[Max]

Originally Posted by stegl

So according to the link as of 2012 anything over .75mw fpv transmitting power on analogue subject to having a HAM licenced operator at the field ... monitoring.....Re item F in the link.

or as described in the FPV Safety code in the same section, "associate" with a HAM person.

In other words, if I am your spotter, I have my HAM license. You can fly FPV with me under my HAM license.

When I was first getting into FPV, I did not have my HAM license. There was a member at our field that did have a HAM (but he was never into FPV)

Every time I wanted to fly FPV, I would approach him and ask him if he would endorse my FPV flight under his HAM license. It was an informal verbal agreement but something we did each time we met at the field. We maintained this agreement until the time I got my own HAM license.

[stegl]

exactly what I was saying but slightly different wording. I wonder how many aren't hams or fly without anyone ham qualified at the field . I bet most.

[davidmc36]

Originally Posted by Max

Funny. Maybe you have an old link? I checked the links in the first post and they still work. At least they worked for me

I also went directly to the MAAC site and I found it in the MAAC documents page.

Here it is again, if you want to check it out:
http://www.maac.ca/docs/2012/maac_fpv_guidelines.pdf

The page titled MAAC FPV Safety Code gives the 404 error. I cleared my cache.

http://www.maac.ca/docs/2012/msd_6__revision_1fpv.pdf

The third link on this page:

http://www.maac.ca/view_news.php?itm=491

[bcsaltchucker]

Originally Posted by stegl

exactly what I was saying but slightly different wording. I wonder how many aren't hams or fly without anyone ham qualified at the field . I bet most.

I would guess that most do not have HAM.

And that is regrettable. It was not terribly difficult to get HAM license. The local HAm examiners were nice to deal with.

[stegl]

Yes, wondering if there are still the two levels.... It's surprising just how many MAAC flyers don't know that MAAC insurance only covers flying for pleasure and in no way can one charge dollars ie for photo work or pay in any way. Even to charge for flying instruction for example regardless of aircraft type. Many regulations when it come to charging money ; Transport Canada even gets involved.

[davidmc36]

Originally Posted by stegl

Yes, wondering if there are still the two levels.... ...

You mean for Amateur Radio License in Canada?

Three different qualifications you can get:

Basic
Morse Code
Advanced

http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst...347.html#exam2

[Midair]

Thank you Max for the detailed explination, however, and I really don't want to belabour this, I'm not convinced that the FPV "guidelines" are as innocuous as some may believe. I am concerned that anyone not following the guideline and who experiences an incident or accident may not be covered by MAAC insurance. Please correct me if I am wrong; its the wording of the doc, specifically the requirement to be tested as an FPV pilot, not the general content that concerns me.

Originally Posted by Max

The pilot certification requirement described in the FPV safety code is meant to act as a guideline for clubs. Like the MAAC wings program, your club describes how FPV pilots are to be certifed AT THAT CLUB

I don't see the FPV guidelines as being anything like the MAAC Wings Program. No where in the MAAC Wings doc does it state that all MAAC members must follow the Wings Program or must be prove their Wings level before they are permitted to fly solo; the Wings program is completely voluntary and clubs may or may not choose to follow the program; no so with the FPV Guideline - we must test.

Whatever your club decides to do. It would be wise to have a cut-off point for your grandfathered fliers based on the skill level they have demonstrated to date. Those that do not meet the skill-level cutoff should have to go through your clubs FPV certification process, in the manner your club describes it.

What if a club chooses to do nothing with respect to the test procedure?

Again, its up to your club to decide how it wants to do it. How does your club currently do its wings testing for beginner fliers?

We loosely follow the program, not because of its existence, but more from common sense than anything written in the Wings Program document. Once a student is capable, that's it. No level B,C or D tests. Our club simply is not concerned with that aspect of the program. However, a lack of follow on to the basic competency confirmation does not void our insurance, because the Wings Program is not a guideline, its a "program."

