Change and effect... and a cause!

[JOddino]

My experience tells me pattern has always been an engine game.  I remember when I was starting out I wrote a tongue in cheek article for my club newsletter that said you had to design your own airplane, be in the radio business and be a buddy of the engine builder.  That was the year when Phil Kraft, Doug Spreng and Cliff Weirick (Sp?) made the team and all had Lee Custom engines that were unavailable to anyone else.  And that was before we had any maneuvers that required a lot of power.  In the first TOC when we were still flying pattern planes, Hanno blew us away because he had a tuned pipe.  Everyone followed.  Four strokes didn't catch on right away but when Ron Chidgey flew a YS at the Nats the writing was on the wall.  The ability to go where you want when you want makes aerobatic flying a lot easier.  It is still an energy management game but having excess power makes it easier.
I agree with Erik that the judges don't care what engine you are using, but if your plane is struggling, you might as well pack it up.
I don't agree that you need to be a pro and I believe the great pilot with a enough resources to demonstrate his potential can get sponsorship if he wants it.
I believe this electric thing could be a great thing for pattern for many reasons.  But it still gets down to power.  If it is measurably better power wise and can meet the other requirements, people will buy it.  
Jim
----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Henderson,Eric 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 9:13 PM
  Subject: Change and effect... and a cause!


  I think we accept statements like " There was a judging bias towards 4-c's that made 2-c's redundant",  far too readily.

  I can recall giving a YS 1.20 pilot in D-1 a heck of a good run for his money for a whole season with a Conquest and a Hanno. They guy flew better than I did but I did not experience that his set up was any better. My buddy Charlie Watt beat 24 pilots in Sportsman (402) with the same config. the year before. 

  What I think happened was that pilots who were good also tended to be committed and naturally migrated their investments to the more current and newly available equipment. The net result being that they were at the top with the old and were again at the top with the "new". The rest of us following in the "comet's' tail in the hope that we would also become winners.

  I don't think my flying was ever improved by the latest overpowered brute of a pattern plane.  It never got me in the winners circle without, a) learning to be a judge first, b)slowly applying pieces of education over gallons of burnt fuel. c) Moving up before it got stale.. I can't find a correlation in results to powerplants. Better planes made a difference but not without a ton of left-hand(Rudder) education and practice. 

  I ran the OS1.40 RX for a season in 1997/1998. There was some prejudice that you always get from folks with a lot of money invested in 4-c's but cannot say that I saw prejudice in the scores I got. I flew very average and very rudder clumsy and was scored accordingly. I believe that judges find it hard to downgrade just because of a plane design or a motor. A plane that can't do the maneuvers is much more likely to incur negativism.

  If  a pilot was winning with a .61 powered Jekyll and was left in the dust by everyone moving to 1.20's. I could say that we hurt them.  If a not so successful pilot was left behind and could not afford the new equipment we will never know if the new equipment would have made them more competitive or just left them with their prior status quo.  

  The real "devil" is not equipment changes but open or background sponsorship. Professional, or pseudo professional pilots, with heavy financial support cause changes in our sport. We, the great unsponsored, never seem to open our eyes and recognize that we really can't compete with them!  Perhaps they should have their own class to fly in. In a way the TOC fulfilled that roll for many years. (It deviated a bit when the planes became large and very loud). 

  Pro-Am - If the professionals were separated from the amateurs, even by as little as a class within the class, then private-pilot-entries could have a way to the top that was not blocked by the big bucks! This years FAI finals were dominated by radio-team-pilots  It read JR - Futaba - JR - Futaba -J R - Futaba - JR - Futaba (I'm not picking on the radio suppliers. It could just as easily be fuel or engines or planes or whatever). 

  The point is that the amateur is completely emasculated in our sport and you are sentenced to follow or fade irregardless of how good a pilot you may be!.  Nite all...

  Eric.















  -----Original Message-----
  From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Keith Black
  Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 10:34 PM
  To: discussion at nsrca.org
  Subject: Re: Electric Pattern


  I doubt the migration will be that rapid, and I wouldn't think judging would be discriminatory if the planes are the same size and same style. 

  The real difference would be if electric engines improve flying due to more power and quicker response, basically the same debate that's gone on about two strokes vs. four strokes.

  Clearly this is not nearly as dramatic as the change from 60 to 120 sized planes.

  Personally I look forward to electric pattern becoming an affordable reality!

  Keith


    ----- Original    
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20030810/8f38f7ad/attachment.html