Hong Kong RC Sailplane Forum 香港滑翔機發燒友論壇

This forum is dedicated to r/c sailplane enthusiasts 此論壇專為遙控滑翔機發燒友而設
It is currently 12 Dec 2017 03:11 am

All times are UTC + 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 80 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 15 Jul 2004 09:01 pm 
I'd say this is a time we should all stand together, help the 2 buddies and help ourselves!!! Goto the police station with them (the club, and all of you... did you guys just left them to ofta?) call the press, finance the lawsuit if need be, get ofta upto the beat or out of the way! These guys are grossly outdated (27MHz is unbelievable we all know that) and what I'm saying is not a request, that's what they should do! Their power comes with a duty! I'd hate to see only 6 or 8 planes in the sky!

CT


Top
  
 
 Post subject: CT
PostPosted: 15 Jul 2004 09:22 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2004 10:52 pm
Posts: 586
Location: Shatin
CT, Please clam down, we are working on this and the 2 guys were now at home. We have meetings last night and we will continue to nego with OFTA. Everybody know the existance of the problem including OFTA and we are now work on this to straighten out the problem. The best way to handle is try to make the case from Big to Small, and then find the solution for future. It is not good to boost up the matter at this moment. But we all should stand together so we have bigger power. If you have any suggestion, please e-mail to us directly so we can work together.

Ken


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 15 Jul 2004 09:47 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2004 03:51 pm
Posts: 3626
Location: Hong Kong
I talked with the head of OFTA operational division over phone today regarding yesterday incidence. They relised that 6 channels in 72MHz band were allocated to us for r/c flying and the frequency in question, although illegal, is adjacent to our channels. They do understand our situation of severly lacking of r/c channels and sympathize our awkward situation, but they said that illegal is illegal, they have to send the order to the prosecution unit for processing. Upon the questioning of the acuses, they will decide to proceed with the prosecution or not. HKRCSS will do the best to help the two pilots concerned and will try to present our view to the prosecution unit during the questioning, so that hopefully they will have a favorable decision on the acuses. In the mean time, we will continue to have dialogue with the licensing division of OFTA to press them for openning more r/c channels.

In order to avoid more confusion, here are some more information: OFTA guy told me that, actually, two telecom companies using 72.315MHz for their repeaters, made the continous complains over months, and they had to search for the source of interference. They said the source location in Fei Ngo Shan is more suceptable to intefere authorized channels because it is near the city and in the high ground. If the source is from a more remote area, the outcome may be different. Anyway, they said that they also relised some r/c flyers were using 35MHz band which is illegal and they said that they will take action if any interefence arose and complain received from legal users of the frequency concerned.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 16 Jul 2004 05:17 am 

Joined: 05 Mar 2004 10:05 pm
Posts: 122
Stanley wrote:
I talked with the head of OFTA operational division.......................


特別要求,中文翻譯本。

今日我同郵電署行動組主管通過電話關於昨日之事件。他們提供6條72頻道給我們作遙控飛機的問題,縱使不合法亦很接近我們可使用之頻道。他們很明白亦同情我們的處境,但不合法即是不合法,他們會進行控告程序。本會將會盡量協助及提供意見給兩位機師作訴訟程序問題,希望佢地順利無事。在此同時,本會亦會繼續與郵電署爭取開放更多頻道。
在此不安情況下,郵電署亦稱,實際上,兩電訊公司使用72.315Mhz作轉駁器,已投訴個幾月,他們亦尋找該干擾發現在飛鵝山高地近市區,如干擾有多個來源是會不同。無論如何,他們亦發覺有些機師使用35頻道,這些亦是不合法頻道,如有合法的使用者投訴他們亦會採取行動。


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 16 Jul 2004 11:26 am 
I am a very green pilot. When buying a R/C, I insist on buying the R/c with legal channel, though many people persuade me to use the illegal channel as it is more safe ith less interfererce. They say the HKOFT will not charge me using illegal frequency. Some people (r/c shop owner)say using all frequency is legal. People say the lorry/container driver like to use 72 channel and interference is very great in some area like Yuen Long with a lot of containers parking. I strong support the society to fight for more legal frequency.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 16 Jul 2004 11:41 am 
請問若果此两机師被裁定有罪的話,會否留案底?
若有案底的話,這會影响他們以後的人生 :(

遙控模型是我們的愛好和消閒,若為此而有案底實在是很無奈 :(

愛好遙控飛行是我們的夢想,也是有益身心的運動.政府理應推廣.為何要握殺它呢?

