[NSRCA-discussion] K-Factor morphed into Grow Pattern

Jon Lowe jonlowe at aol.com
Thu Jan 29 17:57:52 AKST 2009


Add the Focus Sport.  $295 at Central Hobbies.


Jon Lowe


-----Original Message-----
From: AtwoodDon at aol.com
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Sent: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 8:42 pm
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] K-Factor morphed into Grow Pattern

The Venus II and the Spot-On 120 and the Leo 110 and........  all good
airplanes in the Sportsman/Int/Advanced clases


 


Don


 




In a message dated 1/29/2009 6:22:12 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
ed_alt at hotmail.com writes:


Agreed.
  There's the Aquila and...

Ed
----- Original Message -----
From:
  <seefo at san.rr.com>
To: <jpavlick at idseng.com>; "General pattern
  discussion"
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>;
  <homeremodeling2003 at yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 1:46
  PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] K-Factor morphed into Grow
  Pattern


>
> Pattern really needs a new competitive ARF to
  enter market at a reasonable
> price point. Something like $500. In
  fact.. it needs several of them so
> people can have choices in what to
  fly.
>
> With IMAC, you can get an airplane of the same size (2m),
  RTF including
> engine and radio for what the majority of the ARFs cost
  for a pattern
> airplane airframe only.
>
> Getting the
  costs under control should be #1 priority.
>
>
>
>
  ---- krishlan fitzsimmons <homeremodeling2003 at yahoo.com>
  wrote:
>> We
ll said John..
>>
>> On another note,
  didn't this start out as a "please take an online vote"
>>
  email.
>>
>> On even another note, Imac is a different bird.
  More people may be
>> interested in flying IMAC IMO because there is
  the freestyle. Foamies
>> have made a great impact so that anyone
  can huck in their front yards.
>> Kids are really into the foamies
  and the freestyles because they are fun,
>> and impressive. We lack
  this fun type of flying in their minds. (Not to
>> me, 3d is
  somewhat boring to me, except for foamies)
>> As someone stated
  earlier, pattern doesn't have the market flooded with
>> $400-500
  arfs that almost every person at my field and other fields
>>
   locally have. If we did, I know of many people at my field that would 
buy

>> one. They have told me so. Every time I bring a new plane to the
  field,
>> people ask me how much, and where can they get one. When I
  tell em how
>> much, their face drops...Wanna grow pattern, do
  something like Hester.
>> He's on the right track IMO. Look at all
  the ads in the larger magazines,
>> how many pattern planes do you
  see in those ads?
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> --- On
  Thu, 1/29/09, John Pavlick <jpavlick at idseng.com> wrote:
>>
  From: John Pavlick <jpavlick at idseng.com>
>> Subject:
  [NSRCA-discussion] K-Factor morphed into Grow Pattern
>>
 To: "General
  pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Date:
  Thursday, January 29, 2009, 7:01 AM
>>
>> Jim,
>>
   Interesting observations. In my neck of the woods (Connecticut) there 
is

>> almost NO IMAC or Pattern competition so I don't see any of this.
  Part of
>> the reason for that is that it's hard to find large, open
  areas where
>> you're allowed to fly model airplanes. Let alone have
  an organized
>> contest. My state pretty much sucks in that regard.
  There sems to be
>> plenty of room for shopping centers and
  "retirement communities" however.
>>
>> Even with these
  restrictions, I've managed to enlighten a few people and
>> make
  them aware of Precision Aerobatics. By this I mean IMAC AND Pattern.

>> Some people just don't want to fly Pattern, whereas others simply
  don't
>> want to fly IMAC. That's fine as far as I'm concerned but
  the point is
>> they need to know about them. That's where I think
  Patttern and the NSRCA
>> suffers the most. People simply don't know
  that we exist. We need to
>> increase our visibility if we want to
  attract new members. We DON'T need
>> to change anything with how we
  fly, how we judge, etc. At least not to
>> attract new people. All
  we need to do is let them know we're here and
>> that they can fly
  with us if they want to. No pressure to join. Ju
st take
>> your
  basic sport model to a contest and fly a few rounds in Sportsman.
>>
   Don't buy a new radio or airplane. Don't worry about the weight or 
size.

