[Pauld]

I've chosen NOT to use this forum to make a bad situation worse.

Richard, I respect your judgement so will give Sharpy the benefit of the doubt.

As far as MAAC contributions, not enough. Time is just not right and wasn't when I was asked by the BC region zone director (back when there was just one zone) to run for his position. Maybe someday.

In addition to the jet committee I also hold the JPO rep position for Canada - a dual role that allows me a voice in the decision making process in JPO who represents the jet community to AMA.

PaulD

[Applehoney]

> Maybe someday

You're willing ... that says a lot, Paul

Thank you

[Dave Larkin]

Regarding the situation on the Executive, the MAAC By Laws say:

Removal from committee
55 (1) Any Executive Committee member may be removed by a majority vote of the Board of Directors, not counting blanks or abstentions. This vote is to be held at a special or regular meeting of the board of directors........

Filling Vacancies
57 (1) Any vacancy, with the exception of the immediate past president, on the Executive committtee may be filled by a majority vote of the board of directors from among their members.

Someone asked about AGM minutes. They are published on the MACC web site.

Dave Larkin MAAC 3577L
Picton

[Richard Lyle Barlow]

Originally Posted by Pauld

I've chosen NOT to use this forum to make a bad situation worse.

Richard, I respect your judgement so will give Sharpy the benefit of the doubt.

As far as MAAC contributions, not enough. Time is just not right and wasn't when I was asked by the BC region zone director (back when there was just one zone) to run for his position. Maybe someday.

In addition to the jet committee I also hold the JPO rep position for Canada - a dual role that allows me a voice in the decision making process in JPO who represents the jet community to AMA.

PaulD

Thank you Paul for a fair and courteous answer.

To tell you more about Sharpy:

He pioneered the use of model aircraft, classified as Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) as they were not recreational, for police surveillance work with the Ontario Provincial Police. He was "cover boy" on their magazine, holding his original creation. The police could now do crime scene surveillance for pennies, rather than the hundreds of dollars involved in photography from a helicopter. As a result of this work, Sharpy represents the OPP with CARAC on their UAV subcommittee - where I represent MAAC. As Jeremy Cartlidge, another MAAC member, represented L3 - a commercial UAV company, MAAC had in effect three people championing our cause, which has been greatly to our advantage.

Some people have down played the importance of our work with TC. This is shortsighted. MAAC was proactive in immediately working with TC on UAVs and thus we never encountered the massive problems that faced the AMA in their conflict with FAA. Although this latter conflict has eased off for the moment, the threats to our American modelling friends are still on the horizon.

It is noteworthy that First Person View (FPV) flying is perilously close to UAV operations. MAAC recognized that and immediately set out to draft guidelines. Zoltan Pittner should be thanked for his work in that area. Our carefully considered guidelines were submitted to TC who raised no objections to any of the document. Our guidelines were copied to AMA and it is my understanding that our success in dealing with our federal authorities was a big help to AMA in drafting their guidelines and in dealing with their authorities.

Because of our success in dealing with TC, our weight limits remain as 35 Kg, whereas small UAVs are now limited to 25 Kg. There are many new restrictions on UAVs whereas our models have faced no new restrictions. For every flight, A UAV requires a SFOC (Special Flight Operations Certificate), which are hard and time consuming to obtain. On that note, if our models exceed 35Kg, we also need SFOCs, but we arranged a simplified and much quicker route for MAAC and AMA members flying at Canadian events. How did we do this so quickly? We went to TC with a solid plan, they tried it and it worked.

The work with TC is ongoing and must remain so. We hang our defence of model aircraft on the word "RECREATIONAL". That is the only thing that separates us from the small UAV, and the last thing we want is to be placed in the UAV category.

I am sure that the usual critics will downplay the importance of this work, and Sharpy's contributions to MAAC, but those that attend the CARAC UAV meetings know better.

Elsewhere in another thread, a contributor implied that those who run MAAC do so for personal gain. That is a slanderous lie. Other than two paid employees who are not MAAC members, nobody who serves MAAC gains anything other than satisfaction. Expense accounts are carefully monitored and the average officer claims but a small proportion of what he spends. Despite any disputes, such as the current debacle, each of these volunteers gives a lot of himself and his own financial resources.

In closing, a public "THANK YOU" to Sharpy, and to every volunteer who has ever served MAAC, for what they has done for modellers and for our association.

Richard

[Sharpy01]

Good discussion..

Appreciate the supportive words.

The Acting Prez's recent message to the membership is helpful to settling some of the speculation. I've met Claude and have confidence he has the skills to work through this stuff.

I wish him and board good luck, Merry Christmas and the best of the New Year to them and their families.

Cheers