[NSRCA-discussion] Small Models...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?

[Joe Lachowski]

The Venus II with a 120AX is an excellent choice. I'd take it anyday over a Quest 3D having flown both planes. Been flying the Venus II in the off season and it does a pretty decent 2007 Masters sequence.

> From: fhhuber at clearwire.net> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 20:27:52 -0600> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?> > Unfortunately... It looks like UltraRC has discontinued the Quest 3D... It > has been listing as out of stock for over 6 months and no emails to them > about an ETA of availability has been answered (I've e-mailed then once a > month.) Great plane for Sportsman and easily capable for ptacticing > Intermediate with a .91 2-stroke.> (and thats what I an powering with 900 Watts brushless. RTF @ 8 lb 6 oz)> > There's a .50 size Quest from NitroModels.com... looks like a miniature of > the Ultra RC .90 size. (might be a good First Sportsman plane... price is > right and the average .40 trainer's radio and engine should fly it)> > ***************> > Sportsman is mostly about the pilot learning what REALLY is level... and > learning to get consistant about handling a plane in varying conditions. > So, I don't see a need for a bonus or penalty based on aircraft size.> > As noted before, you can go to a contest and watch someone who has learned > the lessons Sportsman (Novice) is designed to teach flying a U-Can-Do-46 or > Ultra-Stick 60 beat people flying a Quest 3D or a 2 meter Pattern design.> > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ed Miller" <edbon85 at charter.net>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 10:11 AM> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small > Models...goodforthefutureofthePatternEvent?> > > > The scoring bonus is the key. It doesn't immediately wipe out anyone's> > equipment. When the TOC gave a bonus for bipes, they were unbeatable.> > Giving a small bonus to a .90 4C or .60 2C would over time help facilitate> > new folks to the smaller planes, even when their Masters or FAI mentor is> > flying the latest 2M ship. For the competitive types entering Sportsman> > they would have a leg up on everyone from the start. John Newbie can fly> > his .91 sized Surpass, Reactor, Quest, Groovy, the list goes on and> > instantly be at a competitive advantage against the 2M high dollar plane.> > Keep in mind just how many .90 sized "aerobatic arfs" are currently on the> > market. Far easier and more cost efficient for the manufacturers to > > build,> > pack and load in a carton then a 2M ship. Believe it or not the> > manufacturers look at the market also, folks at the 2M level jump from > > plane> > to plane depending on what the top guys fly. Not a great market to be in> > over the long haul to amortize costs if you are in the business to make > > $$.> > At the Sportsman ranks a 90 sized Quest with a small bonus over a 2M > > Impact> > would be killer. Thumbs on the sticks and fuel or electrons spent is what> > really wins but giving an advantage to the would be pattern flyer is our> > golden carrot. Folks need to stop thinking at the upper end levels and > > put> > themselves at the entrance door to the playground.> > Ed M.> > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Anthony Romano" <anthonyr105 at hotmail.com>> > To: <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> > Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 10:40 AM> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models...goodfor> > thefutureofthePatternEvent?> >> >> >> That is why I suggested a scoring bonus no one gets turned away, no > >> extra> >> events, no one at a percieved disadvantage. Probably not that hard to> >> update> >> a scoring program to do it.> >>> >> For what its worth the last five contest I have run we allowed anything > >> up> >> to 80" and the last two years any AMA legal airplane with no takers.> >>> >> Anthony> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>From: "Rex LESHER" <trexlesh at msn.com>> >>>Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> >>>To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> >>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small> >>>Models...goodfor thefutureofthePattern Event?> >>>Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 15:57:15 -0800> >>>> >>>Georgie> >>>The problem with this theory is, what do we do with the guys now flying> >>>Sportsman and Intermediate with 2 meter planes.... I know of several> >>>guys that will be flying in both of these classes that own two or three 2> >>>meter planes each.... It would be pretty disasterous for them to find > >>>out> >>>that they can't use their planes.... Just shy of forcing them to quit,> >>>how> >>>do you want to handle this?> >>>I could see the smaller plane theory for Sportsman as a method to hook> >>>flyers, but on the other hand, I know quite a few guys in the local club> >>>that don't have any planes that would be small enough to fit the> >>>rules.....> >>>Probably the only fair way to handle this problem would be to create a > >>>new> >>>Sportsman class with limited size, and leave the other Sportsman class> >>>open to any AMA legal airplane... This way, we would be inviting anyone> >>>and everyone to fly, just like we are now doing in Sportsman by> >>>allowing any AMA legal plane to compete in that class..... Then, by> >>>adding another class to a contest, there comes the problems with > >>>logistics> >>>of running the contest and having enough qualified judges and such.....