Model licences A and B

[dirtyharry]

I';m fairly disappointed in the test

To not allow auto-level in a basic pilot proficiency/safety test is just bonkers. Auto-level is the single most important safety feature in a multi controller , and is included on 99% of controllers.

I cant see the BMFA winning any new members or helping out there clubs with these  24 pages of badly plagiarised waffle.

[dirtyharry]

o

[kilby]

Can';t quote from this phone, however as I said I said originally the landowner doesn';t permit IC therefore we are an electric only club (which we are happy enough with) but it is through necessity.

Other club members do fly IC with another club as there is sufficient isolation from homes and livestock (we get enough people complaining about the noise the electric models make)

I have read the newsletter and although I love free flight (lost too many gliders in the early 80s) I certainly feel that there are slim pickings for the more 21st century flyer (sorry)

As for knowing your equipment, it may be in the handbook but if it';s not in their head then.... A bit like my dad learning to drive in the 40s and never reading the highway code again, it may only result in a humorous anecdote but on the other hand.

And yes I do worry about things like that (partially because I work with radio comms equipment every day and see the problems)

Don';t get me wrong I don';t wish to simply complain about the BMFA doing nothing (I know a lot happens behind the scenes on our behalf) but there are reasons why people feel excluded from clubs and some feel that from their old fixed wing days.

Personally as I said a more comprehensive A showing that the pilot has a proper grasp of orientation with some autoclave would be better than full manual but very little concept of nose in.

Even a two stage A1 & A2 where A2 is the same test is taken in full manual would permit the A1 pilot to show basic safe flight in their regular club environment.

I would also point out that stabilised flight on my 250 is much closer to my 450 in manual mode

[Friskle]

im not sure what that has to do with anything, if a multi-rotor is banked or nose up or down and the electronics corrects it and not the pilot it is my opinion that the electronics is doing more than enabling flight and is taking over control.

But to answer your question the largest I have flown was 450 sized and no I didn';t fly it in full manual, self levelling was set and it was very easy to fly and in my opinion there would be no great "achievement" in passing the A cert with self levelling active. Far too easy.

Personally, i think its got a lot to do with it, you have not flown in manual, yet expect us to do it.

no "great achievement", whether its an achievement or not is defined by the person gaining it, not you.

the test is not whether its easy or not, its about safety, a persons competency.

if you think its easy , thats fine, thats your opinion, but the fact remains, its supposed to be about safety, if you slip off the stick in manual its off, at least in auto level, it will level out, that has to be the safest option, if we are talking safety.

seems to me, your taking away the safety aspect of the system, that some people bought them for, the fact that they are easy to fly with auto level.

so whats happened?  have we have gone away from safety and competency,  to how difficult a model is to fly  ?

[tectic]

no "great achievement", whether its an achievement or not is defined by the person gaining it, not you.

the test is not whether its easy or not, its about safety, a persons competency.

seems to me, your taking away the safety aspect of the system, that some people bought them for, the fact that they are easy to fly with auto level.

so whats happened?  have we have gone away from safety and competency,  to how difficult a model is to fly  ?

My sentiments entirely why should this be about achievement.
I believe we should be concentrating on flying in the safest possible manner and awareness of your surroundings and others around you for your a certificate.
Be that on Manual or Assisted
But personally I feel Assisted flight should be allowed to enable the flier to fly solo to gain the necessary time and experience to swith to manual if HE chooses.

[Big A]

Friskle
For any of the RC Achievement scheme tests it is my opinion that the attitude, altitude and position of the aircraft should be controlled by the pilot, so when I get round to taking the Multi A I would expect to do it in Manual mode.

The purpose of the Achievment scheme hasn';t changed at all, it';s primary purpose has always been about personal achievement. Hence the requirement for some achievement in passing the test.

[teslahed]

im not sure what that has to do with anything, if a multi-rotor is banked or nose up or down and the electronics corrects it and not the pilot it is my opinion that the electronics is doing more than enabling flight and is taking over control.

But to answer your question the largest I have flown was 450 sized and no I didn';t fly it in full manual, self levelling was set and it was very easy to fly and in my opinion there would be no great "achievement" in passing the A cert with self levelling active. Far too easy.

So your background is in RC helis and stunt flying small quadcopters and the largest multirotor you';ve flown is a 450 that had auto-level set (by someone else?) Was it a DJI naza flight controller by any chance?