Its up to your club to decide. If they do not have any skilled FPV pilots, then at least get some seasoned, skilled and respected fliers to comprise the initial club examining committee. These members should be familiar with the interpretation of the MAAC FPV safety guidelines so that they can at least observe the FPV potentate to the requirements of the guidelines. Once your club has enough experienced and skilled FPV fliers, then they can take on the responsibility of the FPV examining committee

No! Like the requirement for the wings program, a club can follow the one recommended by MAAC or come up with their own.
At the present, I do not think MAAC has produced any recommended examination/score sheet for FPV. As for my club, I created one similar to our clubs wings and heli logbook(which contain the FPV exam guideline) based on the MAAC FPV safety guidelines.


Again, its up to you.You can give a certificate, a handshake, or a slap on the back and a "CONGRATULATIONS"
I wanted something nicer, so I took the MAAC wings and had "FPV" engraved into them. Here is a picture of the concept I gave to the engraver so he knew what I wanted.



Whatever your club decides


No, the beauty of the MAAC FPV guidelines is it lays the foundation of what the clubs should do to make FPV a safe activity at the club. It does not, nor is it intended to be a rigorous, and un-flexing step-by step method of how to certify FPV members at your club. They left it open ended to allow the cubs to tailor the certification process to fit the needs of the clubs.

And therein lies my primary concern. The first line of the first paragraph in the FPV Guideline states that "Any MAAC member FPV pilot will be required to observe and obey all MAAC guidelines. By title this document is called the "FPV Guideline," therefore, we as MAAC sanctioned clubs must adhere to its contents; the doc is not a recommendation, its not something that we should follow - we must follow it. By extension, therefore, we must test FPV pilots for competency; if we do not, we are in direct contravention of MAAC guidelines and therefore do we not risk the loss of insurance coverage? To suggest that clubs may decide how to implement this guideline, how to test this guideline, how to record the results of this guideline is, in my opinion, a cop out and far too "loosey goosey." This is something (testing) that we must either adhere to, or we don't. The jet boys have nailed down the procedure very well to include National level testing to a specific standard and a certification process with full MAAC record keeping and accountability; FPV has not done this, yet FPV pilots are subject to the examination before they are allowed to fly.

Keep the FPV Guidelines, its a good doc and makes sense, but either get rid of the test requirement, or nail down the testing procedures so that its not up to individual clubs to decide how/if to test, how or if to record test results, who to test and who is grandfathered or be required or allowed to make up their own test sheets. A test is either quantifiable, recorded, provable and recognised by an organization or group or its not.

Oh, and the 404 error issue that I had trying to bring up the docs had to do with the link supplied in the first post of this thread. When I went directly to the link, I had no problem.

Cheers,

Peter

[bcsaltchucker]

Originally Posted by stegl

Yes, wondering if there are still the two levels.... It's surprising just how many MAAC flyers don't know that MAAC insurance only covers flying for pleasure and in no way can one charge dollars ie for photo work or pay in any way. Even to charge for flying instruction for example regardless of aircraft type. Many regulations when it come to charging money ; Transport Canada even gets involved.

not only the MAAC insurance cover rec-only flying, but also the HAM license itself is very strictly for amateur use only and never ever for commercial use.

But then it gets murky for vendors whom are also RC pilots. In the US, folks are worried that the FAA will see vendors demonstrating their products and making videos flying their products like Hobbyking and others do as 'commercial model flying' and thus not falling under the umbrella of exemptions that us amateurs enjoy.

--

As for having a club trainer for FPV .. great idea for sure. Guess it will be awkward with folks being unfamiliar with FPV having to take on supervisory roles for training FPV in some clubs, just for lack of anyone else having experience with it. However I am the most experienced FPV guy in town, so maybe I ought to consider taking on such a training role soon. Hey I equipped the club president and am training him.