> >>>Theres no easy solution to any of this, one solution will cause many> >>>other> >>>problems.... It is however, very good food for thought.....> >>>> >>>Rex> >>> ----- Original Message -----> >>> From: george w. kennie<mailto:geobet at gis.net>> >>> To: NSRCA Mailing List<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> >>> Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 3:20 PM> >>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ...goodfor> >>>thefutureofthePattern Event?> >>>> >>>> >>> Jerry,> >>> The way I see it is, if there's a rule limit, the guy already knows it> >>> exists and he is not going to show up with something that violates the> >>> rules. Additionally, if he owns an Impact, he has already convinced> >>>himself> >>> that he's a proficient enough pilot to fly an Impact and therefore > >>> able> >>>to> >>> conclude that he will be more than capable with a smaller model when> >>> competing against a similar field.> >>> What guy do you know flying an Impact that doesn't have a stable of> >>>smaller> >>> planes that he plays around with. I'm not sure that it's an issue.> >>> JMO, Georgie> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> ----- Original Message -----> >>> From: "JFGREEN" <jf217green at cmc.net<mailto:jf217green at cmc.net>>> >>> To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'"> >>><nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>>> >>> Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 1:53 PM> >>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... goodfor> >>> thefutureofthePattern Event?> >>>> >>>> >>> > Dennis: Why a limit? What if an interested flyer shows up with an> >>>Impact> >>> > to> >>> > fly sportsman? Are we not going to let him fly? Sportsman doesn't> >>>limit> >>> > what you can fly now and it seems to work for those who are> >>>interested.> >>> > If> >>> > one isn't interested in competing, will creating limits on their> >>>options> >>> > help their interest? Jerry> >>> >> >>> > -----Original Message-----> >>> > From:> >>>nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>> >>> > [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of > >>> Dennis> >>> > Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 10:43 AM> >>> > To: NSRCA Mailing List> >>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good for> >>> > thefutureofthePattern Event?> >>> >> >>> > Well at last a comment that to me makes some sense. If the > >>> perception> >>>from> >>> > the person wanting to start pattern is that in order to be> >>> competitive> >>> > and/or to look like they fit in is to have the latest full 2 meter> >>>pattern> >>> > plane then I agree a change is needed. I have had those very words> >>>said to> >>> > me by someone who was interested but did not want to spend the money> >>>to be> >>> > as they put it "competitive". Perhaps what we need to do is limit > >>> the> >>>size> >>> > of the plane for the entry-level classes. This takes out the feeling> >>>of> >>> > needing the latest and greatest, limits the cost and perhaps even> >>>tells> >>> > them> >>> > they can fly what they have now. I would never support telling them> >>>they> >>> > have to have a particular plane for the class. They have the freedom> >>>of> >>> > choice and by the time they are ready for advanced they will be> >>> hooked> >>>and> >>> > can go for the bigger, more expensive stuff if they choose.> >>> >> >>> > Dennis Cone> >>> >> >>> > -----Original Message-----> >>> > From:> >>>nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>> >>> > [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Ed> >>>Miller> >>> > Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 5:59 PM> >>> > To: NSRCA Mailing List> >>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good for> >>> > thefutureofthePattern Event?> >>> >> >>> > The survey says.......... Only NSRCA 171 members responded, that in> >>> it> >>> > self> >>> > is another topic of discussion. Point is for the most part, the 171> >>>that> >>> > did respond are already hooked. This or any other survey I'm aware> >>> of> >>> > wasn't given to the target audience, Joe Newbie who may want to give> >>> > pattern, NSRCA and competition a try. We need to develop a strategy> >>>to> >>> > add> >>> > to that 171 number, folks that have yet to join the NSRCA.> >>> > There has been volumes written on this forum on how to attract the> >>> > "newbie",> >>> > some touting cost, size of planes, complexity of equipment and> >>>schedules> >>> > as> >>> > well as many other reasons as to why we encounter difficulty> >>> enlisting> >>>new> >>> > blood. One constant we can never change ( IMHO ), if an individual> >>>does> >>> > not> >>> > have competition in their blood, we aren't going to be able to turn> >>>them> >>> > to> >>> > the "dark side" short of a lobotomy.> >>> > On the other hand, there are those out there that might take the> >>>plunge> >>> > but> >>> > look at where pattern equipment evolution has gone in the last 15> >>>years> >>> > and> >>> > don't see where they fit in.