I suspect this is colouring your judgement. I think that if you';d flown any larger or more serious multirotors that are equivalent to the kind of RC fixed wing planes you have to fly to pass your BMFA fixed wing A test (i.e 1kg or larger AUW) rather than spending most of your time flying smaller sportier models for fun then you';d have more of an appreciation for the level of skill it can take to fly these things with auto-level turned on;



There seems to be a major disparity in terms of the seriousness with which the BMFA take fixed wing aircraft and with which they take multirotor aircraft. I couldn';t pass the BMFA A test for fixed wing with any of my planes because none are heavy enough. They are all small electric sports models - like the quadcopters you';ve flown. Other people wont be able to pass their multirotor A test because their multirotors are so large that they are best flown with auto-level turned on.

but what has that got to do with anything, especially pilot achievement?

I don';t think anyone would deny that it takes more skill to fly in full manual than it does to fly with auto-level turned on. But the important point is that it still takes plenty of skill to fly a multirotor with auto-level enabled. Especially once you move out of the sports flying category and start flying larger more serious aircraft. If you';ve only ever flown small quadcopters on manual and gotten good at that then of course you will find a 450 with auto-level easy to fly. Your experience is not reflective of everyone else';s on this point. Nor is it reflective of the way a lot of people choose to learn to fly;



But i can see why someone who';s always flown on full manual without experiencing this side of things for themselves would be so dismissive of others who choose (or need) to fly using auto-level.

Anyone who has never flown before or who has only flown simple easy to fly aircraft will get a real sense of pilot achievement when they get their first quadcopter up in the air and under control. Even if they are using auto-level. They will probably get more of a sense of achievement using auto-level at first because they';ll make fewer silly (and potentially dangerous) mistakes and progress faster. The A test should benefit these people and the B test should focus on people like you and me who want to take it to the next level and show off on full manual in front of crowds of people at fly-in events by pulling stunts.

Both levels of flying involve skill and both reward pilots with a sense of personal achievement. It';s a real shame the BMFA doesn';t recognise this and doesn';t seem to want to help both sections of the community.

For any of the RC Achievement scheme tests it is my opinion that the attitude, altitude and position of the aircraft should be controlled by the pilot, so when I get round to taking the Multi A I would expect to do it in Manual mode.

I would also expect you to do it in full manual. I just think it';s very unfortunate that you expect everyone else to do the same.

[Hands0n]

Well I suppose that all this strongly suggests that it is an organisation and set of clubs for elitists. As such it will not appeal to the upcoming masses.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[Big A]

You are making wildly inaccurate assumptions.

My background is fixed wing, both aerobatic and scale flying. I am a novice heli flier and novice multi-rotor flier. I see no reason why a multi achievement test should be hugely easier than the heli A, it is of course impossible to have matching levels of difficulty across different disciplines though but broadly similar is desirable in my opinion.

It';s a red herring throwing in the 1kg lower limit for fixed wing too, part of the fixed wing power A skill set being tested is and always was managing the momentum and energy of the aircraft which you cannot test with many lighter weight aircraft, now some sub 1kg models would be ok for the test however you need to set a limit somewhere and 1kg is a good limit in my opinion.

It is of course entirely up to the person presenting for the test to ensure they turn up with a suitable aircraft for any of the tests one that is capable of flying the required manoeuvres and controlled fully by the pilot, whatever the type of test being taken.

None of the achievement scheme tests are a "one size fits all solution" simply impossible to be so. However all the tests no matter which discipline have been formulated by a number of people very experienced in that discipline and I for one am 100% happy to accept their recommendations. The multi tests where tried out by a number of fliers with many different multis of different sizes before being launched.

The achievement scheme tests are not and never have been either safety certificates or licences, they are personal achievement tests. They do improve safety awareness and improve flying skills though, and of course improved flying skills is desirable and also further improves safety.

[Big A]

Well I suppose that all this strongly suggests that it is an organisation and set of clubs for elitists. As such it will not appeal to the upcoming masses.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

well it';s an opinion which of course you are more than welcome to hold, I would, rather unsurprisingly, beg to differ. It strongly suggests an organisation with room for all fliers of all disciplines from the novice to the elite with clubs that in most cases are welcoming to all that are somewhere a novice can go and improve their flying skills with like minded individuals.