But then the learning curve for FPV is extremely short, as FPV flying is easier than learning line of sight flying ... the harder learning all takes place prior to takeoff. It's not the flying, it is everything else. OK there is some getting used to navigating from the sky, which folks who have not flown simulators or real planes might have a learning curve with.

One approach I advocate is to start doing FPV with a micro sized aircraft. It's how I learned 3 years ago. No consequences, no risk except for loss of a micro plane. They fly extremely slow and cannot go far. It allows the pilot to get used to navigating from the sky fairly well. And then there is just flying flight simulators (sims of fullsize jets and also model FPV simulators) which are very much like FPV

[Max]

Originally Posted by Midair

Thank you Max for the detailed explination, however, and I really don't want to belabour this, I'm not convinced that the FPV "guidelines" are as innocuous as some may believe. I am concerned that anyone not following the guideline and who experiences an incident or accident may not be covered by MAAC insurance. Please correct me if I am wrong; its the wording of the doc, specifically the requirement to be tested as an FPV pilot, not the general content that concerns me.

I think you are reading too much into the document. Again, I would ask what does your club do to currently qualify its pilots for their wings test? How/why would the FPV wings test process be different?

Originally Posted by Midair

And therein lies my primary concern. The first line of the first paragraph in the FPV Guideline states that "Any MAAC member FPV pilot will be required to observe and obey all MAAC guidelines. By title this document is called the "FPV Guideline," therefore, we as MAAC sanctioned clubs must adhere to its contents; the doc is not a recommendation, its not something that we should follow - we must follow it. By extension, therefore, we must test FPV pilots for competency; if we do not, we are in direct contravention of MAAC guidelines and therefore do we not risk the loss of insurance coverage? To suggest that clubs may decide how to implement this guideline, how to test this guideline, how to record the results of this guideline is, in my opinion, a cop out and far too "loosey goosey." This is something (testing) that we must either adhere to, or we don't.

Testing does not have to be a complex method. Make a wings test requirement, publish it to your members, have them take the "test" in the method you prescribe and witnessed/approved by whomever your club designates as the "club examining committee".

Originally Posted by Midair

The jet boys have nailed down the procedure very well to include National level testing to a specific standard and a certification process with full MAAC record keeping and accountability; FPV has not done this, yet FPV pilots are subject to the examination before they are allowed to fly.

Do you really think we need something that rigorous in FPV? National procedure? Why? Again, I think you are reading too much into the guideline.

Originally Posted by Midair

Keep the FPV Guidelines, its a good doc and makes sense, but either get rid of the test requirement, or nail down the testing procedures so that its not up to individual clubs to decide how/if to test, how or if to record test results, who to test and who is grandfathered or be required or allowed to make up their own test sheets. A test is either quantifiable, recorded, provable and recognized by an organization or group or its not.

Given your questions and concerns, I strongly recommend you contact the MAAC FPV chairman and have him address your questions. Maybe he can provide further clarification and guidance to you and your club.

If you do contact him, let us know what comes out of the discussion so that the rest of us can learn from your experience.

[bcsaltchucker]

yeah this does not have to be messy and intensive. More like what they do with fullsize planes when you change to a different plane than you were trained on ... a little bit of discussion in ground briefings, and then a couple flights with a more experienced pilot. Done.

and really, few FPVers have ever had one-on-one training to do FPV. We are self taught, because it is chicken-and-egg situation otherwise, as local pioneers. There was not a single person doing FPV in this city before me, so no trainer for me. The hardest part of being a responsible FPV pilots is that you also need to be competent at flying non FPV .. so they should go through whatever your individual club requires to be a nonFPV pilot first.

And MAAC has to leave a lot of things up to individual clubs. As it should be. They are private old boys clubs, run by themselves for themselves. They rightly choose what goes on in their club and take responsibility for it. Some clubs are hostile to FPV and some have even banned it. Some are nasty to all newcomers or what they consider 'riff raff with foamies.' Other clubs set out to be nice to newcomers, embrace FPV, perhaps less formal. And yet other clubs decide to not be part of MAAC too.