> >>> > I wish I had a dollar for every OS 91 four stroke I see at fields> >>>every> >>> > weekend powering H9 P-51's, Sticks, H9 AT6's, etc. the list goes on.> >>> > Along> >>> > our infamous journey, pattern engine evolution has left behind the> >>>sport> >>> > flyer. For years the staple of sport and pattern flying was the .60> >>>2C.> >>> > Then came the 1.20 4C. Both engines were within the sport flyers> >>>grasp> >>> > and> >>> > if they took a foray into pattern and it didn't pan out, they could> >>>always> >>> > use that .60 2c or 1.20 4C in the sport plane ARF of the week.> >>> Engine> >>> > size,> >>> > price nor complexity generally was not an issue. An OS 61 FSR with > >>> a> >>> > muffler was great for a sport flyer and with a pipe made a > >>> formidable> >>> > pattern engine package back in the day. The original YS and Enya R> >>> 4C> >>>1.2> >>> > engines were reasonably priced, made good power and were reliable.> >>>They> >>> > were happy in the nose of a mid '90's pattern ship or a Sig 1/4 > >>> scale> >>> > clipped wing Cub.> >>> > Along comes the world of 1.4 to 1.6 pumped 2C, headers and CF pipes> >>> > costing> >>> > in excess of $700, 1.6 4C with headers, mufflers and 30% fuel > >>> costing> >>>way> >>> > over $800 to haul 2M Pregnant Guppy plane of the week around. Say> >>>what> >>> > you> >>> > will but today's politically correct 2M pattern power plant options> >>>are> >>> > for> >>> > the most part very specific to pattern and virtually nothing else> >>>along> >>> > with> >>> > being expensive. Sure the OS 1.6 is a "sport engine" at heart and > >>> at> >>>the> >>> > lowest end of the price spectrum but not in pattern trim with custom> >>> > headers> >>> > from Karl Mueller, Hatori ( yeah, try and get those from Tower ),> >>>Perry> >>> > pumps and take your pick of aluminum or CF pipes. The Imac/Giant> >>>scale> >>> > crowd have it easy, a DA 50 or 100 with some cans will power just> >>>about> >>> > anything you want to fly, whether it be aerobatic or scale. The > >>> only> >>> > difference is size. Relatively cheap fuel is readily available at> >>>your> >>> > local gas station. I guess 30% Nitro heli fuel is cheap compared to> >>>90%> >>> > Nitro fuel run in Top Fuel Dragsters so we don't have it all that > >>> bad> >>>:).> >>> > Put yourself in Joe Newbie's shoes, he figures he can always sell > >>> the> >>> > pattern airframe if he decides pattern isn't his cup of tea, but > >>> what> >>>does> >>> > he do with those expensive pattern specific lumps of aluminum, steel> >>>and> >>> > C/F> >>> > ?? Sure anything can be sold but at a great loss and to a small> >>>target> >>> > audience. Try and sell a R/E OS 140RX/header/pipe to a guy building> >>> a> >>>1/4> >>> > scale Cub. Or a $800 + single cylinder 4C, that same $$ can buy a> >>>twin> >>> > cylinder 4C with less power but a much quieter, sweeter sound, no> >>> > vibration> >>> > and I know first hand a whole lot less maintenance.> >>> > Though I have no intention of giving up my 2M planes and "expensive> >>> > pattern> >>> > specific lumps of aluminum, steel and C/F" whether they be 2C, 4C or> >>> > Electrons shortly I hope. However, I really believe if Sportsman > >>> and> >>> > possibly Intermediate were limited to .90 displacement, it would be > >>> a> >>> > positive step towards Joe Newbie giving pattern a shot. Hell, I bet> >>>he> >>> > already has a .91 Surpass...........> >>> > Ed M.> >>> > ----- Original Message -----> >>> > From: "Grow Pattern"> >>><pattern4u at comcast.net<mailto:pattern4u at comcast.net>>> >>> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List"> >>><nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>>> >>> > Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 7:47 PM> >>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good for> >>> > thefutureofthePattern Event?> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> John,> >>> >> I thought that you might be interested in this information.> >>> >>> >>> >> In the 2005 NSRCA rules change survey (sent out in 2002) I compiled> >>>the> >>> >> following question with the intent of encouraging 60-90 sized> >>>completive> >>> >> airplane development.> >>> >>> >>> >> Judging of distances> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> Question-65> >>> >>> >>> >> Should we therefore consider and AMA pattern contest rule change> >>> that> >>> >> states> >>> >> the pilot should make the plane appear to be at the size of a> >>> 2-meter> >>> >> plane> >>> >> being flown at 150-175 meters.?> >>> >>> >>> >> YES = 71 NO = 100 RESULT = NO PROPOSED CHANGE .> >>> >>> >>> >> I had been advised that the existing selection-and-intent of the > >>> FAI> >>> >> 150-metres rule was to create a relatively equal ease of visibility> >>>for> >>> >> 2M> >>> >> airplanes to the judges?? Whether that was true or not I admit to> >>>being> >>> >> very surprised when the idea was rejected so soundly by the survey> >>> >> respondents.> >>> >>> >>> >> I had been thinking that the smaller planes would fare better if> >>> they> >>> >> were> >>> >> flown in a bit closer. Our rough math had shown that a 60-72"> >>>airplane> >>> >> would> >>> >> look just about right at 100-110-M.> >>> >>> >>> >> What would the difference be for a 2-M airplane and a 1.5-M > >>> airplane> >>>if> >>> >> flown at their relative distances?