[Jimbodiddly]

With the explosion of multi rotors in the last 2 years more and more people are buying rtf multi';s or indeed building them, the general sense I get from this thread is that the BMFA view is somewhat elitist and in some aspects behind the times. In order for the BMFA to appeal to a wider audience and indeed garner more members it needs to change this mentality, however in light of previous statements in this thread despite some good forward thinking posts & very valid  points from the multi rotor community yet again it comes across to me as though the BMFA are just digging their heels in.

This is yet another reason why I choose not to be part of the membership because of the staunch attitude it has & continues to have against new technology & multi rotors. The CAA are making a lot of effort integrating multi rotors with structured rules which to me think is encouraging, as our hobby continues to grow I do believe the BMFA unless it changes with the times will further alienate itself from our community.

Why doesn';t the BMFA invest some time and a little effort in actually getting a number of the board to fly a multi rotor to gain some insight into the vast difference between auto level & auto pilot as the two quite simply chalk and cheese.

[Hands0n]

well it';s an opinion which of course you are more than welcome to hold, I would, rather unsurprisingly, beg to differ. It strongly suggests an organisation with room for all fliers of all disciplines from the novice to the elite with clubs that in most cases are welcoming to all that are somewhere a novice can go and improve their flying skills with like minded individuals.

Thats a statement you make very frequently and is strongly suggestive that "opinions" don';t count.  But they really do. And it is an opinion occasioned directly through the experience of local BMFA club';s very apparent disparagement of multi-rotor and in many ways your representation of the BMFA in a lot of the feedback you';re giving on this specific thread.

By engendering these "opinions" in my head you are alienating me from the BMFA such that I could not countenance ever being associated with it.   So my question to you would be ... is that exactly what you as a BMFA representative and the BMFA as an organisation are trying to do?  Because if that is the case, then tacitly if not in fact the BMFA are indeed an organisation for elitists.

[Jimbodiddly]

well it';s an opinion which of course you are more than welcome to hold, I would, rather unsurprisingly, beg to differ. It strongly suggests an organisation with room for all fliers of all disciplines from the novice to the elite with clubs that in most cases are welcoming to all that are somewhere a novice can go and improve their flying skills with like minded individuals.

From what I have heard from other pilots who have kneed ventured to fly/ register interest at various clubs the issue also seems to be at club level as well. what steps are the BMFA taking to educate clubs further and assist in the integration of Multirotors apart from the BMFA magazine ??

Jim

[Big A]

The tests were drawn up by very experienced multi fliers and a number of those that approved the final draft did invest their time to try out the differences and the advice and recommendation of the experienced multi fliers was followed. These tests weren';t dreamt up by non multi or novice multi fliers.

[Big A]

Thats a statement you make very frequently and is strongly suggestive that "opinions" don';t count.  But they really do. And it is an opinion occasioned directly through the experience of local BMFA club';s very apparent disparagement of multi-rotor and in many ways your representation of the BMFA in a lot of the feedback you';re giving on this specific thread.

By engendering these "opinions" in my head you are alienating me from the BMFA such that I could not countenance ever being associated with it.   So my question to you would be ... is that exactly what you as a BMFA representative and the BMFA as an organisation are trying to do?  Because if that is the case, then tacitly if not in fact the BMFA are indeed an organisation for elitists.

my posts suggest that there are, and always will be different opinions, please point out where I have dismissed anyone';s opinion, I have expressed my own opinions based on knowledge of how the tests have been formulated and extensive knowledge of the achievement scheme in general. I have even stated you are entitled to your opinions.

In answer your question of course that isn';t what either I or the BMFA are trying to do. I would also suggest there is no evidence for that and huge amounts of evidence against it. The BMFA supports fliers from being an absolute novice right through to the elite, and so it should be.

[teslahed]

The tests were drawn up by very experienced multi fliers and a number of those that approved the final draft did invest their time to try out the differences and the advice and recommendation of the experienced multi fliers was followed. These tests weren';t dreamt up by non multi or novice multi fliers.

I think that';s a big part of the problem and explains a lot.

In answer your question of course that isn';t what either I or the BMFA are trying to do. I would also suggest there is no evidence for that and huge amounts of evidence against it. The BMFA supports fliers from being an absolute novice right through to the elite, and so it should be.

In this case you';ve missed the mark badly. There have been plenty of positive suggestions as to what needs to change if you want to support novice fliers in this thread and others.

