Model licences A and B

[teslahed]

Have I missed something?

"The 'A' certificate is a measure of flying ability and safety which 'may be equated to a safe solo standard of flying' and an increasing number of clubs use it as their 'safe solo' test. As an examiner, the level of competence you should expect of a candidate should be based on
that criterion; that is, is this person, in your opinion, fit to be allowed to fly unsupervised?"

The first paragraph seems to hint that auto-level should be allowed. Because it';s safer flying with it than without and there are many multirotor pilots out there who are perfectly capable of flying safely and solo under full control who still use auto-level.

The next two paragraphs then specifically ban auto-level.

I think this is a contradiction and i disagree with the approach laid out in the second and third paragraphs on the basis of my own experience flying around safe pilots who use auto-level and also on the basis of the content of the first paragraph.

Why bother?

Because clubs and fly in events can be positive experiences for at least some people in this hobby and should become so for more. Making The basic A test too elitist will deny a lot of people entry to these events at which they could actually learn some stuff as well has have a good time which is unfair and will be detrimental to the progression of the hobby in the long run including in terms of safety because it will put people off even trying.

I agree this isn';t life and death as a lot of us will just totally ignore the BMFA and continue to do our own things, but for some people at least that';s a real shame.

My personal belief is that none of this should affect either the fixed wing tests or the helicopter tests. What';s right for multirotor aircraft isn';t necessarily right for any other aircraft as they are different kinds of thing in so many ways. So the old guard might argue that we need to fly on manual because they fly their planes and helis on manual but i just don';t agree with that approach and i don';t think allowing auto-level on multirotors means it has to be allowed on helicopters as well.

[Friskle]

I think you may find the original multi';s did not have self level.

     Marty and the borrowed doggie, :scotland:

The point is, they allow gyros, the fact is without them they wouldnt fly at all, and due to people wanting stability for various reasons, stab systems to make life easier appeared, wich is why they have boomed.

If this is the case here, then get rid of gyros from helis tails, afterall at one time they didnt have any then mechanical ones, you could say, well in the past people had to learn to fly a heli with no gyro, and it was difficult, so why not now ? but technology moves on.

The problem here is the BMFA knows little to nothing about them, and still living in the 70 and 80`and come up with a test based around how certain people fly, and not about safety.

For the A test, all you should need to show is a competent frame of mind, show your safe on the ground, and be able to control your multi in all orientations, in a given area.

My WKM, has never seen manual mode, and never will, i didnt buy it for sport flying i bought it for its stability options, i have flown my quad at our club for the last 2 years, with no incident, yet after this, i will be forced to do a test in manual mode to prove im ok  to fly solo ?   Sorry, ludicrous.

In fact if it was about competency , then why should the fixed wing A cert not carry over ?  It does for electric to IC , which imho is crazy, the difference between setting up an IC to electric are totally differeng kettles of fish, a big difference in competency sticking a battery in compared to starting up IC, but one test does it all...


If people want to fly thier little small quads round like no tomorrow in manual mode, thats entirely upto them, but many never bought them for that.

Simple ground safety and orientation manouvreres in atti mode will still prove compentency.

[Marty McFly]

If you have an electronics failure at least youve got a fighting chance of getting it back if you can fly in manual mode,so does this mean your now going to give up club flying or are you going to do the test.

Marty and the borrowed doggie, :scotland:

[flybywire]

What about my ';free flight models';?

BTW:  For those of you unfamiliar with the concept, a free flight model is a powered or ';thrown'; model aeroplane that relies solely upon the trim settings present at launch to accomplish the flight plan.

P.S if you think those are limited to tiny, light creations, think again!

[teslahed]

My concern is the number of ready to fly multis that are being sold and then flown with out any prior expierence ofany form of modeling.

This is a very real concern which i share and which i think may be partly behind the BMFAs decision to make everyone fly both tests on full manual.

I still feel that simply using auto-level doesn';t make someone a less safe flier. I think that comes when people start relying on GPS and altitude hold just to keep themselves in the air. Both these forms of automation can fail for all sorts of different reasons and even when they work well arguably take control away from the pilot.