Guest - Billy Leung


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 16 Jul 2004 03:20 pm 
Tell me the good of calming down, please. I'm suggesting a series of action aiming at achieving the results we desire, nothing emotional. If these people were ever serious they should have done what they should have done! Get these people into an official meeting quick! Objective 1: press them to drop the charges; 2: open up more frequencies. I'd rather go high profile and write to the ombusman, secretaries for whateverthatmightbe, than waiting for these guys to take us seriously and find time one day to do what they're paid for. Those who're staying calm may keep flying on 27 or the legal six. Those who're on other frequencies fly with the risk of getting busted, or let's all switch to the legals, how's that?

Let's write to ofta and enquire about all they've done for us modellers over the years too. When was the last time you fly on 27? If we're to get sued, they're bound to get embarassed. And if they're to enforce that rottened law seriously, they're obliged to do something about it too, not because we asked, but because they're paid and should do without needing our asking!

CT


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 16 Jul 2004 05:58 pm 
Stanley Chan wrote:
the source location in Fei Ngo Shan is more suceptable to intefere authorized channels because it is near the city and in the high ground. If the source is from a more remote area, the outcome may be different.

Stanley,我估你意思是,由於《飛鵝山》位於高處,且又接近《九龍》市區,飛機友從該處發出的干擾電波覆蓋面廣及影響較多人。若干擾電波是由其他較偏僻的地方發出、無咁大影響的話,OFTA 可能唔理。

我覺得即使偏僻地方,也有被檢控的風險。偏遠如《塔門》,往山坡的小徑,需經過一電訊公司、設有天線的設施。在那裡使用非法遙控電波,會否干擾該設施、從而招致投訴及檢控?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 16 Jul 2004 08:34 pm 
本人接觸遙控飛行已有一段時間,跟大家在機場也許見過面。讓我告訴大家一個釣鱼故事吧。

從前,香港漁護署轄下的漁業養殖區是不准進行任何形式之釣魚活動,違例者會被檢控。但是,魚排附近實在有很多鱼獲,於是很多釣鱼人唯有偷偷摸摸地釣鱼。本來相安無事,漁護署也是隻眼開、隻眼閉,無投訴、好少理。漸漸地參與鱼排垂釣的人增多,加上傳媒的介紹。終於漁護署執行法例打擊鱼排非法垂釣,每天派船在各養鱼區巡邏,檢控違例者。當時釣鱼界一片愁雲慘霧,一些業界人士向政府,立法會代表及漁護署申請括免。但是漁護署的官員一於少理,拿著過時的法例說句不便算。結果,有人放棄鱼排垂釣,有人採取敵進我退、你來我走的方法繼續釣鱼。

事件在一次刻意安排下的訪問下有了180度的轉機。

在安排下,前財神阿虫到魚排參觀,有人建議阿虫釣下魚試試。上天有眼給他釣上一尾大鱼,於是他在傳媒前教大家釣釣鱼自力更生,好過拿綜援。很怏漁護署批出一個垂釣許可牌照給一個排主試辦。結果,大家現在也可快樂及安心地垂釣。

我們是否也可以邀請一些高官試試拿着遙控器,看著飛機在天際翺翔,感受一下自悠自在、一飛冲天的感覺。說不定他們又教香港人努力工作,令香港再次起飛。好過跟那些官員作出沒結果的討論。

以上言論純屬個人之經歷與意見。

B. C.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 16 Jul 2004 08:34 pm 
本人接觸遙控飛行已有一段時間,跟大家在機場也許見過面。讓我告訴大家一個釣鱼故事吧。

從前,香港漁護署轄下的漁業養殖區是不准進行任何形式之釣魚活動,違例者會被檢控。但是,魚排附近實在有很多鱼獲,於是很多釣鱼人唯有偷偷摸摸地釣鱼。本來相安無事,漁護署也是隻眼開、隻眼閉,無投訴、好少理。漸漸地參與鱼排垂釣的人增多,加上傳媒的介紹。終於漁護署執行法例打擊鱼排非法垂釣,每天派船在各養鱼區巡邏,檢控違例者。當時釣鱼界一片愁雲慘霧,一些業界人士向政府,立法會代表及漁護署申請括免。但是漁護署的官員一於少理,拿著過時的法例說句不便算。結果,有人放棄鱼排垂釣,有人採取敵進我退、你來我走的方法繼續釣鱼。

