UK Euro-USC Charges.

[simon@DEF]

Well played Simon, I'm very interested to see what happens.

Annoyed I didn't spot this earlier before spending all that money.

From what I can tell, I'm possibly the only one to do this.... Certainly very few. I realise by discussing this I'm opening competition for myself and others, bring it on.... I've faced bigger things in life and I like a challenge

 

[The Editor]

Hmmmm.....interesting.
The problem I see is without acquiring a ground school certification how do the CAA know you have suffiecient understanding of airspace rules and will have the knowledge to operate safely within the NAS?

 

[simon@DEF]

Hmmmm.....interesting.
The problem I see is without acquiring a ground school certification how do the CAA know you have suffiecient understanding of airspace rules and will have the knowledge to operate safely within the NAS?

Within my ops manual I show my understanding of NAS/notams and more. I've followed the system, I understand the health and safety, risks and regulations, all through hard research and asking lots of relevant people. This is not an easy way, but I've had time (recovery from heart op) and determination coupled with a willingness to learn and question.

 

[The Editor]

Within my ops manual I show my understanding of NAS/notams and more. I've followed the system, I understand the health and safety, risks and regulations, all through hard research and asking lots of relevant people. This is not an easy way, but I've had time (recovery from heart op) and determination coupled with a willingness to learn and question.

OK, now I understand.
You have gone your own route to demonstrate competency and adherance to the ANO with regards to operations of a SUAV etc.
Your ops manual must be written in volumes and fill a couple of shelves.
Mine is around 50 pages long but doesn't have any in depth detail with regards to certain subjects since that is evedenced by my ground school exam.
You would have not only needed to cover the requisite headings but also demonstrated an understanding of numerous topics such as principles of flight, meterology, air space separation, air law, risk assessment, flight planning and more besides.
That is most definitely NOT an easy or straightforward way of doing it!
I probably would not recommend this approach for the majority of people interested - I would imagine this has taken considerably longer to complete than an NQE course and flght assessment!
Good luck with your submission.

 

[simon@DEF]

OK, now I understand.
You have gone your own route to demonstrate competency and adherance to the ANO with regards to operations of a SUAV etc.
Your ops manual must be written in volumes and fill a couple of shelves.
Mine is around 50 pages long but doesn't have any in depth detail with regards to certain subjects since that is evedenced by my ground school exam.
You would have not only needed to cover the requisite headings but also demonstrated an understanding of numerous topics such as principles of flight, meterology, air space separation, air law, risk assessment, flight planning and more besides.
That is most definitely NOT an easy or straightforward way of doing it!
I probably would not recommend this approach for the majority of people interested - I would imagine this has taken considerably longer to complete than an NQE course and flght assessment!
Good luck with your submission.

3 months, including the month it's been with the CAA. 44 pages ops manual. I've followed CAA own 722, it's just a different approach. I'm not saying it's for all, but suited me.

 

[Oscen]

From what I can tell, I'm possibly the only one to do this.... Certainly very few. I realise by discussing this I'm opening competition for myself and others, bring it on.... I've faced bigger things in life and I like a challenge

I wouldn't worry, I guess if this route becomes more popular the CAA and the BMFA will catch on to what's happening, the fee for sitting the BMFA certificate will rise dramatically!

Editor - As per the table posted earlier, the column for theoretical knowledge required to be demonstrated by someone who holds a BMFA A or B cert reads NIL .

I don't regularly get to use this word but for the first time in a long time I'm going to use it...

I am flabbergasted.

 

[simon@DEF]

I

I wouldn't worry, I guess if this route becomes more popular the CAA and the BMFA will catch on to what's happening, the fee for sitting the BMFA certificate will rise dramatically!

Editor - As per the table posted earlier, the column for theoretical knowledge required to be demonstrated by someone who holds a BMFA A or B cert reads NIL .

I don't regularly get to use this word but for the first time in a long time I'm going to use it...

I am flabbergasted.

