Growing Pattern klipped to repost

Sat Nov 12 16:31:03 AKST 2005

I've been flying pattern since '98 and usually get to two or three a year. I have only gone to one contest where I came back on sunday to fly. If I leave Saturday night, even if I get home late, I still have sunday with the family. I"ve given up a lot of trophies by not coming back, but by the end of saturday, I know where I fit in. 

-------------- Original message -------------- 

> Way back when, there were at least 8 to 10 1 day contests a season all 
> within 2 to 2.5 hours driving. I even went to a couple of two day contests 
> that were close enough to drive to each day. If I had to drive 4+ hours to 
> get to a contest, I would prefer a 2 day event as well. Everyone has their 
> preferences and reasons behind them. I would suggest that if you were one 
> who only would fly at a one day contest, you may no longer be competing or 
> part of this discussion. Most people who stayed with it either preferred 2 
> day contests or accepted them as the norm. (Maybe there are still areas that 
> feature one day events, I do not know). 
> Is the reason for lower attendance at contests due to loss of people that 
> didn't want to invest the time in 2 day contests, or because some of the new 
> blood found IMAC instead? Nobody really knows. Maybe it is a little of 
> both, maybe there is a totally different reason for it. 
> 
> Stuart Chale 
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] On 
> Behalf Of Del K. Rykert 
> Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2005 1:06 PM 
> To: discussion at nsrca.org 
> Subject: Fw: Growing Pattern ** klipped to repost ** 
> 
> 
> 
> Had a comment on the 1 day contests Stuart made. The main reason I don't 
> attend some contests is they are only one day and for me don't justify the 5 
> 
> or 7 hour drive to possibly get rained out or blown out at one day events. 
> If they were local would be different story but For years I have not 
> attended 1 day contests because they were only 1 day and long drive. 
> So there is, as always, two sides to every equation. CD's make their 
> choices and we live with the consequences. I no longer go to contests that 
> camping isn't allowed at flying field either... My attendance has declined 
> for this very reason to some regional contests. We all have different issues 
> 
> that we personally need to address to justify making the choice to fly 
> pattern and which contests we can or will attend. 
> 
> Del 
> nsrca - 473 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Stuart Chale 
> To: discussion at nsrca.org 
> Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2005 9:49 AM 
> Subject: FW: [SPAM] Growing Pattern 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will throw an additional 1½ cents in with some ramblings. 
> 
> 
> 
> Ed and Dave make some interesting points and comparisons between IMAC (I 
> means scale aerobatics) and pattern. As some of you who know me, I have 
> been away from pattern for a while. (kids and other hobbies). I started 
> flying in the early 80's. Most contests were 1 day and less than 30 
> entrants would be unusual. IMAC may have been in existence, I really do not 
> 
> know but it surely wasn't as widely known as it is today. 
> 
> 
> 
> I just did a google search on IMAC history and found this article. 
> http://www.iac.org/featured/Featured%20Article%20-%20Vol.30,%20No.07%20July% 
> 202001.html 
> 
> 
> 
> An excerpt reads as follows: 
> 
> In 1976 the National Sport Biplane Association became affiliated with the 
> IAC and became IMAC. 
> 
> In the next few years, membership in IMAC grew, and more model aircraft 
> manufacturers began producing scale acrobatic aircraft. The Pitts still was 
> popular, but monoplanes like Leo's Laser and CAP 21s were also being built. 
> At this time (early to mid-80s), most of the scale aerobatic models used in 
> competition were 1/4 scale or less, meaning they had wingspans between 60 
> and 80 inches and engines ranging from 0.60 to 2.0 cubic inches running on 
> model airplane fuel (glow fuel). 
> 
> In the late 80s and early 90s, new high-performance mono-planes began to 
> appear on the IAC flight line and also at IMAC contests. Extras, Sukhois, 
> and CAPs became the hot ride of choice. Here is one major advantage of 
> flying models over their full-scale counterparts-the price difference 
> between a clipped-wing Cub and an Extra is a nonissue! 
> 
> During the 90s every kit manufacturer was producing these hot rods in 
> sizes from 1/6 scale to 35 percent scale (54- to 105-inch wingspans), with 
> the larger aircraft powered by gas engines in the 2.4-to 6.0-cubic-inch 
> range. These scale acrobatic aircraft were very popular with all modelers. 
> This trend was helpful to IMAC. Formerly, the soley recognized form of model 
> 
> aerobatic competition involved "pattern" aircraft that appeared dissimilar 
> to their full-size cousins- narrow, ultra streamlined, and unnaturally long 
> moments. 
> 
> ================================================= 
> If you want your reply email to go to the list, you must Cc: the list! 
> 
> To access the email archives for this list, go to 
> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/ 
> To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm 
> and follow the instructions. 
> 
> List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the list. 
> 
> 
> 
> If you want your reply email to go to the list, you must Cc: the 
> list! 
> 
> To access the email archives for this list, go to 
> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/ 
> To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm 
> and follow the instructions. 
> 
> List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the list. 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20051113/2e5a1bb4/attachment.html