>> Just show up. If we want to grow Patttern, that's one of the
  things that
>> we
>>  need to do. If printed copies of
  the K-Factor at local hobby shops will
>> help with that cause (it
  just might), then send me a box so I can drop
>> them off.
  :)
>>
>> John Pavlick
>>
>> BTW - I
  actually did learn about the NSRCA through the K-Factor after a
>>
  club member handed me a copy that he picked up somewhere. Once I knew

>> that Patttern was still alive in my area (I had taken a LONG
  hiatus) I
>> built a new airplane, started going to contests and
  joined the NSRCA.
>>
>>
>> --- On Thu, 1/29/09,
  Woodward, Jim (US SSA) <jim.woodward at baesystems.com>
>>
  wrote:
>>
>> From: Woodward, Jim (US SSA)
  <jim.woodward at baesystems.com>
>> Subject: Re:
  [NSRCA-discussion] Electronic versus Paper K-Factor Poll
>> To:
  "General pattern discussion"
  <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Date: Thursday, January
  29, 2009, 2:16
  PM
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
   JN – there is more to the comparison of IMAC/Pattern than the 
traceable

>> history to the TOC or available ARF scenario. I think Jay hit on
  it
>> somethi
ng important other day stating something to the effect
  that, “… if
>> you are not in FAI or Masters you are left on your
  own.” (forgive me if
>> it wasn’t Jay or I misquoted). Pattern and
  IMAC are totally different in
>> many ways and being that I’m
  involved in the District/Leadership of each,
>> I’ll list a few in
  no particular order:
>> 1. Basic, Sportsman, Intermediate in IMAC: in
  a 50 person contest, there
>> are 5 Unlimited, 5 Advanced, and 40
  persons spread almost equally between
>> the lower
  classes
>> 2. Sportsman, Intermediate, Advanced in Pattern: In a 20
  person contest,
>> maybe 3-4 FAI, 7-10 Masters, 8-10 spread between
  lower classes.
>> 3. R/C Clubs view holding an IMAC Contest as a
  money-making event. Not so
>> sure for the pattern
  event.
>> 4. Not such a rush to move up in classes in IMAC: IMAC
  changes sequences
>> yearly and has unknowns flown each contest, all
  classes except for Basic.
>> IMAC classes get harder in a hurry. For
  instance the intermediate class
>> will have a 90 degree rolling
  turn in it and numerous snaps rolls, also a
>> spin. There is no
  mercy on unknowns… sometimes they are more difficult
>> than the
  normal sequence, sometimes easier, sometimes just different.
>>
   There is not an expectation that all pilots will reach the 
“destina
tion”

>> class. There is no destination class in IMAC.
>> 5.
  Piloting differences? I find the average IMAC pilot is a fairly high

>> skilled R/C pilot that is learning the precision side of things.
  You
>> might watch a OK sequence, but later in the evening see them
  throwing it
>> down on the deck in aggressive Freestyle most of us
  would dare try. The
>> Pattern guys grow-up precision and can fly a
  higher scoring stall turn
>> and have better sequence-fundamentals
  (and positioning), but lack in some
>> of the other R/C
  roundness.
>> 6. The IMAC ranks have a lot of guys “who used to fly
  pattern” in them. I’ve
>> heard it all as to why they stopped flying
  pattern and here it is
>> (believe me or not , up to
  you):
>> a. Pattern is too political at the top
>> b.
  Feeling of Topped out – it didn’t matter how much I practiced, I
>>
  couldn’t improve my scores or beat that one guy
>> c. Best flights
  aren’t winning rounds
>> d. Didn’t fit in
>> e. These are
  opinions range from normal pilots, to “top guys” that only
>> fly
  IMAC now
>> 7. Flying/Positioning – I love the pattern way of flying
  in a box, with a
>> centerpole – I FREAKIN-HATE the IMAC way of
  writing sequences with “sort
>> of left, sort of right” maneuve
rs. I
  understand why it is done and such,
>> but I’d take the box anyday.
  Flying the box in pattern is its
>> “own-significant-difficulty”
  which makes the less complex maneuvers
>> harder to do. The IMAC way
  lets them “load-up” each maneuver into a
>> super-complex deal –
  very hard to score well I may add too. However, its
>> all part of
  the pie.
>> 8. Winning? In pattern, a win means you flew the
  sequences the best. This
>> is cool because often you can “beat” a
  better pilot, by flying the
>> maneuver you need to know how to do
  better than the other guys. In IMAC,
>> usually the “best” pilots
  wins, because it is a combination of flying the
>> known and
  unknown.
>> 9. Planes? Pattern planes fly the best, but are harder to
  fly well.
>> Pattern planes are less affected by small changes in
  atmospheric
>> conditions, or good/bad engine days – IE -- you
  almost always have enough
>> power in a pattern plane regardless of
  sequence flown. IMAC - totally
>> different. Humidity
  (specifically), can DRASTICALLY affect the speed of
>> your plane.
  Power requirements change hugely with sequence/class changes.
>> For
  instance, unlimited need a truly unlimited power setup. Not so easy