If you have an electronics failure at least youve got a fighting chance of getting it back if you can fly in manual mode,so does this mean your now going to give up club flying or are you going to do the test.

If your accelerometers fail your gyros will also fail. Swapping from self levelling to full manual will not save a multirotor from going in. But quite often swapping from full manual to self levelling will save someone from crashing. So i can think of no situation here an electronics failure means self levelling will fail but gyros only will still work. Unlike GPS which is different.

I don';t think many people would dispute that a phantom flier that needs GPS to fly is anything other than a poor pilot at best and a button pusher at worst. I definitely think GPS flight modes should be disallowed in both BMFA multirotor tests because of this.

But anyone that can fly a KK2 equipped multirotor, even if they need the auto-level, is a pilot in my book. And the phantom can be set to fly with a similar level of electronic assistance so there are plenty of phantom pilots out there too.

[barneyg]

If you have an electronics failure at least youve got a fighting chance of getting it back if you can fly in manual mode,so does this mean your now going to give up club flying or are you going to do the test.

Marty and the borrowed doggie, :scotland:

Given that the gyros and acceleratometers are usually on the same chip these days I think if your FC failed to the point it couldn';t keep level flight no amount of manual piloting skills are going to let you control where the thing is going to crash

[Friskle]

The A cert has nothing to do with what happens in the even of incident, its about completing ground safety questions, and flying in all orientations, and showing you have failsafes set up.

But sadly yes, if i have to fly in manual to do a test to fly solo, after over two years of already doing it there, then yes ill just not bother taking it to my club anymore, because there is no way i will be flying 1600 quids worth in manual, just to please someone else.

Well, let us be really honest here, in most cases electronic failure will result in a lump falling to the ground, esc failure on a quad, its coming down, which would be different on a hex or more.

[nub]

@tesla a pilot with any sort of basic skill should be able to level out or keep a multi level easily? will that';s what i think anyways.

but either way none of this will ever affect me so.... i';m out!

i can see your point as well Friskle.

ach as always your not going to please everybody.

[tupoar]

The way I understand the setup of the BMFA and their structure, the only way the tests will change is if the clubs start changing their attitude to multi';s.

The other option is for more multi clubs to start appearing.

[barneyg]

of course there could be some middle ground here ...

Basic hovering, and maneuvers done in full manual and the more complex lazy 8 can be done in stabilize mode

[Oakie]

Hmm, I see the comment saying '; beyond definition above';

To me that allows the use of.

What follows after, is not allowed?

The level of ability to fly, IMHO, is that of competence and the examiner is there to take the persons approach to safety and their general attitude toward flying their model safely.

However the B asks a lot more of the pilot and a better understanding and ability.

So personally I think it a little harsh to ask for the turning off of Stabilisation....

Paul

[teslahed]

@tesla a pilot with any sort of basic skill should be able to level out or keep a multi level easily? will that';s what i think anyways.

Lots can';t. Or can';t safely and well.

Don';t forget there';s a B test - make people do that on full manual i say!

Full manual is for stunt flying which i love. Auto-level is for safer and more sedate flying which a lot of other people love. There are two BMFA tests at two different levels, so...

[nub]

aye i suppose you';ve got a good point there, i wasn';t even thinking about the B test.

[kilby]

Will throw my tuppence in.

Like Chris I think that full manual is unnecessary for the A cert and I also believe that there isn';t enough in the A cert

No nose in flying, FFS surely you should be expected to control a multirotor (or heli) no matter what direction it is facing.

So you can fly nose out and do a lazy 8 in manual but everybody has to watch out if it';s pointing in the wrong direction!

Perhaps there should be A1, A2 & B certs with A1 permitting autolevel and A2 being all the same but manual.

My lazy 8s in manual vary too much in height, but I cope with nose in etc in any mode which makes things safer for everybody else in the club

[Hands0n]

Precisely. Which all goes to show that the A test as proposed is not really tailored to multi-rotor but is an adaptation, at best, of winged flight.  Safety, in multi-rotor terms, is a moderately different kettle of fish than for winged.  Multi';s can hover, and change direction from a standstill in a blink. The "problem set" is rather different to winged flight and, I';d probably go as far as to say that it has subtle differences to heli flight also. 

