[OLD PRAIRIE RED NECK]

It still ticks me off though that they get an immediate resolution to their request and MAAC is left on the back burner with a verbal "oops, didn't intend that, we are leaving you hanging in the gray area" response.

Is the difference money?

Or political connections?

If MAAC is, in Sharpy's words, "practically married to TC" then I'm not sure I even want to speculate how close Amazon is to them. This is a family forum!

[Sharpy01]

LOL .... now, that is funny.

By the way, I bet Kenny he couldn't generate 10 pages of response with a single post.

Thanks a lot guys, now I owe him a beer.

...LOL .... Cheers.

[Eye Can Fly]

Was looking around on the new(ish) MAAC web site. There isn't anywhere to renew a membership, only a form for "New" members.

I was also looking for an answer to a question that has been bugging me. How would someone prove they have their "Wings"? Couldn't locate the documents about the Wings program either......

While I appreciate the new web page, it seems to be lacking substance at this time. Not a great way to promote the organization to a society that is extremely convicted to social media. IMO

[Midair]

If you go to the MAAC website, at the very top of the main page, you can select "Join MAAC." When you click that button, you get to the MAAC application form. At the top of the form, you have the option to renew your existing MAAC membership. You need to log on with your MAAC number and site password. Hope this helps.

Cheers,

Peter

[Midair]

Originally Posted by Eye Can Fly

...I was also looking for an answer to a question that has been bugging me. How would someone prove they have their "Wings"? Couldn't locate the documents about the Wings program either...

Since the Wings program is voluntary and there is no "recognized" or formal documentation or national tracking system, there is no proof that a person is qualified to a certain "Wings" standard. As I understand it, the program is more of a guideline that clubs can follow if they want to participate (...or not).

Peter

[Eye Can Fly]

I don't like to disagree with anyone but, on the old web site there was a whole section dedicated to the "Wings Program". It included the format for each level of wings.

A good point was made on one of the MAAC threads about competency of people attending a Fun Fly. While being a MAAC member doesn't mean you know how to fly, the wings program could demonstrate a certain level of ability. By participating in the program you have shown you understand the MAAC Safety code and proven you can fly, at least at a rudimentary level.

If I hosted a Fun Fly at my place (2 runways but not a MAAC sanctioned club) I would insist that the attendees have a paid up MAAC membership and know how to fly (pronounced "Wings").

We could be on a slippery slope with MAAC insurance. Buy a MAAC membership, buy any RC airborne machine, and never set foot at a MAAC club, the whole while expecting your covered by MAAC insurance.

I'd even suggest that if a MAAC member doesn't have their MAAC "A" wings they wouldn't be covered by the insurance off a MAAC sanctioned field. This might rub some the wrong way as they might consider themselves proficient at flying. From what I remember of the wings format attaining your `first wings isn`t all that difficult.

We have to keep in mind there are a lot of MAAC members that aren`t club members. Getting your wings, if your not a club member isn`t easy, lots of people travel to RC events, what would be wrong with a little travel (to a sanctioned MAAC field) to take a basic flight test.

[Midair]

Originally Posted by Eye Can Fly

...While being a MAAC member doesn't mean you know how to fly, the wings program could demonstrate a certain level of ability. By participating in the program you have shown you understand the MAAC Safety code and proven you can fly, at least at a rudimentary level.

To whom? My drivers licence, motorcycle endorsement, hunting licence, pilots licence, boaters certificate, Air Traffic Control licences, degrees, etc...all prove that I've met at least the minimum standard required to exercise the rights and privileges associated with those documents. Until MAAC adopts a nationally standardised, recognised and provable licensing or certificate system, the MAAC Wings program will only be and continue to be a guideline to be used to assist clubs to teach and advance the skills of their members.

If I hosted a Fun Fly at my place (2 runways but not a MAAC sanctioned club) I would insist that the attendees have a paid up MAAC membership and know how to fly (pronounced "Wings").

There are some U.S. clubs (maybe Canadian as well?) that require a new member to provide a demonstration flight to their governing body to prove competency, before they can fly solo at their fields. Really not a bad idea, however that requirement is determined by individual clubs, not MAAC directed.

We could be on a slippery slope with MAAC insurance. Buy a MAAC membership, buy any RC airborne machine, and never set foot at a MAAC club, the whole while expecting your covered by MAAC insurance.

We are covered!, provided you follow and abide by the MAAC safety code. I may be mistaken, however, nowhere in the safety code does it specify that you must be "Wings" qualified to be covered by MAAC insurance.

I'd even suggest that if a MAAC member doesn't have their MAAC "A" wings they wouldn't be covered by the insurance off a MAAC sanctioned field.

If MAAC were to adopt this position, then MAAC would have to "licence" R/C pilots and maintain a legally recognised database just like any licencing system. I don't believe that anyone wants to go there.

I really don't wish to pi$$ off anyone, but every time the subject of the MAAC Wings program rears up, I become frustrated. The MAAC Wings program is to be used by clubs to assist members to become proficient or better pilots. Its a voluntary program, not mandatory, that does not require "official" tracking, or record keeping. If anyone, including MAAC and our insurance provider wants it to be more, then they will cause the opening of a can of worms that no one wants to experience.

Peter

[Eye Can Fly]

Peter, I'm frustrated too! At the moment the TC Act is being reviewed. I would like to think that a MAAC member won't be in the sights of TC when a serious incident happens. I also believe that a lot of people jumping into the hobby these days are ill informed as to how and where it is acceptable to fly.

I also believe MAAC is at the forefront of protecting how we used to participate in the hobby of flight. MAAC has a couple seats where the rubber meets the road (TC Committees), and having those positions should allow our collective voice to be heard, and influence where the future of the hobby could be going.

To this point RC enthusiasts have had it pretty good, don't get close to full scale planes, and don't fly into a cloud. It wasn't going to last forever. With the TC review of the act, it almost equates to a license if you are going to receive any remuneration for a flight. One pre-requisite for a UAV SOFC is proof of training. Who better to do the training tha a well established, long term organization like MAAC.

I doubt HK or many Canadian retailers of RC flight equipment is going to offer training. To date I have only heard (seen) of one RC retailer offering training. Retailer are sure making sure liability isn't going to be coming back on them.

[Midair]

Hello Eye:

I agree with all you've said. I prefer to keep our hobby as simple (and safe!) as possible. The Wings program is a good baseline to assist clubs and members who wish to participate. I hope it stays that way and doesn't become more or I fear that we might alienate and loose more members.

One last comment about your last para above - I'm not a lawyer (thank heaven, or I'd be even more opinionated), but imagine that I purchase an R/C product from that vendor who provides or offers R/C training. He completes the training and declares me fit to fly. I then have a serious accident and I'm sued. How might the courts react to my claim that I was competent to fly? That I'd been properly trained? Was the vendor legally capable to teach me to fly? What did the training program consist of? Can I sue the vendor for not training me properly?...

Ugh, say no!

[Eye Can Fly]

There might be a wee bit of an issue about where a person flies. For a guy/gal that never flies at a club away from their home club this issue isn't a very big deal. To those of us that are 100+km away from a club or event it might be a whole other issue.

Peter, that s a good question. If a High school driver trainer responsible for a past student having an accident??? Like you said, if your following the MAAC safety protocols and mitigating risk, I would be saddened if the courts held the pilot liable. Yet here is the better question, if someone is aware of the TC regs, and have never heard of MAAC, are they liable?