<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.5730.11" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Len,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>First of all, welcome to Pattern, it's great to
have you here!!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Keep practicing and enjoy yourself, this
discussion won't change any rules in the near future, it doesn't
happen that way. Bring out what ever plane you want and fly in Sportsman,
no one will tell you you can't. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>If the judges tell you, with the scoresheets, that
you are dominating, move up next year.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Good luck and have some fun, that's what most of us
are here for.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Ken Thompson</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>D6 Newbie...</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=rudyl11@yahoo.com href="mailto:rudyl11@yahoo.com">Leonard Rudy</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, January 07, 2007 8:20
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small
Models ...goodforthefutureofthePattern Event?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Terry,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I am in a similar position as Jerry's brother. I have two 2 meter
planes. A Focus 2 and</DIV>
<DIV>a Vivat. In practice, I mainly fly the Intermediate pattern.
I have not competed before</DIV>
<DIV>and would not start out in that class as I would feel very
intimated. (It will be bad enough</DIV>
<DIV>in the Sportsman class.) If I was told I have to fly
the Intermediate class, it just would</DIV>
<DIV>not happen. I would sit it out and watch.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Len <B><I> <amad2terry@juno.com></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Jerry:
<BR><BR>You are first, jumping to the conclusion that anything is going to
be<BR>"decided" on this forum, and second that it would go into effect for
the<BR>upcoming competition season. Both are VERY far from reality, but a
CD<BR>could publish this intention ahead of time, so your brother could
take<BR>another plane, or move up, or stay home.<BR><BR>We are expressing
our thoughts on something that we feel could help the<BR>growth of Pattern.
OK, you have an specific example that is the<BR>exception, but if your
brother IS good enough to fly the Impact, and an<BR>IMAC plane, why not move
him up to Intermediate? He certainly is not<BR>going to be challenged by the
Sportsman sequence!<BR><BR>Terry T.<BR><BR>On Sat, 6 Jan 2007 17:07:09 -0800
"JFGREEN" <JF217GREEN@CMC.NET>writes:<BR>> Let me give you an example: My
brother decided to try pattern. Hes <BR>> a good<BR>> flyer and flew
two contests with a 60 trainer. Two contests that <BR>> convinced<BR>>
him that he would like to jump into pattern. He bought an impact <BR>>
and wants<BR>> to get serious in sportsman this coming year. Possibly he
will be <BR>> told<BR>> sorry you can't fly at our contest now because
you decided to buy <BR>> near state<BR>> of the art equipment and it's
not fair to those who are less <BR>> fortunate or<BR>> talented than
you are. He also bought an IMAC airplane this year. <BR>> If the<BR>>
"fairness rule" takes effect he some others I recruited may have <BR>>
some<BR>> pattern planes for sale and IMAC will benefit by their <BR>>
participation. I<BR>> have nothing against anyone participating in
sportsman with any type <BR>> of<BR>> airplane they have, a 60 trainer
or an Elexant. How far do we carry <BR>> it? If<BR>> another guy shows
up in intermediate with a Twister and I can only <BR>> afford an<BR>>
old used Oly, do we give me a handicap on the scoring. What if the <BR>>
wind is<BR>> blowing, handicap for the 60 trainer, and my Oly. It
wouldn't be <BR>> "fair" to<BR>> do otherwise, would it?<BR>>
<BR>> -----Original Message-----<BR>> From:
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of <BR>>
george w.<BR>> kennie<BR>> Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 3:21
PM<BR>> To: NSRCA Mailing List<BR>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Small Models ...goodfor<BR>> thefutureofthePattern Event?<BR>>
<BR>> Jerry,<BR>> The way I see it is, if there's a rule limit, the
guy already knows <BR>> it <BR>> exists and he is not going to show up
with something that violates <BR>> the <BR>> rules. Additionally, if
he owns an Impact, he has already convinced <BR>> himself <BR>> that
he's a proficient enough pilot to fly an Impact and therefore <BR>> able
to <BR>> conclude that he will be more than capable with a smaller model
when <BR>> <BR>> competing against a similar field.<BR>> What guy
do you know flying an Impact that doesn't have a stable of <BR>> smaller
<BR>> planes that he plays around with. I'm not sure that it's an
issue.<BR>> JMO, Georgie<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> -----
Original Message ----- <BR>> From: "JFGREEN" <JF217GREEN@CMC.NET><BR>>
To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> Sent:
Saturday, January 06, 2007 1:53 PM<BR>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Small Models ... goodfor <BR>> thefutureofthePattern Event?<BR>>
<BR>> <BR>> > Dennis: Why a limit? What if an interested flyer
shows up with an <BR>> Impact <BR>> > to<BR>> > fly
sportsman? Are we not going to let him fly? Sportsman <BR>> doesn't
limit<BR>> > what you can fly now and it seems to work for those who
are <BR>> interested. <BR>> > If<BR>> > one isn't interested
in competing, will creating limits on their <BR>> options<BR>> >
help their interest? Jerry<BR>> ><BR>> > -----Original
Message-----<BR>> > From:
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of <BR>>
Dennis<BR>> > Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 10:43 AM<BR>> >
To: NSRCA Mailing List<BR>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small
Models ... good for<BR>> > thefutureofthePattern Event?<BR>>
><BR>> > Well at last a comment that to me makes some sense. If the
<BR>> perception from<BR>> > the person wanting to start pattern is
that in order to be <BR>> competitive<BR>> > and/or to look like
they fit in is to have the latest full 2 meter <BR>> pattern<BR>> >
plane then I agree a change is needed. I have had those very words <BR>>
said to<BR>> > me by someone who was interested but did not want to
spend the <BR>> money to be<BR>> > as they put it "competitive".
