[NSRCA-discussion] IMAC Vs Pattern Participation? Doesthe DogHunt on points made?
Ed Alt
ed_alt at hotmail.com
Thu Mar 2 13:08:18 AKST 2006
Hi Bill:
Whatever it is, I think I can take it now. It used to just make my head hurt because of the complete lack of logic behind it, but it doesn't matter anymore. Hey, I bought some new batteries for my 40% Extra and will probably get it off the ground a few times this year! We'll see if I can remember what the heck to do with it after two years. I hate to see it do nothing but sit all the time.
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Glaze
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 4:59 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] IMAC Vs Pattern Participation? Doesthe DogHunt on points made?
Ed:
I'll tell you of the latest iteration/interpretation when I get back from Florida. I'm sure it will be interesting. It is amazing and a little more than baffling to me that, with the loudest airplanes in modeling, there is somewhere between little or no effort to control the noise footprint.
Bill Glaze
----- Original Message -----
From: Ed Alt
To: randy10926 at comtekmail.com ; NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 4:48 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] IMAC Vs Pattern Participation? Does the DogHunt on points made?
For all practical purposes, Scale Aerobatics has no box anymore. It exists as an abstract concept on a piece of paper in that it has a defined height, width and depth, but since they eliminated the 75 degree markers, there is nothing left to measure it against. Additionally, they eliminated the concept of zones, so you are free to place things where it seems good to place them, i.e., a figure that would appear to be meant for the center of the box doesn't have to be flown directly in front of you. Your choice of placement has some kind of connection to the so-called Presentation Score as it was originally 'defined'. There are no deductions for centering inaccuracy. Once you enter the box, you still need to get figures in the correct order and direction, though cross box figures leave direction (in or out) to the discretion of the pilot. Currently, there may or may not be enforcement of a pure impressionist extra figure known as the Presentation Score. It passed as a rule, then everyone was instructed by the IMAC BOD not to follow the AMA rule they pushed through. I heard rumblings that maybe they are going to allow or encourage CDs to follow that rule again. Not sure, I don't really track what they do very closely anymore.
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: Glenn Hatfield
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 4:21 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] IMAC Vs Pattern Participation? Does the DogHunt on points made?
You can fly low slow and close in if you desire. The box that you fly in is smaller for pattern than IMAC. You get too close in and the box gets really small. The box is about the right size for a 2 meter at 150 to 170 Meters parallel to the flight line. You might be able to fly a 50 sized at 125 to 150 meters. At least I do.
Randy
--- "Jay Marshall" <lightfoot at sc.rr.com> wrote:
From: "Jay Marshall" <lightfoot at sc.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 15:51:24 -0500
To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] IMAC Vs Pattern Participation? Does the DogHunt on points made?
I’m new and saw my first contests last year. My first impression was “Why do they fly so high?” Then I wondered what would happen if I flew low, slow and close in with a Oxalys 50? Still wondering.
-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of mike mueller
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 2:14 PM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] IMAC Vs Pattern Participation? Does the DogHunt on points made?
You know what, Keith is right. We have a really good flyer that comes to one of our contests about once a year. He flys his whole sequence right off the deck like a bat out of hell. He's really good and can pull it off. The deal excites everyone. It's a blast to watch.
Keith Black <tkeithb at comcast.net> wrote:
Reading the comments here brings the following to my attention.
Loud "ballistic missile" pattern = Huge popularity.
Quite graceful pattern flying 150 m away = Boring.
Huge Loud IMAC planes flying 3D = Huge popularity.
I bet if we add an "Extreme Pattern" class where we do high slow rolls and snaps ten feed off the deck right over the runway we'd become much more popular again. ;-)
Keith Black
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Richards
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Thursday, Ma! rch 02, 2006 8:55 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] IMAC Vs Pattern Participation? Does the DogHunt on points made?
Larry,
Good points.
A little history, as best as I can remember it.