[Marty McFly]

My final thought';s are that it will be very difficult to change the BMFA around,and at the end of the day most people with multi';s fly on there own or in very small groups,im still in favour of club flying as it requires you to have certain disciplines and be safety conscious,and do checks on your model';s airworthyness.
Good luck with the task youve taken on Chris as it will be a very hard long winded climb to get any relent from the BMFA.

Marty and the borrowed doggie, :scotland:

[teslahed]

Unfortunately i think you are right Marty. I don';t think i will succeed in changing anyone';s mind at the BMFA despite my best efforts and intentions. I think that all that will happen is that most people will ignore the A and B certificates with the exception of a few stunt fliers who';ll sail through both tests without much of a problem and some helicopter fliers who are new to multirotors but who';ll find making the transition relatively easy. So people like you and me could take the tests and pass without much stress but anyone who';d been flying multirotors for some time and has no interest in learning gyro only flight will probably just ignore them. Then miss out on a lot of stuff as a result.

I am quite tempted to re-write the actual test parts of the BMFA pdf files over the weekend. I will then upload them to the forum somewhere. That way instead of just criticising i can actually add something constructive to the conversation. Any clubs that want to run their own tests would be welcome to nick as much as they want from what i produce if it helps in any way.

I don';t think there is much more i can do than that.

I will of course open up my efforts to constructive criticism and comments from the community and wont necessarily expect the first draft to be perfect in every way.

[flybywire]

If people want to fly thier little small quads round like no tomorrow in manual mode, thats entirely upto them, but many never bought them for that.

Simple ground safety and orientation manouvreres in atti mode will still prove compentency.

At last, a voice of wisdom & reason

P.S I';m afraid passing any test will not make you a better pilot/driver (just look at our road system) only practice will do that.

[Oakie]

Live and let live.......

The BMFA have done a supper job.

Paul

All the personalities aside, The A is there for a good reason.

the examiner has the final say on the day and as a guide the inforemation supplied is good enough.

I cant see why they had to change anything for Multi';s from heli, it can do the same thing.

All can chop your arm off.

IMHO nothing has come out of this other than peoples own experiences or not, i suspect personalities have more to do with the out come than common sense.

So as a supporting member of the BMFA I would personally see no point to change and just to slip it in........


Chris, as has already been said qudos to you.

I';me off to my club annual public fly on Sunday and they support all model flying.

[flybywire]

On the subject of clubs.  I wouldn';t want to say anything disparaging about clubs and the folk who attend them, I realise they are a bona fide social amenity and lifeline to many who have nobody else to share their hobby with. 

THrough my endeavours, I have discovered that I am not a club person, despite spending many happy days/years in my youth ';larkin'; about with balsa stuff of all shapes and motive power';s with my young confederates.
Somewhere along the line I parted with the conventional wisdoms of society, and I have found a certain sanctity and solace in my solo flying activities, mostly involve me, a pair of goggle, a multi and a nice piece of scenery below or in front of me.  Believe me, I wouldn';t have it any other way.

Can you imagine, hovering over the Grand Canyon, with £2000 of multi bling, when you hear a voice from behind: "Yo!  Do you have the A cert there boy?"

THis is why I feel strongly about these things, even though I will never join a club again.  I won';t be glib and quote Marx (graucho that is ;-)) I did meet a few guys who were genuine, and enjoyed some banter from those who appeared fascinated by my various ';dark vehicles of the satan';!

[Hands0n]

So, for all the reasons that Chris has eloquently stated, the proposed A test as constructed, will be a bar to me joining any flying club that mandates an A test to be allowed to fly solo.  Having that as a bar to solo club flight will be a big negative to very many multi-rotor fliers, I contend.

The downside is that people who could possibly gain the most from the club experience will be denied it.  An a multi-rotor apartheid would become apparent. And we can almost guarantee that the RTF crowd will avoid all and any such clubs.

I wonder if that is what the clubs and BMFA actually want to happen.