> >>> >>> >>> >> I also thought that the budding but slower electric planes of the> >>> day> >>> >> could> >>> >> use the closer in option and need less extreme (read expensive)> >>> power> >>> >> systems.> >>> >>> >>> >> Regards,> >>> >>> >>> >> Eric.> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> ----- Original Message -----> >>> >> From: "John Ferrell"> >>><johnferrell at earthlink.net<mailto:johnferrell at earthlink.net>>> >>> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"> >>><nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>>> >>> >> Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 4:46 PM> >>> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good for the> >>> >> futureofthePattern Event?> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> There is no need to worry about rules changes at this time.> >>> >>>> >>> >>> Those of us dabbling with smaller planes are doing it with the> >>>existing> >>> >>> rules. If winning trophies and satisfying judging problems are at> >>>the> >>> >>> top> >>> >>> of> >>> >>> your needs you will probably be best served with whatever is> >>>percieved> >>> >>> as> >>> >>> the latest & greatest equipment.> >>> >>>> >>> >>> I have two boxes of trophies out in the shed. The smaller box is> >>>from> >>> >>> when> >>> >>> nobody better showed up. The larger box is from events that did > >>> not> >>>get> >>> >>> enough attendance to give away the trophies. I don't have strong> >>> >>> feelings> >>> >>> about either box!> >>> >>>> >>> >>> I just want to fly more and enjoy it more. Right now that appears> >>> to> >>>be> >>> >>> with> >>> >>> a little smaller airplane!> >>> >>>> >>> >>> John Ferrell W8CCW> >>> >>> "My Competition is not my enemy"> >>> >>> http://DixieNC.US<http://dixienc.us/>> >>> >>>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message -----> >>> >>> From: "george w. kennie" <geobet at gis.net<mailto:geobet at gis.net>>> >>> >>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"> >>><nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>>> >>> >>> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 10:40 PM> >>> >>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good for the> >>> future> >>> >>> ofthePattern Event?> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Deano,> >>> >>>> When you reference " changing the shape of the event ", how deep> >>>are> >>> >>>> you> >>> >>>> suggesting things go? Are we losing sight of the fact that we > >>> are> >>>part> >>> >>>> of> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________> >>> >>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list> >>> >>>> >>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> >>> >>>> >>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion>> >>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________> >>> >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list> >>> >>> >>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> >>> >>> >>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion>> >>> >> >>> > _______________________________________________> >>> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list> >>> >> >>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> >>> >> >>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> > _______________________________________________> >>> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list> >>> >> >>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> >>> >> >>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion>> >>> >> >>> > --> >>> > No virus found in this incoming message.> >>> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.> >>> > Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.6/617 - Release Date:> >>>1/5/2007> >>> >> >>> >> >>> > --> >>> > No virus found in this outgoing message.> >>> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.> >>> > Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.6/617 - Release Date:> >>>1/5/2007> >>> >> >>> >> >>> > _______________________________________________> >>> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list> >>> >> >>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> >>> >> >>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________> >>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list> >>>> >>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> >>>> >>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<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> >>> >> _________________________________________________________________> >> Get live scores and news about your team: Add the Live.com Football Page> >> www.live.com/?addtemplate=football&icid=T001MSN30A0701> >>> >> _______________________________________________> >> 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> >> >> >> > -- > > No virus found in this incoming message.> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.> > Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.7/618 - Release Date: 1/6/2007> > > > _______________________________________________> NSRCA-discussion mailing list> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
_________________________________________________________________
Get the Live.com Holiday Page for recipes, gift-giving ideas, and more.
www.live.com/?addtemplate=holiday
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20070108/ab4d6728/attachment-0001.html