>> to move up without changing equipment. A 40% plane is easier to
  fly
>> 
wings-level”, but the judging penalties
>> 
  are 0.5 point per 5 degrees, instead of 1 point per 15 degrees.
>>
   10. Organizational view on Judging – I don’t know what the NSRCA 
stance

>> is on judging right now. In IMAC, there is HUGE $$$ spent on
  judging
>> programs, seminars, and creating a national standard for
  judging. How do
>> they do this? They fly in people from all around
  the country for a
>> national-type of judge certification. These
  guys then go forth and carry
>> the message.
>> a. Why do
  they do this? Because they know that regional differences and
>>
   biases, or cheating of any kind, can kill-off an organization. They 
put a

>> huge leadership and organizational priority on getting judging
  right. –
>> if you know me – you know I like
  that.
>>
>> So, there are many, many differences between the
  two. Personally, I
>> gravitate towards flying the pattern plane.
  However, the “competitive”
>> factors in IMAC are solid too and
  given the activity around my neck of
>> the woods, you can’t pass it
  up. So what’s the point, I guess the point
>> still is that the
  total formula is working for IMAC. The NSRCA formula is
>> not. What
  can we take from the differences to tune-up our own game? And
>>
  regarding the K-factor – in today’s=2
0economy it is hard to justify
>>
  business decisions that don’t break even.
>>
  Jim
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From:
  nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>
  [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of J N
  Hiller
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 8:48 PM
>> To:
  General pattern discussion
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
  Electronic versus Paper K-Factor Poll
>>
>> IMAC v/s Pattern
  is almost an apples to oranges comparison. IMAC
>> popularity can be
  traced to the TOC and the general appeal of large
>> colorful high
  performance readily available aircraft but mostly
>> visibility.
  Pattern flying is absent from many local clubs but large
>>
   aerobatic airplanes are represented nearly everywhere. The big 
airplanes

>> attract the press and interests spectators. Pattern by comparison
  is
>> extremely repetitious and boring to those not directly
  involved.
>> I didn't want to get into this here but I question how
  many non-pattern
>> folks would read a free K-Factor. There is a
  free sample available there
>> now. Is anybody finding it? The
  problem I find is "Pattern" visibility. I
>> couldn't get Google to
  find the NSRCA when querying aerobatics, RC
>> aerobatics or
  pattern, however IMAC showed up. It's as if some amount of
>> prior
  knowledge is needed before an outsider can gain access to pattern
>>
  activi
ty.
>> AMA doesn't do a very good of job explaining competition
  events or
>> activity and if you don't know follow the SIG you are
  kind of out of
>> luck. How dose an outsider become aware of and
  interested in any
>> competition event without knowing where to
  look?
>> As for the K-Factor, the publication is second to none. I
  have been
>> receiving them since it was several folded 11 x 14
  sheets from a copy
>> machine. The content has for the most part
  remained about the same;
>> mostly contest results and district
  news. It's more of a competition
>> newsletter with content of
  interest to those involved and of questionable
>> interest to
  outsiders or the mildly interested. There is little seed for
>>
   growing interest in any rulebook event on the Internet. It only 
happens

>> at the local level with people having fun.
>> To be
  active competitors in either IMAC or pattern requires a fair amount

>> of disposable income and time commitment. We draw from the same
  shrinking
>> pool of people willing to commit to a weekend out of
  town to participate
>> in what appears to be a very regimented
  activity flown near the limit of
>> visibility for many. Bigger
  really is better and we (Pattern) is somewhat
>> restricted by
  trying to remain compatible with FAI.
>> I have probably gone on too
  long but I don't believe 
our salvation lies
>> in a free K-Factor,
  not that it shouldn't be, it just won't draw many to
>> our
  sport.
>> Sorry Derek, forgive me for splattering this even
  more.
>> Jim Hiller
>>
>>
>> -----Original
  Message-----
>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org

>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of
  Troy Newman
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 3:44 PM
>>
  To: General pattern discussion
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
  Electronic versus Paper K-Factor Poll
>>
>>
>>
  Jim,
>>
>> What is really amazing is locally here in AZ and
  Sothern California IMAC
>> contests attract 60-70
  pilots.
>>
>> IMAC membership is up near 1000 members. They
  have an online only
>> newsletter. Not even a
  magazine.
>>
>> Why would it be horrible to emulate an
  organization that is successful
>> like
  that.
>>
>> They can’t be doing anything right they are just
  IMACers
>> Just something to think about.
>>
>>
  Troy_______________________________________________
>>
  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
>
>
>
>
>
  _______________________________________________
>=2
0NSRCA-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



------------------------------------------------------------
Know Your Numbers: Get tips and tools to help you improve your credit 
score.






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







More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list