Perhaps what we need to do is limit <BR>> the size<BR>> > of the
plane for the entry-level classes. This takes out the <BR>> feeling
of<BR>> > needing the latest and greatest, limits the cost and perhaps
even <BR>> tells <BR>> > them<BR>> > they can fly what they
have now. I would never support telling <BR>> them they<BR>> > have
to have a particular plane for the class. They have the <BR>> freedom
of<BR>> > choice and by the time they are ready for advanced they will
be <BR>> hooked and<BR>> > can go for the bigger, more expensive
stuff if they choose.<BR>> ><BR>> > Dennis Cone<BR>>
><BR>> > -----Original Message-----<BR>> > From:
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Ed <BR>>
Miller<BR>> > Sent: Friday, January 05, 2007 5:59 PM<BR>> > To:
NSRCA Mailing List<BR>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models
... good for<BR>> > thefutureofthePattern Event?<BR>> ><BR>>
> The survey says.......... Only NSRCA 171 members responded, that
<BR>> in it <BR>> > self<BR>> > is another topic of
discussion. Point is for the most part, the <BR>> 171 that<BR>> >
did respond are already hooked. This or any other survey I'm <BR>> aware
of<BR>> > wasn't given to the target audience, Joe Newbie who may want
to <BR>> give<BR>> > pattern, NSRCA and competition a try. We need
to develop a <BR>> strategy to <BR>> > add<BR>> > to that 171
number, folks that have yet to join the NSRCA.<BR>> > There has been
volumes written on this forum on how to attract the <BR>> <BR>> >
"newbie",<BR>> > some touting cost, size of planes, complexity of
equipment and <BR>> schedules <BR>> > as<BR>> > well as many
other reasons as to why we encounter difficulty <BR>> enlisting
new<BR>> > blood. One constant we can never change ( IMHO ), if an
<BR>> individual does <BR>> > not<BR>> > have competition in
their blood, we aren't going to be able to <BR>> turn them <BR>> >
to<BR>> > the "dark side" short of a lobotomy.<BR>> > On the
other hand, there are those out there that might take the <BR>> plunge
<BR>> > but<BR>> > look at where pattern equipment evolution has
gone in the last 15 <BR>> years <BR>> > and<BR>> > don't see
where they fit in.<BR>> > I wish I had a dollar for every OS 91 four
stroke I see at fields <BR>> every<BR>> > weekend powering H9
P-51's, Sticks, H9 AT6's, etc. the list goes <BR>> on. <BR>> >
Along<BR>> > our infamous journey, pattern engine evolution has left
behind the <BR>> sport<BR>> > flyer. For years the staple of sport
and pattern flying was the <BR>> .60 2C.<BR>> > Then came the 1.20
4C. Both engines were within the sport flyers <BR>> grasp <BR>> >
and<BR>> > if they took a foray into pattern and it didn't pan out,
they <BR>> could always<BR>> > use that .60 2c or 1.20 4C in the
sport plane ARF of the week. <BR>> Engine <BR>> > size,<BR>>
> price nor complexity generally was not an issue. An OS 61 FSR <BR>>
with a<BR>> > muffler was great for a sport flyer and with a pipe made
a <BR>> formidable<BR>> > pattern engine package back in the day.
