Someone who knows MAAC rules on Transmitters!!! Help! - Page 4 - RCCanada - Canada Radio Controlled Hobby Forum
RCCanada - Canada's Radio Control Hobby Forum
General RC Aircraft Discussion Discuss anything RC related

Closed Thread
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-10-2006, 06:45 AM   #31
RCC Master Contributor
I am: Eric T
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Mississauga, Ont

Feedback: 1 / 100%
Posts: 1,126
Total Props: 2

       Remove this ad - become a site supporter!
give him some time.

He'll get back to you.

The official answer will probably be "no" because you are not following the manufacturers original design for both the TX box and the TX module. This is not a manufacturer approved modification.
To say "yes" could crete liability on behalf of MAAC which is an unnecessary risk.
tech1 is offline   Quick reply to this message.

Sponsored Links - Subscribe to remove this ad.
Old 02-10-2006, 07:19 AM   #32
RCC Senior Contributor
DP01's Avatar
I am: Dennis P
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Southern Ontario

Feedback: 9 / 100%
Posts: 667
Total Props: 0
I suspect you’ll discover that Industry Canada type approvals are based on the original equipment in its entirety. If you make a bitza, the approval no longer applies.

"Simplicate and add lightness"
DP01 is offline   Quick reply to this message.
Old 02-10-2006, 10:30 AM   #33
I am: Boolean21
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Singapore

Feedback: 0 / 0%
Posts: 38,228
Total Props: 56
Contacted MAAC

I sent a note to the chair of the Radio Specturm (old Frequency) Committee this morning, asking for clarification.

I suspect that you probably are voiding any MAAC insurance coverage in using the plane.

Talked with one of my fellow employees and he did mention some problems with the radio and the frequency band:
1) short range. Unless I'm flying in a gym, I'm going to get out-of-range in a realy hurry if I'm flying anything with speed.
2) directional signal and reception -- that's why there are TWO antennas and you have to make sure their have differenct orientations.

Saw the March 2006 issue of Backyard Flyer and there's an article on the Spektrum radio plus an ad on the inside back cover (opposite the article on battlefield UAV's in Iraq)

Anyone wanting to check out the radio and current pricing ($200 US), its

ME? I'm going to hold off on picking up a 2.4G radio until Futaba and JR come out with one. That way, the bugs are worked out and the technology matured. Remember Kraft's synthesized frequncy TX/RX? Dial-a-crash....
PurgatorY is offline   Quick reply to this message.
Old 02-11-2006, 05:55 AM   #34
RCC Supreme Contributor
OICU812's Avatar
I am: Shawn S
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central, Alberta

Feedback: 31 / 100%
Posts: 2,405
Total Props: 19
First of all this is a JR product, aka Horizon Hobby and the radio guts are a downgraded 6102. Next is the fact that as mentioned the range is over 3000 and considering this is a park flyer radio setup that is more than enough range as far as I am concerned. Next the antenna orientation is notthat critical. It can be bunch up, sideways it does not matter. A Spektrum rep stated that to me and I have seen several pics and videos showing people wrapping their antennas around carbon fiber, plastic skids etc with no effect on range or operational ability.

As mentioned I did send Barlow an email and then no answer. Wanting an answer I emailed another chap from Maac Insurance side of things and basically got told to research it through Canada FCC regulations and if it looked like it applied to my situation and was ok then I was good. What a joke I can not even get an official answer from an official. That is very frustrating. I will not mention the name of that member in order to not be too rude but I can assure that is lazyness on that persons part. If his statement is true "I doubt it" that would mean I declare it good and use that as my defence, lol. Man oh man the saga continues.....
Once upon a time there were Nitros, Flybars & Frequency pins
My Main OL Photo Gallery:
OICU812 is offline   Quick reply to this message.
Old 02-11-2006, 06:28 AM   #35
Ed Smith

Feedback: / %
Posts: n/a
Total Props: 0
As mentioned I did send Barlow an email and then no answer.
Mr. Barlow is out of the country on vacation.

Ed S
  Quick reply to this message.
Old 02-11-2006, 09:21 AM   #36
Donovan Dow
RCC Junior Contributor
I am: Donovan R
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Barrhaven Nepean Ontario

Feedback: 0 / 0%
Posts: 238
Total Props: 0
Morning All

Richard Barlow will be back from his South Africa holidays 18 Feb.

don dow
Donovan Dow is offline   Quick reply to this message.
Old 02-11-2006, 02:05 PM   #37
RCC Expert Contributor
Jabba's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Windsor, Ontario SW Zone

Feedback: 0 / 0%
Posts: 933
Total Props: 0

Richard is on holidays at the present time.

I have done a little research and according to our Safety Code: "Transmitters will be used in accordance with Canadian Government Regulations'"

If what you are doing conforms to the current Government Regulations, and you will have to research this, you will have no problems. It must also specificly state that what you are doing is within the regulations.

Hope this helps
Charles Smith
SW Zone Director
Insurance Committee Member

Plus remeber that not only is the transmitter go for only 3000 ft. but also the receive has that range too. no matter what box it is in the range is STILL only 3000 ft.

This e-mail from the director looks pretty much like an answer to me. All you have to do is look it up or contact the radio committee for the info.


