Struggling to decide best route into aerial photography in the UK

Macsgrafs

Macsgrafs

Active Member
Do we really need the BNUC Dave???
Personally I think 4 or 6 of OUR examiners doing as follows:-

2 areas...North Uk & South UK. Equal number of examinders in each of the 2 areas. Cost for a test for 1 person = £300! This would include a fee of £100 + travellign costs for the examiner involved. So if 10 people in Plymouth wanted to take OUR test...then they would pay a total of £1200...or in plain English £120 EACH!
We must break away from the rip off BNUC, they will only force reasonable people to fly without what they offer, because w eALL know you dont need BNUC to fly commercially, there are ways around it. I for one am sick of seeing us, the people being ripped off by government approved bodies.

We need our OWN test, which MUST include CAA guidelines & of course health & safety. At least that way we will have fully qualified flyers, flying safely.

Ross
 

ZAxis

ZAxis

Member
I'm with Ross on this.
Can anyone explain how the BMFA examiners are appointed ? We would have to use a similar process.

As I understand it BNUC handle everything from the biggest drone to the smallest multirotor so can we set some boundaries within which the new organisation would operate; application / weight / size / endurance / etc.

andy
 

Macsgrafs

Macsgrafs

Active Member
Thank you Andy for agreeing. Don't get me wrong, we do need a test, if for no other reason than to stop the man on the street buying a ready made & setup MR, putting a cam on it & flying right into someone & killing them!

As for the BMFA examiners, they take an examiners test or better known as a C cert. One of my flying buddies is BMFA approved examiner for helis, he took me for my A test late last year & was hard, but fair on me.

As you rightfully pointed out, the BNUC caters from the biggest to our smallest MR...hardly a fair & just body in my book.

Ross
 

Vortex

Vortex

Member
I can only speak from the Australian Perspective on this as I have been researching it also. Made a few calls to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and this is basically what it condensed down to.

There are 3 types of flying of R/C or UAV aircraft
1/ Recreation Modelers who fly to the MAAA (Miniature Aircraft Association of Australia) rules at a REGISTERED flying field within strict boundaries and altitudes
2/ Recreation Modelers/Flyers & Illegal Commercial Operators who fly OUTSIDE registered flying fields/areas/boundaries who are open to legal action by a number of Civil Authorities including CASA
3/ UAV Operators who are licenced, registered and insured to operate within strict boundaries and limitations governed by CASA

Anyone operating a UAV or a model for "Gain or Reward" is deemed to be conducting "Commercial Operations" and must comply with the requirements listed in number 3/

The airspace above a private property is not the property of the land holder and is governed and controlled by CASA, CAA the FAA or whatever the governing body is, in your particular part of the world.

It's tough to break into this market as a Commercial Operator as the requirements are almost impossible. Here in Australia you might as well be a Commercial Aircraft Pilot and also a Gold Wing Helicopter Instructor. Then there are Operations, Maintenance, Safety, Pilots and Flight manuals you need to have "Approved" before you can even lodge your application which will cost anywhere between $8,000 and $15,000 per Annum and don't forget Insurance........

I would be surprised if most if not all of these would apply to any Country.

Will it be worth the effort......I hope so!!!

Regards,

Lance
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bowley

Bowley

Member
Its my understanding, from speaking with the CAA that they actually want another organisation to give approval to, who can offer a BNUC equivalent, it would certainly save them a lot of earache. I dont think its a healthy situation to have just one private enterprise in discussion with the CAA.
 

Macsgrafs

Macsgrafs

Active Member
Good points raised Lance.

Commercial gain or reward...what a great sound that has. So if you wanted to get around it..do NOT charge for aerial work, offer it free if they have ground shots as well. That cuts out the whole game of paying ridiculous amounts of money just to fly our MR's with a camera. Thats the easy way to get around it LEGALLY.

EXAMPLE:
Buy 2 get 1 free. Free aerial photos/video if you have internal & external shots of said property/location/item or whatever.
We have all seen the big companies doing the same with so many things, but in the real world nothing is FREE...the costs are hidden in the ground shots.
It would be down to a court to prove you were charging for aerial shots, which they can only succeed with if YOU ADMIT to it.

I belong to a society called "The freeman society", we follow common law & want the abolishment of statutes/acts....dont forget statutes/acts are only givent he force of law, with the consent of the governed...so what happens when you dont consent?...they don't apply.

Looking at a court case, the prosecution has to have "FOUNDATION EVIDENCE", this evidence is what their case is based on. So they need to prove 2 things. Who has higher authority over me than myself? Prove that statutes/acts apply to ME!
Both of these things they can NOT do in a courtroom...because if they claim they have higher authority over you, then you want to see the contract that YOU signed giving them that authority, or else they are guilty of slavery!!!!!
This DOES work, I have seen it work with my own eyes. Let me give you another similar example.

To drive a motor vehicle on the roads in the UK the powers that be say you need:-

a driving license
insurance
mot certificate

But what they do NOT tell you is that you only need any of the above if engaged in commerce...so what if your just travelling & not engaged in commerce?
Let me show you a freeman stopped for no insurance or tax. He has a fee schedule in place (as is our right).

He refused to give a breath test & did NOT contract with them by giving his name...released without charge!!!!! Becausde he knows the difference between legal & lawful.

This is just an example of how easy it is to beat the system if you know in the first place that the system only applies to PERSONS & not HUMANS!

Ross
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Macsgrafs

Macsgrafs

Active Member
Bowley said:
Its my understanding, from speaking with the CAA that they actually want another organisation to give approval to, who can offer a BNUC equivalent, it would certainly save them a lot of earache. I dont think its a healthy situation to have just one private enterprise in discussion with the CAA.
Click to expand...

ABSOLUETLY!!!
Hence why I support Dave in starting this up.
 

Vortex

Vortex

Member
Good point Ross......It will be interesting to see how you get on there with this.

I know here, no Company would risk engaging someone who didn't have the Appropriate Qualifications and Legal Coverage.

Regards,

Lance
 

Macsgrafs

Macsgrafs

Active Member
Vortex said:
Good point Ross......It will be interesting to see how you get on there with this.

I know here, no Company would risk engaging someone who didn't have the Appropriate Qualifications and Legal Coverage.

Regards,

Lance
Click to expand...

Thats the problem here as well Lance, but hopefully between us all we can get all this sorted.
All I want is something that is fair for us all & no more of this rip off that currently dominates a corrupt world.

Ross
 


You must log in or register to reply here.
Top