[Big A]

From what I have heard from other pilots who have kneed ventured to fly/ register interest at various clubs the issue also seems to be at club level as well. what steps are the BMFA taking to educate clubs further and assist in the integration of Multirotors apart from the BMFA magazine ??

Jim

jim
I am the BMFA club support officer and I have spent many hours assisting clubs directly on the matter, what I or the BMFA for that matter will never do is insist a club does something, simply not our role. Advise and assist is what we do.

There have been many clubs asking for advice and assistance to integrate multis and many have with no problem at all, some clubs have little or no experience of them and can be wary but in generally they are very open to accepting them and accepting that they may have to do things a little differently sometimes too. It is purely a decision for the club though.

[Big A]

I think that';s a big part of the problem and explains a lot.

In this case you';ve missed the mark badly. There have been plenty of positive suggestions as to what needs to change if you want to support novice fliers in this thread and others.

i think not having experienced multi fliers involved would be completely unacceptable.

There are two strands to this thread though, their is the Achievements scheme aspect and the supporting novice fliers aspect while related they are not the same thing and I would suggest its a mistake to think they are.

There is absolutely nothing stopping clubs accepting a lore level of achievement and skill to permit solo multi flying, indeed it';s something I have pointed out on numerous occasions to clubs.

[Jimbodiddly]

jim
I am the BMFA club support officer and I have spent many hours assisting clubs directly on the matter, what I or the BMFA for that matter will never do is insist a club does something, simply not our role. Advise and assist is what we do.

There have been many clubs asking for advice and assistance to integrate multis and many have with no problem at all, some clubs have little or no experience of them and can be wary but in generally they are very open to accepting them and accepting that they may have to do things a little differently sometimes too. It is purely a decision for the club though.

Thats what you need to highlight more of what you';ve done, until you mentioned the above statement in relation to clubs enquiring about how best to integrate multi rotors in the clubs themselves I had not heard of this, its a positive step & needs to continue.

Jim

[Big A]

I did mention it in my corner of the last BMFA news.

One thing that should be pointed out is that all the achievement scheme tests are under constant review and nothing is ever set in stone, these multi tests are very very new, and the proof of the pudding will be in the eating. I would be very surprised if there are no changes whatsoever to them in time once it can be seen how they are working.

[teslahed]

i think not having experienced multi fliers involved would be completely unacceptable.

I totally agree with you here.

I just also think that you should have gotten novices and newer fliers involved as well - especially for the basic A test. If you';d spoken with a wider cross section of the community you';d have gotten a better more representative result. You';d have allowed auto-level in the A test and this would result in a lot more novice and new fliers trying for the A test and eventually the B test too once they had achieved their A test which would encourage rather than discourage people to make the effort and increase their skill level and safe flying ability. Which is what you should be aiming for.

I can tell you that most fliers will feel a sense of piloting achievement once they can get to the point where they can fly nose in, do fast banked circles in either direction, and do figures of eight with a good level of control. Even if they need auto-level turned on to achieve this level of flying. It won';t result in less safe multirotor fliers if you allow this. It will simple encourage people to engage with the BMFA and their local clubs (the clubs that listen to the BMFA anyway).

There is absolutely nothing stopping clubs accepting a lore level of achievement and skill to permit solo multi flying, indeed it';s something I have pointed out on numerous occasions to clubs.

The better a job you do in encouraging clubs to allow multirotor pilots the better it will be for the multirotor community. But also the more likely these clubs are to consider the BMFA A test as the best (or easiest to implement) test of safe solo flying ability. If you come across as an authority on the subject by engaging with these clubs then they are more likely to take the BMFA tests seriously.

This explains why people are so ';up in arms'; about the simpler A test requiring you to fly in full manual. It will harm rather than help people who want to get involved with clubs unless they can fly the way you think they should be flying. Your expectations of what should be in the A test are pretty far off as far as i am concerned and also as far as a lot of other people i';ve spoken to on the subject are concerned. I think this forum thread reflects this fact, as does both the simpler survey attached to this thread and the more complicated one i';ve linked to several times already.

One thing that should be pointed out is that all the achievement scheme tests are under constant review and nothing is ever set in stone, these multi tests are very very new, and the proof of the pudding will be in the eating. I would be very surprised if there are no changes whatsoever to them in time once it can be seen how they are working.

That';s the most reassuring thing I';ve heard you say so far

[barneyg]

im not sure what that has to do with anything, if a multi-rotor is banked or nose up or down and the electronics corrects it and not the pilot it is my opinion that the electronics is doing more than enabling flight and is taking over control.