事件在一次刻意安排下的訪問下有了180度的轉機。

在安排下,前財神阿虫到魚排參觀,有人建議阿虫釣下魚試試。上天有眼給他釣上一尾大鱼,於是他在傳媒前教大家釣釣鱼自力更生,好過拿綜援。很怏漁護署批出一個垂釣許可牌照給一個排主試辦。結果,大家現在也可快樂及安心地垂釣。

我們是否也可以邀請一些高官試試拿着遙控器,看著飛機在天際翺翔,感受一下自悠自在、一飛冲天的感覺。說不定他們又教香港人努力工作,令香港再次起飛。好過跟那些官員作出沒結果的討論。

以上言論純屬個人之經歷與意見。

B. C.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 16 Jul 2004 08:38 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2004 07:54 pm
Posts: 1660
Location: Tai Po, HK
Anonymous wrote:
Tell me the good of calming down, please. I'm suggesting a series of action aiming at achieving the results we desire, nothing emotional.
CT


CT,
呀 Ken 叫你 calm down,相信是因為現在有兩位机友可能會被 charge 用非法 72 band。
如果現在同有關部門開火,可能對呢兩位師兄不利!
我用什麼方式去面對呢件事,都應該先考慮佢地既處境。然後至係日後的飛行問題!

唔知當事人想個會點樣協助佢地呢?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 16 Jul 2004 08:58 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2004 10:52 pm
Posts: 586
Location: Shatin
CT,

I agree with you that we need to force the OFTA to drop the charge & release more frequencies to RC activity. We are communicating this issue with OFTA and other departments with the hope that OFTA will not charge the 2 guys. In fact, if the 2 guys are guilty, most of us are guilty too, at least I am, since I use 40MHz sometimes. However, as OFTA has the right to do what they have done, if we boost up the matter at this moment using public media, we may be able to get more frequency in future, but the 2 guys will definately be suffered to certain level.

If any of us think that they have some good methods to force OFTA not to charge the 2 guys, please inform us as we are not professional in this field. But we want to make the action in a calm level at this moment. We will increase the level later if it is necessary, hope all of us can stand up together at that instant.

Regarding to your point of requesting more frequencies, the society has talked to OFTA over past 3 years and the process has not stopped. Our objective is get a full frequency, saying 29, 35, 36 or 40Mhz, without application of license. It is unbelievable that HK has only 6 Channels for R/C flying activities, but that is the outcome after 2 years nego with them by Stanley. OFTA just do not want to release more frequency out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 16 Jul 2004 10:09 pm 
Willy (as guest) wrote:
Stanley,我估你意思是,由於《飛鵝山》位於高處,且又接近《九龍》市區,飛機友從該處發出的干擾電波覆蓋面廣及影響較多人。若干擾電波是由其他較偏僻的地方發出、無咁大影響的話,OFTA 可能唔理。

我覺得即使偏僻地方,也有被檢控的風險。偏遠如《塔門》,往山坡的小徑,需經過一電訊公司、設有天線的設施。在那裡使用非法遙控電波,會否干擾該設施、從而招致投訴及檢控?



