[NSRCA-discussion] Was Mini Brio, Now Pattern Longitevity

[Mike Hester]

Real quickly, I don't think pattern is dying, I think it is evolving, 
changing, shifting areas of activeness. While it's numbers are dwindling in 
some places, the numbers are on the increase in others.

one thing I think would be a mistake would be to change the airframe rules 
in pattern. they are stabilized, and I don't think changing them would have 
any positive long lasting effect. if anything, it could worsen the 
situation. Stability fosters enginuety, and some people are rising to the 
challenge of both leading edge technology, and old school methods. When you 
learn how to seamlessly blend both, you create more options.

Think about how wide open our airframe and power rules really are: power is 
virtually unlimited, airframe is an empty 2 meter box with a maximum weight 
of 5 k or 11 lbs, and the noise requirement...but if they can get a 40% 
within the noise requirements, then that's no longer an issue.

What we have to do, all of us, is foster a fun but competetive atmosphere. 
We need to reach out to people on a grass roots level and get them 
motivated. We need to slay the perception that you must have a $3000 
airframe and $2-3000 worth of electric power or you're wasting your time. I 
hate that crap. And we need to ALL make sure that we don't even 
subconsciously give the edge to a guy with the latest greatest electric set 
up, because by doing so think what message we'll be sending to the guy that 
really can't afford that kind of investment right now, today. in the future 
who knows.

if you haven't heard, ZDZ is coming out with a new 40cc f3A engine this 
summer. this thing will turn as large of a prop as the electrics. The weight 
increase over glow isn't even half as bad as electric. This alone could do 
great things for us in crossing certain invisible barriers.

Then again, maybe not =)

Sorry to ramble, must be the paint fumes.....

-Mike

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ryan Smith" <smaragdz at bellsouth.net>
To: <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2006 12:51 PM
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Was Mini Brio, Now Pattern Longitevity


I honestly don't think that you have to spend out the butt to have a 
competitive setup. The keeping up with the Joneses syndrome is the prevalent 
factor that makes everyone think that pattern is so ungodly expensive. There 
are plenty of options out there for people to create a cost-effective, 
competitive two meter rig. But alas, people out there think they HAVE to 
have the biggest best and fastest everything, when in reality, there is no 
way in hell most newer fliers out there can discern between a slightly 
inferior and cheaper product and a top of the line product (a big example 
here would be digital servos as opposed to analog servos). There are 
certainly MANY viable options out there for a cheap two meter setup that 
will be competitive in the long run. The best example I can see of this is 
Mark Hunt, down in the Houston area. His airplane, the Insight, is all wood 
and foam, and can be built with maybe $150 worth of wood (I'm throwing a 
generous estimate out there), not to mention the plans are like $25. He is 
actually running an OS 1.60 on a standard muffler and is still making the 
noise restrictions. Mark exemplifies what people just starting out in 
pattern need to look into, not only because it's cheap, but the airplanes 
are simple to maintain and I would venture to say bulletproof.  I bought a 
set from him a while back and haven't had the chance to build one, but I 
really would like to. I would like to do what he's doing and and outfit it 
with analog servos and make it otherwise plain jane and see just how it 
stacks up to the rest of the field out there. There are also several other 
wood airplanes out there that are a little more extravagant, such as the 
Black Magic v2 by Mike Hester and the Quest and Shindin by Bryan Herbert 
that are being drawn in CAD and being kitted. Look at the airplanes that the 
Japanese team members fly- they're all wood. And look at where they place. 
Most if not all are always in the top ten, and young Tetsuo Onda even placed 
second this year. That's a heck of a feat for anyone, mu
ch less an eighteen year old who is flying against people who have been 
modeling twice as long as he's been living.

            Another point, the theory of everyone flying the same thing has 
never worked, not in fullscale and not in models. The One Design class never 
caught on in full scale, however there are many examples of that airplane 
flying. In IMAC, there are worries about everyone using consistent 
batteries, motors, servos, and such, and if you have to be dictated that 
much on what you can and cannot fly, it takes the fun out. Also, in IMAC, it 
is commonplace to see high end airplanes in Basic and Sportsman just because 
people want to get that advantage that they really get through burning fuel. 
I know everyone hates to hear that, but it is the truth. Once you start to 
see improvements in your own flying after having flown a lot, then you see 
what everyone preaches about when they say fly a bunch. I really don't think 
that pattern dying is really directly related to cost, but if you want to 
make it such let's break down Jay's idea. How cost effective is it to make 
someone buy something that they can't use in upper classes and would have to 
buy a new setup every year. Shouldn't we be showing people that they can go 
and get a nice setup that they can actually use and enjoy? Not to mention 
the fact that you can reuse the equipment should you decide (or your thumbs 
decide) to get a new airframe. I think the cost factor is implemented by 
people who don't really have the desire to succeed and have to use that as a 
scapegoat to cover what they see as their failures.

            I honestly think pattern needs an overhaul. It's not the cost 
that really drives people away, it's the ideology surrounding it that does. 
People see pattern as being boring and too easy, and generally not exciting. 
However, with the advent 3D flight, and people becoming attracted to model 
airplanes because of it, they really want to hone their skills. I have seen 
a lot of subtle hints dropped by some past pattern flyers who write for 
magazines telling people to look into pattern if they really want to become 
better at 3D. I also think that we need more promotion. Model Aviation has 
cut down the pattern column in the magazine to every other month, yet there 
are other facets in there that get full coverage that really don't need it. 
If we want pattern to survive, we really need to get publicized where it 
counts- where we're going to be attracting people. Advertising in the K 
Factor does nothing for the growth of pattern because we're all already 
interested enough in it to subscribe. But there are people out there who 
don't know and maybe would like to. I can't tell you how many times on RCU 
I've seen someone post in the Pattern Forum "What is Pattern Flying?". Most 
are usually creative in what they think it is, but nevertheless, the same 
group sets them straight. I think we should get on the AMA to get us more 
coverage and other magazines as well, such as Model Airplane News, 3D Flyer, 
etc. I believe THAT is what will help us, not making people buy some little 
electric that they won't be competitive with.

            Thanks for taking the time to read this guys, please feel free 
to respond.



Regards,



Ryan Smith




_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion