has basically taken this approach recently I believe - all the rules that apply to LoS models apply to FPV models, and people flying FPV must have an observer to address the fact that they are not themselves LoS. The plane must at all times remain within visual range of the observer. Simple, effective, safe, fair.... no getting bogged down in definitions and semantics. Job done, now lets go home for tea and medals.

From what I hear the individual(s) opposed to higher weight limits for buddy-box free flying in this initial renewal (or indeed a renewal at all) are the same ones who are now turning around and pretending like they achieved this fantastic increase in freedoms for their members single handedly. Given that these individual(s) are now giving off super pro-FPV vibes to their membership, it'll be interesting how the next round of negotiation goes and whether they will have a leg to stand on.

The idea is to take this a step at a time. I think we have made good progress and our relationship with the CAA is off to a great start and this general exemption is just the start - I hope!

Stuart and I have some plans in hand to help to develop FPV and I hope that they will help those of us that want to make this a really exciting part of our hobby.

Cheers,