OFTA行動組位主管講他們行動組人手不足,每月都有許多投訴,根本無時間去做唔重要的case。他們基本上都會monitor注香港啲無線電頻帶,知道有任何非法使用頻率的情況,包括無線電遙控。但礙於人手不足,如沒有嚴重扞擾,道至他人投訴,他們都唔會採取行動。由於今次扞擾源頭在飛鵝山山頂距離那些repeaters又近,所以租到使用者持續的投訴,他們才採取行動。如果扞擾源頭在啲遠離市區的地方,影嚮較少,他們採取行動的可能就會降低。他們這樣講,其實喺話他們被迫到埋身唔做唔得!
他們也暗示過,35MHz頻帶基本上未有開放給人使用,所以在飛鵝山捉到嘅35MHz遙控使用者,喺唔會扞擾到他人,所以他們不作處理,但當然他們會提出警告,始終這都是非法使用。他還問我們為什麼不去牌照部申請35MHz為遙控頻道。嘩!奇怪,我去年同OFTA牌照部的大佬過手時曾經問灑35MHz,40MHz和其他遙控頻道嘅使用情況,如果無使用者就希望開放給我們使用。當時他們只是說35MHz是政府的祕密通訊用唔講得我知,又話40MHz巳經撥咗比解放軍用。諗番起我始終覺得他們只是西遊,無誠意去開放頻道,因為要做好多功夫,去立法局立法等等。他們肯開放72MHz上6條channels,只是被我哋迫得緊要,用拖延之計,因為申請這6條頻道攞牌的情序和其他牌照申請一樣,己經有喺度,連份form都唔使設計過,懶得就懶!
唉!我諗待今次事件解決後,我們會有排忙,誓再與OFTA過招週旋到底!
無論如何,希望各位為两位被告機師著想,暫時不要把事件鬧大,待是否檢控的決定出了以後,我們再部處下步一行動。

Stanley


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 16 Jul 2004 11:34 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2004 05:31 pm
Posts: 741
Location: 沙田
Stanley 點解你會變 guest 咁古怪 ? Anyway﹐ OFTA 站在監管者既立場﹐佢地最關注既係會唔會有任何人包括合法頻率使用者﹐傳媒同政府監察機構如立法會等會質疑佢地既能力同有否盡責。今次事件中﹐機友只係玩﹐但受干擾既係正常既電訊服務﹐輕重同錯對頗為分明﹐所以如果我地係傳媒道揚 ﹐OFTA 只會更加決意提出起訴﹐加重刑罰﹐以向外界顯示佢地盡責。

如果呢件事無揚到出黎﹐請況就簡單D﹐OFTA 只會考慮今次投訴既電訊公司會唔會係日後繼續受到干擾﹐再次向佢地投訴。如果我地可以令 OFTA 相信機友日後會自律﹐唔會繼續俾麻煩佢地﹐OFTA 就有多少少空間考慮對今次事件中既機友從輕發落。我建議我地個會寫封信俾 OFTA, 好似 Willy 講咁解釋今次事件主要係因為機友對頻率規管方面缺乏認識﹐日後本會會加強係呢方面既宣傳同教育﹐避免同類事件既再發生。等 OFTA 處理呢單個案既人可以有番D野喳著同老勢或外界解釋輕判既原因。


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 17 Jul 2004 12:01 am 
User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2004 10:52 pm
Posts: 586
Location: Shatin
我非常同意 YC 的說法, 現在應將事情低調處理。若OFTA明白我們不是故意違法,他們可能用較寬鬆之方法處理。若OFTA堅持提出檢控,到時我們才考慮進一步行動。


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 17 Jul 2004 12:18 am 
User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2004 03:51 pm
Posts: 3626
Location: Hong Kong
寫編野寫得耐,被個system logout咗都唔知咪變咗guest攞。
Y.C.你啲主意我都贊成,但封信要寫得特別小心。
我同OFTA個位仁兄對話時,佢曾經問我地個會嘅資料,之後佢話這次控告應與個會無關,叫我哋放心。我直覺上覺得佢曾經諗過是否個會包庇模型機師使用非法頻道。我同佢講個會一直有申請合法頻道,還鼓勵模型機師使用,所以絕無此事。
因此如果我哋寫信求情,就要有技巧,以免弄巧反絕。


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: 支持
PostPosted: 17 Jul 2004 02:22 am 
讚成 Y C Lui 講法!
祝兩位師兄早日脫出困境!大事化小,小事化無!


Top
  
 
 Post subject: 支持
PostPosted: 17 Jul 2004 02:24 am 
讚成 Y C Lui 講法!
祝兩位師兄早日脫出困境!大事化小,小事化無!


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 17 Jul 2004 11:07 am 
我都同意要低調處理,大家都要小心行事,包括係呢度講野,因為佢地都可以monitor到我地呢個公開頻道。
希望件事完滿解決啦。


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2004 01:26 am 
Now imagine me calmed down and think this over again. You keep communicating with these government officials in the hope that they'll act as you wish in this hostage situation (which you've been doing for years) and you go fly in the fear of getting busted. Once they press charges, no government department would like going back losing the case and will go all the way to get you convicted, then it's up to the judge in that room (not ofta) and the two buddies would get a criminal record. So the priority is ofta drop the charges or our 2 buddies are at stake! And who will be the next?

