Scat/IMAC

[Ed Deaver]

Having started in Pattern and doing the full fledged IMAC thing here in TX, these are my thoughts on this.
1)  ARF's are here to stay, but they are on both fronts now, for those that want them.
2)  Trailer, and 2 37% Extras, in my mind to be competitive, $20000, current transport and 2 pattern planes, $5000.  This is an easy choice for me.
3)  Size of the box, caused by size of the planes and sequence in IMAC has eliminated in Tx 3 IMAC contests and with it, one very good pattern contest.  Doing rolling circles over someones house 1/2 mile away do not encourage neighborhood support.
4)  The number of IMAC contests in Tx is way down, the number of Pattern contests is on the rise.

Please don't misunderstand.  I am not trying to pit one vs the other.  Only to say there is room for both, and I like it that way.  I disagree with the size issue as I know of a number of pilots opting for the pattern venue now, that were dedicated IMAC pilots.  Even with the ARF's a 35% IMAC plane is going to cost more than a competitive Pattern plane.  Transportation to the field is still an issue, involving more cost.
Also interesting to watch the top IMAC pilots that strive to fly their plane the same way a top Pattern dude does his.
Personally believe IMAC will bring more pilots to Pattern once they see the above.  Contrary to popular belief, in my experiences at a  contest, something goes wrong, 10 pattern pilots jump up to help, in IMAC only one jumps up to help.  This is my experience.  Of course the current press is contrary to my experiences.

Ed
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ron Van Putte 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 6:08 PM
  Subject: Re: Team Trials




  JOddino wrote:

    Hi Ron,
    It seems to me that IMAC/SCAT pilots have the same objectives as Pattern pilots.  They like nice looking planes that fly aerobatics well.  I feel the rules, namely weight and noise limit the choices in pattern.  There are many kits and ARFs with gas engines that meet the 2 meter rule but can't meet the weight and noise requirements.  Dick Hansen has suggested classes by size and I like that idea.  What do you think?

  The problem we regarding our size and weight restrictions, as well as our noise limitations, is that they are currently tied to F3A limits.  The size and weight limits we have are the same as F3A, while the AMA classes are 2 db more lenient than F3A.  The tie between AMA and F3A size and weight limitations do not have to be.  We can go to 12 lb weight limits and/or 80-85 inch wingspan and length limits anytime we have a proposal to implement them that passes the R/C Aerobatice contest board.  We haven't had a proposal to implement those changes yet.  

  We already have noise problems at local fields (and even at the Nats) from scale aerobatic airplanes that were/are too noisy and I don't believe that easing the noise limits is a way we should go. 

  I hadn't thought about classes by size.  The only negative I can think of is that it would adversely impact the low-budget pilot when he transitioned from class to class.

  Ron Van Putte

    ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Ron Van Putte 
      To: discussion at nsrca.org 
      Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 12:03 PM
      Subject: Re: Team Trials




      JOddino wrote:

John,  Your obsevations should make everyone stop and think about their own situation.  Building and flying model airplanes is a great hobby but like everything else in life there must be a balance with other aspects of your life as you mentioned.
We had a very successful SCAT contest in Camarillo this weekend with about 40 entries.  I'd say half the planes were ARFs and I believe ARFs won in every class.  I'd sure like to see pattern as healthy but I think it will take some rule changes.
  
      I'd like to see Pattern be  healthy and grow too, but I don't know what is meant by, "it will take some rule changes".  

      Ron Van Putte


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Ferrell" <johnferrell at earthlink.net>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 7:41 AM
Subject: Re: Team Trials


  Some personal observations:
If we all flew like the guys at the team trials, we would have to hire people to put on contests.  If we did not have ARF's we would lose a lot of flyers.  If we did not have guys in business to produce pattern planes, we would lose a lot of flyers.  If we all agreed on what airplane/engine was best it would be a one-design program.
The only real constant is change...I believe things are coming along nicely!

There are elements of IMAC/SCAT/SPF & ARF's that have made positive contributions to pattern.

Some of us come to grips with the fact that we fly pattern for fun and are never really going to become really successful competitors regardless of the rules. At that point we choose to pick the contests that are the most fun, fly in weather that threatens neither health or equipment, with equipment that provides the least frustration.

There are lifestyle factors that come into play as well. A new baby, a grandchild who is willing to share your time, a health problem (yours or your family), an employment situation, an opportunity to fulfill some special dream (think full scale flying). Environment changes: Your local
field is no longer available and travel time to the field becomes excessive.
    We each come to the Pattern World with our own agenda and either adapt to reality or leave. While there are a lot of us who have a strong drive to compete and win, I believe there are more of us who pursue it as the venue for self improvement. Those who must compete and win simply go away when the trophies stop.

Like I said at the top, just some observations....
I am still having fun!

John Ferrell
6241 Phillippi Rd
Julian NC 27283
Phone: (336)685-9606
johnferrell at earthlink.net
Dixie Competition Products
NSRCA 479 AMA 4190  W8CCW
"My Competition is Not My Enemy"


        


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20030624/9b2f71eb/attachment.html