At one time, Pattern was the top of the heap. I remember the first RC Modeler magazine I bought (circa 1972) had coverage of the Masters competition. RC Modeler carried coverage of the large pattern contests back then. At some point (I don't remember when, exactly) RCM (aka Don Dewey) became ticked off at the AMA because AMA chose to publish their own magazine. This happened when American Aircraft Modeler magazine went out of business, they had been publishing the AMA News in the back of their magazine. It seemed to me that RCM no longer covered pattern events after that. There was a big push by RCM to promote the "Sport Flyers Associat! ion", anything AMA sanctioned was left out. (This was my observation).
Along came the TOC, which actually started out with pattern models. Again, t! here was coverage. But, then the TOC went the scale aerobatics route (and extra points for biplanes, and extra points for mammoth planes -- the rest is history).
Pattern is no longer the premiere event that it used to be. I think it all goes back to the WOW factor. There also seemed to be a period where pattern flyers were looked down upon, usually labeled "snobs". Thank goodnes that does not seem to be the case anymore.
I think the change from loud, ballistic missle type flying to the turnaround style now has changed the general modeling perception, although it took several years for the general modeling public to recognize the change.
However, the turnaround format seems to have had both a positive and negati! ve effect. The general modeling public respects pattern more as a result, but it also SEEMS to be a barrier for new participants. Again, this is just my opinion.
Bob R.
Lisa & Larry <lld613 at psci.net> wrote:
Eric Henderson wrote**** If we knew why we could probably fix it. ****
From my viewpoint trying to get into pattern around 1999 was a major challenge.
I was first introduced to Pattern in Southern California in 1985 when I went to watch a contest. It took another 15 years to have the time and money to do it. For me lack of time was because of my service in the US Navy. Difficult to fly when your out at sea and they don’t fit too well in a locker on the ship…vbg
! It took me from 1999 to 2002 to find somebody that new what pattern was. Everyone new IMAC and could point me to a pilot that competed, but not Pattern.
What does this mean? Either I’m not a very smart cookie or Pattern is a very well kept secret (not much has changed since 1999). So how is it that a person that new pattern existed took the better part of 4 years to finally talk to someone that could help get started?
Over the last seven years we watched IMAC ARF’s take off and sell like hot cakes, only in the last couple years have we seen Pattern ARF’s on the market.
I went to an RC Airshow north of Bloomington, IN around the spring of 2002. I watched a pilot fly an Extra for an! IMAC Sportsman Class Demo. I approached him and asked him about Pattern and how to get started. His response was clear, “Why would you want to fly a toy model plane when you can fly a model of a real plane and do the same thing!” Aside from an instant turn off from IMAC, it ! set the tone of perception between IMAC and Pattern. I will most likely start competing in IMAC this year as well as pattern. Mostly because there are more IMAC contests in a 5 hour drive than there are pattern from where I’m located.
If you compare IMAC and Pattern I don’t think the dog hunts in most of the arguments I’ve seen posted in the last few years as they reappear from time to time.
1) IMAC and Pattern planes compare in cost. (That dog won’t hunt on this point)
2) 2) IMAC and Pattern take the same ! amount of practice time to be competitive in a given class. (That dog won’t hunt on this point)
3) IMAC and Pattern meets are relatively the same driving distance for most. (That dog won’t hunt! on this point)
4) I can find more IMAC contests than Pattern contests (Dog might be tracking something on this one)
5) Sport pilots know more about IMAC than they do pattern, this is speculative but I believe it’s the case. (Dog might be tracking something on this one)
We need to do a better job marketing Pattern. I think that IMAC has done great in this area. The TOC helped IMAC grow and get the word out through coverage of a big event. I think we can see a decline in IMAC since the last TOC. I have not seen or heard of a big contest that gets the publicity that the TOC received. Even the FAI World Pattern contest is not covered! as well as the TOC was.
How do you guys view these points?
Larry Diamond
NSRCA 3083
PS…What Eric does for Pattern in his reporting to magazines is probably one of the key factors that he! lps pattern stay afloat. Thanks Eric….
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20060302/7f20e792/attachment-0001.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list