I have discussed this at length with the BMFA and the CAA, the whole thing is under review is the verbal reply the CAA gave me, they said all PFAW is. The BMFA test isn't just a flight test, questions are asked too.
The information is readily available for all to see, I just decided to ask questions and follow it up. I realised in December this was a bit of an anomaly, but it's in black and white.
In theory including PFAW application fee, it could be gained for under £150 plus the insurance.
My insurance company checked also, they've covered me as they're satisfied at my competency and followed CAA info.
I do things properly, but I'm not afraid to do them differently

 

[The Editor]

I

I have discussed this at length with the BMFA and the CAA, the whole thing is under review is the verbal reply the CAA gave me, they said all PFAW is. The BMFA test isn't just a flight test, questions are asked too.
The information is readily available for all to see, I just decided to ask questions and follow it up. I realised in December this was a bit of an anomaly, but it's in black and white.
In theory including PFAW application fee, it could be gained for under £150 plus the insurance.
My insurance company checked also, they've covered me as their satisfied at my competency and followed CAA info.
I do things properly, but I'm not afraid to do them differently

I have actually read all of IN-2015/008 now. I wouldn't be surprised if this is changed in the very near future.
It is very contradictory in the way it is worded. On the one hand the CAA (quite rightly) want a full understanding of the criteria laid down under the NQE stipulations. These points would already be covered and understood by all of the entities in Annex 3 WITH THE EXCEPTION of BFMA A or B holders. Model flyers would not have a need nor covered many of the subject matters required by the CAA's own admission and stipulation for granting PFAW.
I think this may even be a cock up on the part of the CAA and a loophole that is hastily closed in the near future.

 

[Oscen]

But a loophole I may be able to jump through before it shuts!

 

[The Editor]

But a loophole I may be able to jump through before it shuts!

I actually think it would be easy for you to since you already have groundschool and ops manual approved. You would simply be doing the BFMA-A cert.

 

[simon@DEF]

I actually think it would be easy for you to since you already have groundschool and ops manual approved. You would simply be doing the BFMA-A cert.

Interesting watching the different reactions to this on here.... If I've given the opportunity to others to save money and earn a living, good
The info has been in relatively plain sight for 12 months, I chose to read CAP 722 and gain comprehension of before applying to any NQEs, I saw the opportunity for gaining PFAW could be done differently to the masses.
I understand why people choose NQEs, they serve an excellent purpose. It's possible to save enough money though to buy a dedicated computer, editing software and flight batteries just by doing things differently....
I'm not looking to cause chaos, the NQEs, BMFA and CAA all know this could be done this way....
Good luck to those that go for their PFAW via their chosen route

 

[simon@DEF]

If anyone has doubts, I have received my PFAW today.....

 

[Oscen]

Congratulations!!!!

Sorry for the late reply, I am currently on the BMFA website trying to figure out how I can book my A or B cert as close to home as possible.

If you have any pointers, please feel free to PM me.

 

[simon@DEF]

Thanks Oscen

 

[Nigpd]

If anyone has doubts, I have received my PFAW today.....

Well done Simon, that's great news

 

[Hugh4G]

Wait a mo....

I have my ops manual passed, and my ground school... The bit I was getting cross about is that all the available test sites are half way across the country....
Does this mean that I can arrange to take the practical test with a local BMFA club that is within ten miles of me...

That would be such good news. The idea of not travelling from the south coast to Birmingham would be good!

Do the BMFA have a straightforward means for examining multi rotor candidates who are aiming to work with their craft?


Best

Hugh

 

[Oscen]

From what I gather, the CAA will accept the BMFA A certificate without anything else other than a good ops manual. It seems to be of a grey area at the moment though, and as editor says, could be a loophole that could be soon closed.

Have a read through CAP 722, specifically the sections noted in this discussion.

 

[Oscen]

Also, it appears that some clubs only fly fixed wing, which is useless. However some fly multirotor and some fly helicoptor. Unless I'm mistaken the clubs that fly coptors will also be able to assess multirotors.

Simon may be in a better position to comment and clarify on this.

 

[simon@DEF]

I'm amused that some of you view this as a 'loophole' without having looked into it properly
As for me doing more for you all.... I don't wish to be rude but I've given plenty, if you want it-research it, put the graft in. I've helped, hopefully, a few people with information that you could use to your own benefit.
Now please excuse me for a bit as I'm fielding work projects.
Cheers

 

[Oscen]

Hugh - Check out this BMFA document detailing multirotor exams;

- http://www.bmfa.org/DesktopModules/...ryId=1636&language=en-GB&PortalId=0&TabId=220

Hopefully that helps somewhat?

Simon: I do think there is a loophole here somewhere.

I don't wish to be rude but I think going the A Cert and ops manual only route, leaves some doubt as to whether the participant has all the required theoretical knowledge that someone going the NQE route would have. I am not saying you don't have this knowledge, I'm just saying that it is hard to give evidence for it in the PFAW application.

As said previously, the Ops manual would have to be many volumes wide in order to show the breadth of knowledge gained from ground school and examined against.