A heartfelt apology...

[t-rex pedro]

Mart, if posts were Phoenix hours you would be Lucas Rivas by now!!!

Glad you have got a sense of humour mate.

[Brian Gifford]

Martin, you don't have to apologise for anything. People might not agree with you, but that's part of this forum. You have a talent for starting some interesting (and at times heated) debate.

[waveydavey]

i dont know myself but i expect an expert will be along in a minute to help you dave!

Ron I seem to spend most of my waking day on here and am ashamed to have only a paltry 500 or so posts, where am I going wrong oh wise one

[Boggy]

its easy Dave just start threads about pussies or fit birds,or post how often you like a five knuckle shuffle .and watch em rack up


sorry Martin it had to be done

[Hangar-7]

Martin Hi!

I was about to join in your earlier thread but seen this one now. I'm sure most people have accepted your sincere apology.

There are enough people in this world trying to throttle this hobby at any excuse you can imagine - I would not mention even those organisations.

The example of "sugar" comes to mind - if it were invented this century then it would be banned as a "harmful" substance!! Safety seems to be paramount these days, yet we have over 20 millions cars on the road. I'll get off my soap box.

Cheers

[Mart61]

Can I ask a question about your signing of each build step in the manual idea? What happens when you crash and have to rebuild the model?

I photocopied the build manual for the 500 and 600 and signed off on those. I still have the original, unsigned manuals.

Martin, if you've only been in the hobby since Christmas how the hell have you amassed 2503 posts?

Talking's what I do best!

You have a talent for starting some interesting (and at times heated) debate.

I do love a debate. Just wish that sometimes others could take it for what it is - a debate - I never aim to take things to a personal level.

[Boggy]

im sure every body read it as just that Martin a debate . at least you can take a "ribbin" well.

but on the other side we are mostly responsible flyers and dont need constant reminders about safety. wait till you fire up that 600n and spool it up in front of yourself, you soon realise its bloody obvious to most

[Rotorhead]

Pitty the other thread was locked, I often fly my T-Rex 500 on a field near where I live, its big enough to comfortably fit a full size cricket pitch on it or a dozen football pitches.

It is public access, but if someone is on there with a dog then I wait until they leave, or if there are people playing football I go home, or if someone turns up I land, and its only accessable from two sides, so seeing them coming is easy, just use common sense.

I checked the bylaws beforehand, and the place is legal, the bylaws here are listed on the councils website, and only three places are mentioned as model flying being banned, a place call Mount pleasant (not even in Grimsby) another in a village called Healing and one in Immingham called Spring street field.

The funny thing is the one in Immingham is the field that the council actually said we could use up until a few years ago, and those bylaws havnt been updated since about 1996, so I suspect that most councils may not know what their own bylaws are.

One other thing, and I have also checked this with the police, if a place has signs up that say no model flying, but that has not been done through a bylaw then those signs mean nothing and are unenforceable, if something is banned it has to be done through either a law or a bylaw, so I suspect most places where something is "banned" it actually isnt.

Its likely a case of either "oh just go put a sign up, that'll stop them", if thats the case then its completely unenforcable until they do ban it through a bylaw, or they dont know their own proceedures (I'm sure that is a shocker)

[Hangar-7]

I'm glad Rotorhead you have taken the trouble to find laws regarding flying in public places and situation with Police. Councils have a department full of solicitors (?) and they will take you to the civil court and the councils know what they're doing will not stand in the court of law .. but in the meantime, you'll have to find £££ to fight 'em.

In summary, we need someone to stand upto councils and the precident will be set.
We have to be thankful that some people thought enough was enough and there was mass public so called illigal walks on moore lands - so now we can peacefully walk on all footpaths. and we have since 2005 "right to roam" law as well.

[Janek]

Martin, either the original thread got out of hand after I left, or you're being a little too sensitive ?

You may have started the discussion, but you're NOT responsible for everyone else's opinions.

Chill out, and go flying, that's where I'm going, bugger the qualifying

[tourerjim]

Martin I dont know what to think about all this, 'Debate'
Debate or debating is a formal method of interactive and representational argument. Debate is a broader form of argument than a loagical argument, which only examines the consistency fro axiom, and factual argument, which only examine what is or isn't the case or rhetoric which is technique of persuasion. Though logical consistency, factual accuracy as well as some emotional appeal to audience are important elements of the art of persuasion, in debating, one side often prevails over the other side by presenting superior "context" and/or framework of the issue, which is far more subtle and strategic.
Ask Wikipedia

[zoombolt]

Martin I dont know what to think about all this, 'Debate'
Debate or debating is a formal method of interactive and representational argument. Debate is a broader form of argument than a loagical argument, which only examines the consistency fro axiom, and factual argument, which only examine what is or isn't the case or rhetoric which is technique of persuasion. Though logical consistency, factual accuracy as well as some emotional appeal to audience are important elements of the art of persuasion, in debating, one side often prevails over the other side by presenting superior "context" and/or framework of the issue, which is far more subtle and strategic.
Ask Wikipedia

OoooHhhhh

That explains it then. I always thought that the de-bate was on de-hook. When someone took de-bate, you ad em on de-hook & a fierce struggle would ensue between de-bated & the one who set de-bate.
If more than one person is bated, I fought it was a mass-de-bate, cuz everyone gets all excited & blows de-top.
De-winner is always de-one with de-biggist grin on de-face after said mass-de-bate. The loser/losers are often viewed simply as W**kers.

Or is that just me

[Mark_T]

Its likely a case of either "oh just go put a sign up, that'll stop them", if thats the case then its completely unenforcable until they do ban it through a bylaw, or they dont know their own proceedures (I'm sure that is a shocker)

Be interesting to check that one with the BMFA.

The insurance requires the 'permission' of the land owner, not the absence of a ban.

[tourerjim]

OoooHhhhh

That explains it then. I always thought that the de-bate was on de-hook. When someone took de-bate, you ad em on de-hook & a fierce struggle would ensue between de-bated & the one who set de-bate.
If more than one person is bated, I fought it was a mass-de-bate, cuz everyone gets all excited & blows de-top.
De-winner is always de-one with de-biggist grin on de-face after said mass-de-bate. The loser/losers are often viewed simply as W**kers.

Or is that just me

Yep very good.

[Rotorhead]

Be interesting to check that one with the BMFA.

The insurance requires the 'permission' of the land owner, not the absence of a ban.

The fact that they listed specific sites that where banned implies strongly that they are ok with it in the places that they dont list, that could be argued probably successfully that it would indicate permission.