0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Therefore leaving you with an unapproved and illegal transmitter, not to be recommended.
I will admit it does stop it being a CE-approved 'Futaba 6EX Transmitter'
Not wishing to get into a debate but that is exactly my point
So you don't want a debate.
you just want everyone to accept you're right?
CE is only relevant if you are selling the converted sets.Phil
Although apparently the BMFA (and LMA etc.?) have chosen to gold-plate that in the traditional British way and say you can't fly at their shows/competitions unless the manufacturer has certified the module and tx as a whole.Not an OFCOM regulation, not a legal thing, just a BMFA rule.
Rules, guidlines or whatever, is it really worth the risk and potential litigation in the event of a problem?
It's always self-certified anyway - you are at no more risk with CE approved third party modules than with a big brand TX, as long as you honestly believe it is safe to fly with.The two-box scenario I outlined above is exactly the same as a buddy box system - a set of unregulated controls sending a PPM signal to a CE marked RF transmitter. I really can't see why the BMFA think there is an issue here?And if there is an issue there, presumably all of the 1960's single channel homebuilt sets will be banned from BMFA events too?
As I understand it, the EU law is clear and the BMFA interpretation of that law is also clear, no CE = no fly. ...why not have the peace of mind rather than being a maverick and campaining against the rules etc.
Ce compliancy is about making sure that the transmitter RF SECTION is OPERATING to eu standards,
The simple solution is to simply rule out anything that is not understood or not made by the manufacturer. I personally think this approach is wrong, and the bmfa needs to readdress the approach they have . Sadly... I doubt they will because it all gets very complicated!
CE compliance is about a lot more than just an RF stage/module transmitting within a set of rules. ... (BTW Is there an actual statement that this is the case with our insurer?)
As far as I understand it, the CE marking is only required if you intend to sell the modified tx, so a homebrew or modified tx is fine for your own use.
The inspector was recalled and was quite happy to sign off this home designed and manufactured engine. It went on to fly many hours.
People fly homebrew planes. People modify kits, engines, all sorts.Why can you do all that and yet you can't modify the radio?All I'm after is a level playing field. A dodgy modification to an airframe is just as likely to result in a plummeting fireball as a dodgy modification to a radio. Why are they treated differently? Because the radio mod is easier to spot?
Because in general a dodgy airframe will be visible, an iffy radio giving out interference etc isn't.
I know which I'd go for.
But like so many things in life what you'd go for isn't relevant, it's what the laws say that is.
A telemetry rx is a transmitter, operating under the far more stringent 'airborne transmitter' rules. Yet it can have all manner of sensors, mixers, power splitters, servos, ESCs and the like (of any make) attached with no regulatory issues.But the ground transmitter can't? The 0v, +v, ppm interface is exactly the same. Inconsistency again.
I really don't think there is a practical resolution to this problem, we'll just go around and around...