Hmmm I seem to remember back when I flew real planes when I let the pressure off the stick when banking the plane gradually returned to level ? and didn';t someone already mention the wing dihedral angle ?  When I fly my quad in angle mode in order to maintain a bank I have to maintain pressure on the stick or it will level out ... sound familiar ?

edit :

I am the BMFA club support officer and I have spent many hours assisting clubs directly on the matter, what I or the BMFA for that matter will never do is insist a club does something, simply not our role. Advise and assist is what we do.

And herein lies the problem ... you come across as elitist, and you are the club support officer ... its no wonder people find the clubs elitist.

There are two clubs near enough to me as to be worth while joining.  Neither mention helicopters let alone multi';s on their site and both talk about 35Mhz radios only.  Personally I';m frightened to even contact them

[teslahed]

On the subject of whether or not auto-level is an auto-pilot, it';s interesting to note that the people who are behind the APM hardware and programming think that it is not;

http://copter.ardupilot.com/wiki/stabilize-mode/

Always switch into a manual mode such as stabilize if the autopilot fails to control the vehicle. Maintaining control of your copter is your responsibility.

Stabilise mode is what they call auto-level on the APM. Well worth a read that article.

I won';t repeat all my arguments as to why I think auto-level isn';t an auto-pilot but i will say that i find it very reassuring that some of the top experts in the field feel the same way that i do. Maybe this will help change the BMFA';s opinion on the subject?

[tupoar]

Does it mean that they should make you turn off ABS, Traction Control etc on a car before you can perform an emergency stop on your driving test??

[Hands0n]

Does it mean that they should make you turn off ABS, Traction Control etc on a car before you can perform an emergency stop on your driving test??

Before enlightenment the DSA (Driving Standards Agency) would fail a candidate taking their Practical test if they braked hard enough to cause the ABS to activate.  Eventually they listened to reason and no longer do so, acknowledging that it is a safety feature and that the candidate can indeed brake quickly enough and firmly enough to maximise the braking effect.

In teaching the skill, it never ceases to amaze me how reluctant a learner is to maximise their braking, thinking they';ll either break the car or cause a catastrophic skid!

[kilby]

Tupor, I was thinking exactly the same thing.

I hope it';s a case of great minds think alike.

Also as I said earlier one flight controllers auto level mode behaves very differently to another';s.

The Naze is more like the APM when the APM is running in acro and I';m sure the Naza is different again

[nub]

but then that';s not very fair on motorcyclists is it, because as far as i remember you can fail your test if you skid in your emergency stop and most bikes do not have ABS.

your taking away some of the skills it requires to use a brake properly and relying on the electronics to do the work for you, which is not right IMHO.

any fool can jam a pedal, whats the point in having the emergency stop as part of test?

[teslahed]

It';s a good job i know you are joking nub

[Friskle]

So the Heli A Cert should be taken using a gyros Rate mode and not heading hold mode, afterall, heading hold is taking tail control away from the pilot.

I know many heli flyers that can fly in HH mode, but cant fly in rate.

Surely if your talking about taking control away is a bad thing, then this is the same thing ?

[Hands0n]

but then that';s not very fair on motorcyclists is it, because as far as i remember you can fail your test if you skid in your emergency stop and most bikes do not have ABS.

your taking away some of the skills it requires to use a brake properly and relying on the electronics to do the work for you, which is not right IMHO.

any fool can jam a pedal, whats the point in having the emergency stop as part of test?

A good point, even if in some humour    So just to clarify, if you take your Practical Driving Test in a car without ABS, and you induce a skid, then you will fail the Emergency Stop. However, if, in that car, you demonstrate Cadence Breaking then you will not.  What you have demonstrated in either case is that you have safe control of that specific vehicle.  So it is up to the instructor and the pupil to learn to that vehicle.

With a multi-rotor such safety features should be considered also.  So in an Acro-only FC you would demonstrate safe and controlled use of.  With an FC that is has stability capabilities then that should be viewed in the same light, as a safety feature that the pilot knows how to use in the context of an overall safe flight.

Returning to the car Practical Test - you won';t be surprised to learn that there was a very vocal cabal of fuddy duddies who argued that ABS activation should persist to be a test failure as the candidate had over-braked.  An equal and opposite argument, however, is that they knew how, and were fully prepared, to use the safety feature of the vehicle.