I also hate to think leaving Fei Ngo Shan and go fly somewhere else hoping that there's no repeaters around, and still there is no guarantee! Unlike B.C.'s case, it's not where you fish, it's your possession of the fishing rod that constitute an offence!

It seems that these guys are just sitting around and let you sell these things (model shops, Toys R Us, Apliu Street...) unless somebody calls them! And they let you play with these things too unless somebody calls them! 27MHz is from the stone age... wait a minute! Isn't there supposed to be a director for something or some senior officials in ofta? Aren't they meant to update something to accommodate or otherwise ban our equipment including control of the sales (and hence a big part of the hobby)? Isn't it their duty to go out there and arrest people playing R/C toys (if they're to be banned)? Who's taking care of the policy part here?

I'm ready to write to the SCMP and the ombusman. I'm aware that it's their ***** so what do the 2 buddies say?

CT


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2004 01:19 pm 
讚成 Y C Lui 講法!
祝兩位師兄早日脫出困境!大事化小,小事化無!

Appreciate Stanley's effort !
Hope we can secure more channels.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: 19 Jul 2004 02:53 am 

Joined: 05 Mar 2004 10:05 pm
Posts: 122
Stanley wrote:
Just received information a few minutes ago that two r/c pilots in Fei Ngo Shan were arrested by police under the request of OFTA staff ...........


代言:
各位朋友,早前兩位機師發生不愉快事件,兩位機師表示很多謝各位關心,
而事件已交由有關部門處理,希望您們唔好再問,暫時亦唔想再提,希望您們明白及體諒。


另外,有關部門祇發出六條頻道給與我們作高情趣的活動,
而香港數以十萬計人正在使用無線電搖控作飛機、直昇機、模型車、船?等等活動,
當中本人絕對相信有關部門官員的親屬或朋友,甚至該等官員亦參與這些活動,
但現在突然的不愉快事件轉變,有關部門更無恥地稱知道我們的問題,
亦同情我們,但不去解決或處理,反而容忍我們違法,但接獲投訴時就會拘捕我們,
不合法就是不合法,即是我們任何時間均隨時被捕,因為我們管有或使用非法無線電器具,
這是甚麼社會?甚麼法律?事後刑事資料紀錄亦祇有顯示?#38750;法使用/管有無線電器具?
或?#38750;法干擾?#65292;並無講明係無線電搖控模型,無奈。

作為一個唔拋垃圾,唔開快車,奉公守法的我,我決定暫時停止我所有搖控活動,
直至事情清晰或解決為止,而我亦已將我違法之Crystal全部銷毀。
我唔係宣洩或者針對某部門或人,因為代價太大,呢個純粹係我個人意見同決定。

仲有,今日我帶同CASIO frequency scanner 到旺角及海運戲院附近一間好大既玩具店,
發覺佢地3歲至任何年齡的所有無線電搖控玩具,頻道都係27Mhz,36Mhz,40Mhz,41Mhz,
46Mhz,47Mhz,49Mhz,當然其中有些話係40幾Mhz,原來係26至27Mhz,我看過香港法例第106章
http://translate.justice.gov.hk/han3/0/1/0/0/0/1/www.justice.gov.hk/chi/home.htm
製造、裝配,出售該等無線電裝設給與無該牌照的人或公司亦屬違法,
如有關部門堅持及無對話空間,可能牽涉更多問題,但無論如何,
都要看有關部門如何處理兩位機師。

祝我們能早日合法地翱翔天際。
以上純粹個人意見。


Last edited by Billy on 19 Jul 2004 11:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 19 Jul 2004 10:19 am 
User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2004 12:04 pm
Posts: 65
Location: HONG KONG
I just back from business trip and was told about this issue.

I am sorry for the fellows who was caught, I will keep on following this issue.

Chester


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 80 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC + 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

RCSAIL Home

WindGURU at Ma On Shan, Clearwater Bay and Fei Ngo Shan

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group