<html><body>
<DIV>You are absolutely right, Bill. I am probably representative of most in this regard- the first few years I flew the freestyle and enjoyed it very much. As time went on I did it less and less- I haven't done one in the last 2-3 years now. I really like working on the sequence and not as much on the freestyle as I used to. My self expectations have gone up- no longer content with just thinking things up as I go. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Now, I'd like to fly some freestyle again- but now my standards would force me to develop and practice a whole routine choreographed to music and with 3D mixed in to be happy enough with my effort to go out in public with it!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It does help draw attention to the contest though- from a spectator and contestant viewpoint. It was part of why I started flying IMAC- now I haven't flown freestyle but I still fly the sequences - I have been hooked. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I don't see any harm in advertising and holding a seperate freestyle/AA contest at the end of the day after a pattern contest. If noone shows- no loss. If someone does- it could be fun to do and or watch and might even draw someone to participate. That's the hook.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dave Michael</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>From: "Bill Glaze" <billglaze@triad.rr.com> <BR><BR>> Perhaps AA might help growth. As long as it stays as an option. It is a <BR>> fact that only 10-20 percent of the flyers entering an IMAC contest elect to <BR>> fly the freestyle. Most do not desire to do so. Even at the JR Challenge, <BR>> (in which I will be one of the judges) probably less than 20% will opt for <BR>> freestyle. <BR>> Bill Glaze <BR>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> From: "Michael Wickizer" <MWICKIZER@MSN.COM><BR>> To: <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 2:08 PM <BR>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] IMAC Vs Pattern Participation? Does <BR>> theDogHunt on points made? <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> > Keith: <BR>> > <BR>> > While you say that in jest, it would attract the younger pilots and <BR>> > specators. Perhaps it's time we think about Artistic Aerobatics. Had <BR>> > there <BR>> > been IMAC in our area, I know of one pilot who would have never flown <BR>> > pattern (but now is hooked). <BR>> > <BR>> > Mike <BR>> > <BR>> > <BR>> >>From: "Keith Black" <TKEITHB@COMCAST.NET><BR>> >>Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >>To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] IMAC Vs Pattern Participation? Does <BR>> >>theDogHunt on points made? <BR>> >>Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 12:30:47 -0600 <BR>> >> <BR>> >>Reading the comments here brings the following to my attention. <BR>> >> <BR>> >>Loud "ballistic missile" pattern = Huge popularity. <BR>> >>Quite graceful pattern flying 150 m away = Boring. <BR>> >>Huge Loud IMAC planes flying 3D = Huge popularity. <BR>> >> <BR>> >>I
bet if we add an "Extreme Pattern" class where we do high slow rolls and <BR>> >>snaps ten feed off the deck right over the runway we'd become much more <BR>> >>popular again. ;-) <BR>> >> <BR>> >>Keith Black <BR>> >> <BR>> >> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >> From: Bob Richards <BR>> >> To: NSRCA Mailing List <BR>> >> Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 8:55 AM <BR>> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] IMAC Vs Pattern Participation? Does the <BR>> >>DogHunt on points made? <BR>> >> <BR>> >> <BR>> >> Larry, <BR>> >> <BR>> >> Good points. <BR>> >> <BR>> >> A little history, as best as I can remember it. <BR>> >> <BR>> >> At one time, Pattern was the top of the heap. I remember the first RC <BR>> >>Modeler magazine I bought (circa 1972) had coverage of the Masters <BR>> >>competition. RC Modeler carried coverage of the large pattern contests <BR>> >>back <BR>> >>then. At some point (I don't remember when, exactly) RCM (aka Don Dewey) <BR>> >>became ticked off at the AMA because AMA chose to publish their own <BR>> >>magazine. This happened when American Aircraft Modeler magazine went out <BR>> >>of <BR>> >>business, they had been publishing the AMA News in the back of their <BR>> >>magazine. It seemed to me that RCM no longer covered pattern events after <BR>> >>that. There was a big push by RCM to promote the "Sport Flyers <BR>> >>Association", anything AMA sanctioned was left out. (This was my <BR>> >>observation). <BR>> >> <BR>> >> Along came the TOC, which actually started out with pattern models. <BR>> >>Again, t! here was coverage. But, then the TOC went the scale aerobatics <BR>> >>route (and extra points for biplanes, and extra points for mammoth planes <BR>> >>-- the rest is hist
