[NSRCA-discussion] Rules Proposals
Del
drykert2 at rochester.rr.com
Tue Mar 13 06:40:33 AKDT 2012
Hi Bob..
Those are all valid points but the people that I have tracked that have left the sport after trying it did not leave it to participate in any of those other venues in my case. Not saying that is always the case. But if the NSRCA "TRULY" wanted to address the pattern drop they would make up a questionnaire to ask those that dropped from participating after a full year as a courteous follow-up to ask some open ended questions about their choice why they stopped their competition and leave one or two questions open ended, to what would you do to make it appealing for you yourself to participate again.. Granted the responses will be varied and not able to address them all.. But to spin the wheel with no true idea of what it will take to bring back some that used to play and why they left at least would give material to steer the growth with. The true problem with that is, the NSRCA By-Laws dictate that is not the primary goal or reason or existence of the NSRCA. This of course don't address new fliers some are trying to attract to the fold but it may help address the common theme and that alone with bring newcomers and some will stay. JMHO. Thanks for reading.
Del
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Richards
To: General pattern discussion
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 8:38 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules Proposals
Del,
I don't know that they ever had that amount in this area. I remember several 50 plus contests in this area (two contests each at Winston-Salem and Smithfield) each year, this was in '93 AFTER the four-strokes and turnaround had started. I flew in a couple of contests in the 70s and 80s, none were anything close to that. I started flying competitively in '89, and from that point until '95 or so, pattern grew in this area. I could go to 10 contests a year and rarely drive more than a 4 hour radius.
Back in the 70s, when I started flying RC, if anyone in this area competed it was pretty much limited to fun-fly, pattern, scale, pylon, or gliders. There were no RC helicopters until the early 70s and very few people tried them (I was the first in my club in '75). There were no indoor or park flyers unless you count .049 or smaller noise makers. No electrics. With the explosion in technology that has taken place, there are so many more avenues that a modeler can explore and, like I said, pattern is now a smaller piece of the pie.
Pattern, pylon, and scale had the WOW factor back then, but not any more. Giant-Scale, turbines, 3D, helicopters, etc have the WOW factor now. I think that has as much to do with the down-turn in attendance at pattern contests as anything. JMHO.
Bob R.
--- On Mon, 3/12/12, Del <drykert2 at rochester.rr.com> wrote:
From: Del <drykert2 at rochester.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules Proposals
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Monday, March 12, 2012, 11:30 AM
Bob..
Not sure if you hark back tot he 70's with 68 in attendance at local contests. That contest has withered and never gone back to even close to those numbers.
Del
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Richards
To: General pattern discussion
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 5:15 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules Proposals
That may be so, but I don't see how this particular proposal would have that effect. Is anyone serious about leaving the hobby because of the weight rule proposal? Is anyone who was contemplating pattern competition going to be turned off by it?
Keep in mind there will always be chronic complainers. How many times did I hear that "four-strokes are going to ruin the sport" or "turnaround ..." or "noise rules ...", etc etc. Some did leave the hobby, but there will always be turnover. Some of them will feel the need to give an excuse whether it really is the reason. I will say that some of the largest local contests I ever attended were AFTER all of those game-ruining rules that I mentioned.
The whole hobby of model airplanes has changed significantly in the last 10-15 years, with many more venues to divide one's time in the hobby - pattern is an overall smaller piece of the pie as a result. I personally don't think that anything about the rules can be blamed for any downturn in pattern contest attendance. Nor do I think that tweaking the rules we have will magically breath new life into it.
Bob R.
--- On Sun, 3/11/12, Del <drykert2 at rochester.rr.com> wrote:
From: Del <drykert2 at rochester.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules Proposals
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Sunday, March 11, 2012, 2:56 PM
Bob..
Poorly disguised rule changes have driven more from the sport than any words or hashing about the sport.
Del
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Richards
To: General pattern discussion
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2012 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules Proposals
Guys,
For the life of me, I can't see why everyone is getting bent out of shape over the proposed weight limt rule for the lower classes. It opens up the possibilities for someone wanting to get started in pattern and competing in the lower classes, IMHO. If someone in the upper classes has a plane that is at the weight limit, but is unable to repair the plane without it going over the limit, then it becomes a perfect hand-me-down for someone getting started.
The fact is that the proposed rule does not exclude any planes that are already legal. The guys that build light know they should have a better flying plane than one that is heavier. The only reason I can think of that people with light planes can get upset with this rule is that someone with a heavier plane might beat them.
OTOH, how often are models weighed at local contests? I never saw it done in the years I flew, but that was before the electrics came on the scene. Tell me, does any CD weigh planes at a local event now? If not, then I am really confused about weight limit discussions where someone says it is ruining things to raise the weight limit, when no one is checking it at local contests anyway. Why all the fuss (one way or the other) about a rule that no one enforces except at the Nats?
I really don't have a dog in this hunt. I'm just confused about all the strongly worded comments going back and forth. This, IMHO, does more to turn people off from pattern than any rule change proposal.
Bob R.
----------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
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
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
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/20120313/5f7af7f5/attachment.html>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list