Personally, well we are all individuals after all , I do not enjoy flying full manual, have had a lousy experience with it on a KK2, even the early auto-level software was rather poor up to and including 1.5 software. The chances are that I actually do not have the manual dexterity to fly manual. So should people like me be disbarred from flying at all?  Gaining access to auto-level-capable FCs has transformed the experience, making me safer in the process.   Of course, all other "auto" modes are bonus levels if you want to use them.

[teslahed]

The guy who wrote the BMFA A & B tests considers auto-level to be the same as auto-pilot and thinks that auto-pilot means you aren';t really flying the aircraft which is why it shouldn';t be allowed in any flying test. The same as GPS driven flight modes.

I think auto-level is more a form of stability augmentation system than it is an auto-pilot as defined by this somewhat interesting wikipedia article;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopilot

Because of the way it doesn';t manage position or trajectory at all - it still leaves all of that up to the pilot.

The gyros themselves are arguably also a form of stability augmentation. Accelerometers just add more augmented stability than gyros alone can provide. Drawing the line at one and not the other is down to personal preference and this decision should be left up to the pilot in my opinion. As long as you are safe and under control i don';t care if you are or are not using accelerometers to achieve that effect. I';d still be happy flying next to you

[barneyg]

and where does Horizon mode fit into it  ;D

[Hands0n]

Exactly, the human pilot remain the pilot at all times when using auto-level or stabilisation, whatever one wants to call it. 

Perhaps the word "auto" is adding an incorrect connotation into the author';s head.  But for absolute certain, there is nothing autopilot in it at all.  Release the sticks and the multi-rotor will be at the whim of the prevailing air movement and environment, there will be no practical auto-anything other than level. So it will happily crash into anything above, below or alongside it without human pilot intervention. 

I would defy  anyone to actually fly a multi-rotor will all forms of augmentation removed, just raw control from the RX to the ESC/motors, bypassing the flight controller itself.  I';m sure there are one or two superhumans out there that could manage it. But the other 99.98% of the human population wouldn';t be able to!

[Hands0n]

and where does Horizon mode fit into it  ;D

As a hybrid between auto-level and acro/manual it would fail the current BMFA requirement (unless you wanted to demonstrate your talents by flying at full stick movement ::) ).

[teslahed]

Horizon mode is just a loosened up form of auto-level for people that want to try stunts on multiwii but who still want the accelerometers in the loop. It will make your aircraft more stable and easier to fly without taking away any control from you the pilot.

You';ll still be able to crash the thing if you make a mistake and you';ll still be able to perform any flight manoeuvre you like if you practice hard enough.

It will help keep you right side up similar to dihedral on a fixed wing but it wont manage the flight trajectory or help you move from A to B beyond simply reducing the pilot work load required to level the aircraft.

Probably shouldn';t be allowed in the B test but should in the A (my opinion not the BMFAs that unfortunately).

[teslahed]

I would defy  anyone to actually fly a multi-rotor will all forms of augmentation removed, just raw control from the RX to the ESC/motors, bypassing the flight controller itself.  I';m sure there are one or two superhumans out there that could manage it. But the other 99.98% of the human population wouldn';t be able to!

The CC3D actually gives you the option to try. The manual says don';t!

The option is there for people that stick them in fixed wing aircraft and should probably be removed from the multirotor firmware so that people don';t misunderstand and try it by accident thinking it';s another stunt mode

Just for a laugh; here are some people trying to fly multirotors without any electronic augmentation.

http://youtu.be/FPF9OP7Jync

They only work at all because they are so large that everything happens more slowly anyway.

[Oakie]

So in a nutshell As I read it you can use Stabilisation mode for the ';A'; test.

Paul

[teslahed]

The guy who actually wrote the test tells me (vociferously!) that you can';t.

[Oakie]

Then I need to go back to school as everything I understood about English is wrong!

I';ll seek clarification at the club meet over the weekend, they will have most that would know there.

It';s so confusing. as it quite clearly states to me that anything above the comment:-

The use of any autopilot and/or artificial stability features which are (or may be) designed
into such units beyond definition above

which is...It is acceptable to use an electro-mechanical or solid state gyro/s in a multirotor being used
to take the test although electronic stabilisation is restricted to enabling flight.....


does not this say yes, not no?