ory). <BR>> >> <BR>> >> Pattern is no longer the premiere event that it used to be. I think it <BR>> >>all goes back to the WOW factor. There also seemed to be a period where <BR>> >>pattern flyers were looked down upon, usually labeled "snobs". Thank <BR>> >>goodnes that does not seem to be the case anymore. <BR>> >> <BR>> >> I think the change from loud, ballistic missle type flying to the <BR>> >>turnaround style now has changed the general modeling perception, although <BR>> >>it took several years for the general modeling public to recognize the <BR>> >>change. <BR>> >> <BR>> >> However, the turnaround format seems to have had both a positive and <BR>> >>negative effect. The general modeling public respects pattern more as a <BR>> >>result, but it also SEEMS to be a barrier for new participants. Again, <BR>> >>this <BR>> >>is just my opinion. <BR>> >> <BR>> >> Bob R. <BR>> >> <BR>> >> <BR>> >> Lisa & Larry <LLD613@PSCI.NET>wrote: <BR>> >> Eric Henderson wrote**** If we knew why we could probably fix it. <BR>> >> **** <BR>> >> <BR>> >> From my viewpoint trying to get into pattern around 1999 was a major <BR>> >>challenge. <BR>> >> <BR>> >> I was first introduced to Pattern in Southern California in 1985 when <BR>> >>I went to watch a contest. It took another 15 years to have the time and <BR>> >>money to do it. For me lack of time was because of my service in the US <BR>> >>Navy. Difficult to fly when your out at sea and they don't fit too well in <BR>> >>a locker on the ship.vbg <BR>> >> <BR>> >> ! It took me from 1999 to 2002 to find somebody that new what pattern <BR>> >>was. Everyone new IMAC and could point me to a pilot that competed, but <BR>> >>not <BR>> >>Pattern. <BR>
> >> <BR>> >> What does this mean? Either I'm not a very smart cookie or Pattern is <BR>> >>a very well kept secret (not much has changed since 1999). So how is it <BR>> >>that a person that new pattern existed took the better part of 4 years to <BR>> >>finally talk to someone that could help get started? <BR>> >> <BR>> >> Over the last seven years we watched IMAC ARF's take off and sell <BR>> >> like <BR>> >>hot cakes, only in the last couple years have we seen Pattern ARF's on the <BR>> >>market. <BR>> >> <BR>> >> I went to an RC Airshow north of Bloomington, IN around the spring of <BR>> >>2002. I watched a pilot fly an Extra for an IMAC Sportsman Class Demo. I <BR>> >>approached him and asked him about Pattern and how to get started. His <BR>> >>response was clear, "Why would you want to fly a toy model plane when you <BR>> >>can fly a model of a real plane and do the same thing!" Aside from an <BR>> >>instant turn off from IMAC, it ! set the tone of perception between IMAC <BR>> >>and Pattern. I will most likely start competing in IMAC this year as well <BR>> >>as pattern. Mostly because there are more IMAC contests in a 5 hour drive <BR>> >>than there are pattern from where I'm located. <BR>> >> <BR>> >> If you compare IMAC and Pattern I don't think the dog hunts in most <BR>> >> of <BR>> >>the arguments I've seen posted in the last few years as they reappear from <BR>> >>time to time. <BR>> >> <BR>> >> 1) IMAC and Pattern planes compare in cost. (That dog won't <BR>> >> hunt <BR>> >>on this point) <BR>> >> 2) IMAC and Pattern take the same ! amount of practice time to <BR>> >>be competitive in a given class. (That dog won't hunt on this point) <BR>> >> 3) IMAC and Pattern meets are relatively the same driving <BR>> >
>distance for most. (That dog won't hunt on this point) <BR>> >> 4) I can find more IMAC contests than Pattern contests (Dog <BR>> >>might be tracking something on this one) <BR>> >> 5) Sport pilots know more about IMAC than they do pattern, this <BR>> >>is speculative but I believe it's the case. (Dog might be tracking <BR>> >>something on this one) <BR>> >> <BR>> >> We need to do a better job marketing Pattern. I think that IMAC has <BR>> >>done great in this area. The TOC helped IMAC grow and get the word out <BR>> >>through coverage of a big event. I think we can see a decline in IMAC <BR>> >>since <BR>> >>the last TOC. I have not seen or heard of a big contest that gets the <BR>> >>publicity that the TOC received. Even the FAI World Pattern contest is not <BR>> >>covered as well as the TOC was. <BR>> >> <BR>> >> How do you guys view these points? <BR>> >> <BR>> >> Larry Diamond <BR>> >> NSRCA 3083 <BR>> >> <BR>> >> PS.What Eric does for Pattern in his reporting to magazines is <BR>> >>probably one of the key factors that he! lps pattern stay afloat. Thanks <BR>> >>Eric.. <BR>> >> <BR>> >> <BR>> >> <BR>> >> <BR>> >>------------------------------------------------------------------------------ <BR>> >> <BR>> >> <BR>> >> _______________________________________________ <BR>> >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list <BR>> >> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org <BR>> >> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion <BR>> > <BR>> > <BR>> >>_______________________________________________ <BR>> >>NSRCA-discussion mailing list <BR>> >>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org <BR>> >>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion <BR>> > <BR>> > <BR>> > ___
____________________________________________ <BR>> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list <BR>> > NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org <BR>> > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion <BR>> > <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> _______________________________________________ <BR>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list <BR>> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org <BR>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion </BLOCKQUOTE></body></html>