Palmer Johnson
MAAC Radio Sp. Committee
Palmer Johnson
Jabba is offline   Quick reply to this message.
Old 02-13-2006, 01:29 PM   #38
RCC Supreme Contributor
OICU812's Avatar
I am: Shawn S
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central, Alberta

Feedback: 31 / 100%
Posts: 2,405
Total Props: 19
gov't regulations etc...

ok well in breif looking at the thousands of documents available I could as anyone could interpet my findings to be in my favour so I guess since it is apparently up to me to deem it either allowed and acceptable I will deem it so. In the USA the AMA states what the rules are they do not tell you to research it and tell them if it is allowed, that is a poor way to deal with a question imho. Maybe I am taking your response wrong, I understand this is new technology and the answer may not be obvious and as well you simply may not know the answer, but I feel Maac's response should be the truth "we don't know", but "we will let you know our firm stance". That is my opinion of how this should be handled. Is Maac going to tell the next dozen people to research it too, or will someone have educated themeselves from that end and make a decision?

I certainly do not want to sound rude on the subject but I just find that response ridiculous.

In my industry and as management it is my responsibility when someone from the public or an employee comes to me with a concern I have to answer to them. If the answer is unknown it is then my responsibility to investigate and give a speedy and accurate response to that individual. Being the authority on matters that come to my attention it is not only a responsibility but is my duty to those that need answers. I feel you should tell me if what I am describing is within regulation of the way Maac sees it, not the other way around. Next you will have others researching different subjects and deeming what they may do either acceptable etc and next thing you know you have a lawsuit down the road. Just all in my humble opinion.

In short all I am interested in doing is taking the communication board from one radio to another thats it, 3 wires and less than 5 minutes to do, likely easier than changing crystals from some different radios out there. I would like a firm answer on this as I like to always be within the rules. If you simply want to stand by me telling Maac what I have read on the regulations in this regards I can tell you the way I perceive this is to be just fine and compliable.

Thanks if you care to shed more on this, otherwise as I have read and as stated the way I understand the rules and gov't regulations I have looked through what I am wanting to do is within the law and the rules of MAAC.

Once upon a time there were Nitros, Flybars & Frequency pins
My Main OL Photo Gallery:
OICU812 is offline   Quick reply to this message.
Old 02-13-2006, 02:15 PM   #39
RCC Expert Contributor
Jabba's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Windsor, Ontario SW Zone

Feedback: 0 / 0%
Posts: 933
Total Props: 0
Well I'm on the Radio Committee.

This question is FAR above MY head.

BUT with the little I know about the insides of a radio here is MHO!

1) your taking the inside out of a 2.4 gzh radio and putting them into a 72 mhz radio.

2) what makes you think they will WORK.... each made for a different wave band.

3) the 2.4 ghz RECEIVER is still made for SHORT range.

4) I'm no legal begal... but know enough that give a insurance company ANY change to reject a claim and I would say they will.

5) NEXT I would say that IF you go ahead and do this you will blow both radios up.... because they are not made for that freq/power.
example: the 2.4 ghz is less the a 1/8 watt (my guess) because of the range - now you want to hook up a normal trans. power of (again guessing) of 1 watt. I think you will be smoking testing it and when the smoke comes out all the magic is gone with it.

6) next from the safety code that freq. is not OK in Canada (yet)???????

7) did you buy the 2.4 ghz system in Canada?

again the Radio committee will be making recommendation for the next AZM.

so in the end... I would say NO.... (but again that is JUST MY GUESS)

turn it on do a range check.... watch the smoke come out ...

wait... and they will come out with a radio in 2.4 ghz with NORMAL range.
Palmer Johnson
Jabba is offline   Quick reply to this message.
Old 02-13-2006, 02:31 PM   #40
RCC Senior Contributor
sarawnty's Avatar
I am: Stephen J
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Mississauga, Ontario
Radio of choice:

Feedback: 8 / 100%
Posts: 571
Total Props: 0
modified transmitters

Hi Folks,
The AMA Frequency Committee was meeting this weekend in Champaign, IL along with JR and Futaba to discuss these very issues. Not sure what transpired but I would suggest someone try to contact someone on that comittee to get the skoop on their thinking.
Like it or not, this technology is here to stay and judging by the number of both modified and un-modified 2.4ghz tx's I saw at the E-fest event, is gaining wide acceptance and becoming very popular.
Stephen Johnston
MAAC 12138
sarawnty is offline   Quick reply to this message.
Closed Thread

Quick Reply

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the RCCanada - Canada Radio Controlled Hobby Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

Member names may only be composed of alpha-numeric characters. (A-Z and 0-9)

!!ATTENTION ADVERTISERS!! If you intend on advertising anything on this forum, whatsoever, you are required to first contact us here . Additionally, we do NOT allow BUSINESS NAMES unless you are an Authorized Vendor. If you own a business, and want to do sales on this site via posting or private message, you will need to follow the rules. Shops, Stores, Distributors, Group Buys without being authorized will see your account terminated.
User Name:
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Your Name
Your first name and last initial is required if you plan on using the forum.
Which city & province you live in. This is mandatory for classified listings.
Radio of choice?
Which radio is your current favorite to use?
Number of RC Vehicles?
How many boats, cars, planes do you own?


Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
vBulletin Message

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:01 AM.

vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.