[NSRCA-discussion] Not bama now

Wed Nov 25 16:34:04 AKST 2009

Ron,

Yep your right about the duck rule.. The planes I'm doing are right off the original plans with no size changes, only change is electric for some and using OS .61 for the glow versions..

Scott Anderson
www.rcfoamy.com
www.classic-patternrc.com

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ron Van Putte 
  To: General pattern discussion 
  Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 8:29 PM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Not bama now

  I can tell you why I dropped out of the SPA:  The nostalgia was gone once 0.91 4-strokes were permitted and the allowable 0.60 2-strokes couldn't compete.  

  I feel qualified to comment on the SPA rules, since I was an SPA member, one of its strongest supporters ((go look at the SPA web site and see who wrote the Model Aviation report on the first SPA contest) and i was "driven out" of SPA by the motor rule change.

  BTW, go look at the currently acceptable Daddy Rabbit airplanes; I saw one at the Orlando contest last December and almost didn't recognize it.  That must be the "duck" rule alluded to by Scott.

  Ron

  On Nov 25, 2009, at 7:52 PM, Phil Spelt wrote:

    CONGRATULATIONS, Jason!!!  You are almost the only one (the ONLY non-SPAer) who has done more then bit..., uh, compl..., er, commented on our rules.  I will email you privately about your suggestions.

    I don't understand why non-SPA people spend so much time worrying about our rules and regulation.  Can someone explain, please?

    EVERYONE (yes, even non-SPAers :-D) have a Happy Thanksgiving.  Eat lost of turkey, absorb lots of tryptophan, and fall asleep in front of the TV...

    At 05:44 PM 11/25/2009, you wrote:

      Ok... been thinking about this and I sound just like how I hate others to sound. Complain without suggesting a fix. Here goes.

      Plane and motor, not my choice. I'm not an SPA member, don't plan on joining, but hope to participate in more events. I still think the motor issue will become a bigger issue now that the OS-91 isn't made anymore... but just my opinion. Honestly, those blue-printed 91's are no different power wise than YS-91's, IMO. And as I said below, I like the planes I remember when I was growing up, so I will choose something similar.

      Would a 10% rule be worth looking into for SPA? IMAC has it and you can still tweak and change things around enough. Also, why was the Miss Norway deleted from the list? I like that plane.

      As for competing in Novice only if you're not a member. Seeing as most of the people that might participate would most likely be pattern pilots (new or old), some will skill levels more than Novice level, what about this for non-SPA members...

      Novice: Can fly an SPA legal (don't remember the Novice allowance rules for plane allowed) set-up, and CAN place and receive a trophy/plaque... once. This will give them a taste for it in FULL competition.

      Sportsman: Same as Novice, no trophy/plaque, but a certificate as the SPA rules state.

      Expert: Same as Novice, but scores are handed back to you after your flight, no awards or *certificate. I don't need a certificate to remind me of the fun I have, I have the memories. * Maybe certificate, but don't think that matters. BTW, I sent my plaque to the highest placing SPA member from the Masters after being made aware of the rules.

      I hope that SPA will allow non-SPA members to fly all classes. Ron Ellis and club are holding an SPA event in Melbourne in February I would like to go to and compete. But only as an Expert, not a Novice.

      http://www.seniorpattern.com/compguide.htm

      And Happy Thanksgiving to all of you (celebrating it). I'm outta here for a few days, so have fun ;)

      Regards,
      Jason
      www.shulmanaviation.com
      www.composite-arf.com

        ----- Original Message ----- 

        From: J Shu 

        To: General pattern discussion 

        Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 12:08 PM

        Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Alabama Bound

        I have no problem with what others fly if it's in the rules, even if it's a 4-cycle. If I ever do an SPA plane it will have a 61 (or 55) AND look like the original, my choice. But there are a few things that I do think are an issue.

        The rules state that you can fly Novice and not be a member, all other classes you must. So now if I want to go fly again at an SPA contest, I will have to fly Novice. I'm not sure many of the Novice pilots will like that. And had I know about this rule before the end of the contest in GA, I would have only been Ryan's PB and helped out where ever needed.

        Some of the ducks just look like geese.

        Some of the 91's that are flying are 'blue-printed motors'. I also understand that these are not commercially available to any Joe Schmoe. Well, that seems a bit unfair to me, but again, I would only fly a 2-stroke anyway.

        But the thing I really enjoyed was the contest itself. I had a blast and nice and relaxing. It was the break I was looking for. Go 4lb Kaos'...lol

        Regards,

        Jason

        www.shulmanaviation.com 

        www.composite-arf.com

          ----- Original Message ----- 

          From: Phil Spelt 

          To: General pattern discussion 

          Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 10:36 AM

          Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Alabama Bound

          Well, Guys,

          I was preparing a response to Ron Van Putte, but it appears this is not the venue for that.  Everyone is free to choose with whom to associate, and while we in SPA are sorry to have lost the people who have chosen not to fly with us, that was/is their choice.  If you check with Jason Shulman, you might find a different perspective.

          I won't go into the many discussions I have had with fellow SPAers about the direction of AMA pattern, as directed by the NSRCA -- but they are frequent, and those of us having them choose not to fly AMA pattern - but we don't publicly criticize it, either.  I judged several rounds at an AMA meet last season, and while I really like the turn around part, the judging reinforced my decision to fly SPA, only.

          BTW, if anyone is interested in some 2-meter stuff (engines and airframes) you can email me privately...it would be great stuff @ a reasonable price for entry into 2-meter pattern, and up through Advanced.

          At 10:23 AM 11/25/2009, you wrote:

            That’s the reason I quite SPA also… 4-cycles!!  There is not much challenge flying the old pattern with a overpowered (90 4c) engine.  That was what made it hard!  The scavenge-pot 60’s didn’t really have enough power, so you had to FLY the airplane…. If they are allowing 90 4c engines, why not allow ANY power plant!

            Tony Stillman, President

            Radio South, Inc.

            139 Altama Connector, Box 322

            Brunswick, GA  31525

            1-800-962-7802

            www.radiosouthrc.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------

            From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [ mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Pete Cosky

            Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 10:20 AM

            To: jpavlick at idseng.com; General pattern discussion

            Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Alabama Bound

            I'm with you John. When I was into racing anything vintage had to be....well...vintage.

      _______________________________________________
      NSRCA-discussion mailing list
      NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
      http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
    --> There are only two types of aircraft -- fighters and targets.

    Phil Spelt, Past President, Knox County Radio Control Society, Inc.
           URL: http://www.kcrctn.com
    AMA--1294,  Scientific Leader Member, SPA--177
          My URL: http://mywebpages.comcast.net/~chuenkan/
          (865) 435-1476 v  (865) 604-0541 c 

    _______________________________________________
    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/20091126/cfd46904/attachment.html>