[SPAM] Growing Pattern

[George Kennie]

Here,Here, Ed!

Ed Alt wrote:

>   FYI, Dave Michael and I are good friends stemming from my IMAC
> days.  I would like to add my perspective as IMAC to Pattern
> convert.  I talk to many from the IMAC ranks about starting in
> Pattern and I think Dave makes many good points about their
> perspective on things. The perception of Pattern requiring
> expensive designs is fairly prevalent in my experience.  Alot of
> it is based in reality, i.e., you definitely do see some expensive
> hardware in use, especially at the Nats level.  It's less
> prevalent locally, but the reputation is probably still somewhat
> deserved.  It is a fairly recent development that some solid,
> competitive designs are available as ARCS / ARFs or relatively low
> cost composites.  There are the strong proponents of one engine
> design/brand or another.  I have found that very inexpensive
> alternatives to high end 4 strokes exist and they are extremely
> competitive and well behaved.  Also much cheaper to run.  But this
> type of information does not seem to be widespread. To frame this
> for the List, Dave is a very good pilot and builder and very
> resourceful. Yet, about the time right after his first Pattern
> contest experience, he had a zillion questions for me, the 2 year
> Pattern veteran (ha!).  Questions about airframes, engines,
> exhaust etc.  Why?  Not because it's too hard for a guy like Dave
> to figure it out, but because these are well kept secrets!  What
> is a much less experienced guy going to do?  Generally, they go
> where the perceived action is, where almost everyone seems to know
> something about the hot setup, the best buy in an engine etc. They
> flock to "big gas" and then some of them actually end up flying
> IMAC competition.  A smaller percentage stick with it.  An even
> smaller percentage get real serious about precision flying.
> Whoever they are, they often spend 3X or more of what it would
> take to enter Pattern successfully, so it's not money holding many
> guys back from trying Pattern.  I think it has to do with the
> perceived value of whatever they spend $$$ on, the WOW factor, the
> fact that the lingering image of Pattern to the masses is still
> pinned to a 130 mph lawn dart with retracts zipping from horizon
> to horizon. I was fortunate when I got started in Pattern, because
> I had a boatload of local, very experienced Pattern competitors
> right nearby who I already knew well.   So I got great start-up
> advice, instantaneous feedback at the field etc.  A show of hands
> please:  Who else had this experience to start with?  Some, but
> not most I bet.  Where can you find even 1/10th the information
> about our current equipment as you can for the IMAC stuff?
> Magazines?  We're fortunate to have Eric and Dean's columns, but
> it's a dedicated following that hunts for this type of
> information.  I think that there is just a different mindset in
> the majority of IMAC flyers vs. those dedicated to Pattern.  I see
> it in the aircraft designs, in the rules, in the sequence designs
> and in the demeanor of the people involved.  I think Pattern
> appeals to more of the purist type, yet we are every bit as fun
> loving as IMAC types.  That's me for example.  I went absolutely
> bonkers over what I thought were idiotic rules changes in IMAC
> about 3 years ago. It took me a while to just figure out that I
> was just in the wrong event after 7 years. Do we need unknowns to
> make Pattern more popular?  By itself, I don't think it would do
> much to help.  IMAC is off doing their level best to copy IAC,
> which includes interesting stuff like unknowns, but the rules and
> sequences they fly also take alot of precision and objectivity out
> of the flying and judging. Adding unknowns creates more dependence
> on luck.  Judges don't know what they are looking at until they've
> seen it flown a few times.  It's interesting to fly something new,
> but does it make sense to heavily influence the outcome this way?
> Freestyle is something that on average, less than 20% of
> contestants will attempt, so that's not the big draw as far as I
> can tell.  I've seen Freestyle materially interfere with the
> conduct of the "pattern" portion of the contest (the real contest
> IMO) due to the undue emphasis on it. I guess what I'm saying is,
> it's Pattern. It's about precision.  That's the thing that I 'get'
> from it anyway. It has similarities to IMAC, yet differs from IMAC
> in significant ways. I think those differences form the basis of
> the key strengths of Pattern, even if enough newbies aren't able
> to recognize it in recent history.  Each event will draw it's own
> type of follower. I think that NSRCA has to learn one key thing
> from IMAC.  That would be how to market themselves (us).  Ever
> wonder why everyone calls "it" IMAC?  "It" is really the Scale
> Aerobatics event.  "It" isn't IMAC, IMAC is just the SIG, but
> everyone thinks IMAC is what they are flying.  Who goes around
> saying "Hey Bubba, going to the Propbuster NSRCA contest next
> weekend?" No one does. Not that calling it an NSRCA contest is the
> goal, but the thing is, hardly anyone even knows this SIG exists
> unless they are already flying Pattern.  Since the NSRCA SIG and
> it's members are the probably the main source of information to
> entice/educate newcomers, I reckon that's a key problem to be
> solved. I think that the key to growing Pattern has little to do
> with emulating events from IMAC.  It has mostly to do with
> educating people, getting the 'product' out there, making sure
> people know what it's about and how to get into it successfully.
> IMAC is a product that is marketed successfully, even with the low
> recurrence of new flyers returning to compete.  They pull
> newcomers in by the droves though.  From what I can tell, Pattern
> keeps 'em better though.  Why?  It's a more mature event, many of
> the hardest lessons have been learned already it and it "makes
> sense" once you are in it.  Most of the rules in Precision
> Aerobatics don't make me want to bang my head against the wall
> (except that spin definition).  You guys have it mostly figured
> out already, which makes a purist want to stick with it, but you
> have NOT figured out how to get them in the tent in big numbers so
> that you can find new purists. So please don't re-engineer the
> event to try to draw new blood.  Instead, focus on dispelling the
> myths about what is flown, what the models are like, let it be
> known that a $700 4C burning $25 worth of fuel in a day isn't
> required etc.  I've got several guys from IMAC interested in
> Pattern, because I explain stuff to them, I let them fly my
> airplane etc.  Between Frank Granelli and I, we've got 2 or 3
> newbies in our own club starting up with a Focus II this coming
> season.  We're going to teach them about straight lines, what plug
> to pick etc and hopefully they will feel good about whatever
> progress they make.  Work with the guys that don't know what we
> know and have some enthusiasm about it. Hold Pattern Primers.
> Show up and help demonstrate and explain at these Primers.
> Pattern in D1 is not dying, it is GROWING. Our district leadership
> works with interested clubs and individuals to help to make this
> happen.  Contests with 2 dozen to over 30 contestants do happen in
> this district and they are not anomalies. Ed


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20051113/5393a771/attachment.html