The original YS and Enya <BR>> R 4C 1.2<BR>> > engines were
reasonably priced, made good power and were reliable. <BR>> They<BR>>
> were happy in the nose of a mid '90's pattern ship or a Sig 1/4
<BR>> scale<BR>> > clipped wing Cub.<BR>> > Along comes the
world of 1.4 to 1.6 pumped 2C, headers and CF <BR>> pipes <BR>> >
costing<BR>> > in excess of $700, 1.6 4C with headers, mufflers and
30% fuel <BR>> costing way<BR>> > over $800 to haul 2M Pregnant
Guppy plane of the week around. Say <BR>> what <BR>> > you<BR>>
> will but today's politically correct 2M pattern power plant <BR>>
options are <BR>> > for<BR>> > the most part very specific to
pattern and virtually nothing else <BR>> along <BR>> > with<BR>>
> being expensive. Sure the OS 1.6 is a "sport engine" at heart and
<BR>> at the<BR>> > lowest end of the price spectrum but not in
pattern trim with <BR>> custom <BR>> > headers<BR>> > from
Karl Mueller, Hatori ( yeah, try and get those from Tower ), <BR>>
Perry<BR>> > pumps and take your pick of aluminum or CF pipes. The
Imac/Giant <BR>> scale<BR>> > crowd have it easy, a DA 50 or 100
with some cans will power just <BR>> about<BR>> > anything you want
to fly, whether it be aerobatic or scale. The <BR>> only<BR>> >
difference is size. Relatively cheap fuel is readily available at <BR>>
your<BR>> > local gas station. I guess 30% Nitro heli fuel is cheap
compared <BR>> to 90%<BR>> > Nitro fuel run in Top Fuel Dragsters
so we don't have it all that <BR>> bad :).<BR>> > Put yourself in
Joe Newbie's shoes, he figures he can always sell <BR>> the<BR>> >
pattern airframe if he decides pattern isn't his cup of tea, but <BR>>
what does<BR>> > he do with those expensive pattern specific lumps of
aluminum, <BR>> steel and <BR>> > C/F<BR>> > ?? Sure anything
can be sold but at a great loss and to a small <BR>> target<BR>> >
audience. Try and sell a R/E OS 140RX/header/pipe to a guy <BR>> building
a 1/4<BR>> > scale Cub. Or a $800 + single cylinder 4C, that same $$
can buy a <BR>> twin<BR>> > cylinder 4C with less power but a much
quieter, sweeter sound, no <BR>> <BR>> > vibration<BR>> > and
I know first hand a whole lot less maintenance.<BR>> > Though I have
no intention of giving up my 2M planes and <BR>> "expensive <BR>> >
pattern<BR>> > specific lumps of aluminum, steel and C/F" whether they
be 2C, 4C <BR>> or<BR>> > Electrons shortly I hope. However, I
really believe if Sportsman <BR>> and<BR>> > possibly Intermediate
were limited to .90 displacement, it would <BR>> be a<BR>> >
positive step towards Joe Newbie giving pattern a shot. Hell, I <BR>> bet
he<BR>> > already has a .91 Surpass...........<BR>> > Ed
M.<BR>> > ----- Original Message -----<BR>> > From: "Grow
Pattern" <PATTERN4U@COMCAST.NET><BR>> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
<NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> > Sent: Friday, January 05,
2007 7:47 PM<BR>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ...
good for<BR>> > thefutureofthePattern Event?<BR>> ><BR>>
><BR>> >> John,<BR>> >> I thought that you might be
interested in this <BR>> information.<BR>> >><BR>> >>
In the 2005 NSRCA rules change survey (sent out in 2002) I <BR>> compiled
the<BR>> >> following question with the intent of encouraging 60-90
sized <BR>> completive<BR>> >> airplane development.<BR>>
>><BR>> >> Judging of distances<BR>> >><BR>>
>><BR>> >> Question-65<BR>> >><BR>> >>
Should we therefore consider and AMA pattern contest rule change <BR>>
that<BR>> >> states<BR>> >> the pilot should make the
plane appear to be at the size of a <BR>> 2-meter<BR>> >>
plane<BR>> >> being flown at 150-175 meters.?<BR>>
>><BR>> >> YES = 71 NO = 100 RESULT = NO PROPOSED CHANGE
.<BR>> >><BR>> >> I had been advised that the existing
selection-and-intent of the <BR>> FAI<BR>> >> 150-metres rule
was to create a relatively equal ease of <BR>> visibility for <BR>>
>> 2M<BR>> >> airplanes to the judges?? Whether that was true
or not I admit <BR>> to being<BR>> >> very surprised when the
idea was rejected so soundly by the <BR>> survey<BR>> >>
respondents.<BR>> >><BR>> >> I had been thinking that the
smaller planes would fare better if <BR>> they <BR>> >>
were<BR>> >> flown in a bit closer. Our rough math had shown that a
60-72" <BR>> airplane<BR>> >> would<BR>> >> look just
about right at 100-110-M.<BR>> >><BR>> >> What would the
difference be for a 2-M airplane and a 1.5-M <BR>> airplane if<BR>>
>> flown at their relative distances?<BR>> >><BR>>
>> I also thought that the budding but slower electric planes of the
<BR>> day<BR>> >> could<BR>> >> use the closer in
option and need less extreme (read expensive) <BR>> power<BR>>
>> systems.<BR>> >><BR>> >> Regards,<BR>>
>><BR>> >> Eric.<BR>> >><BR>> >><BR>>
>><BR>> >><BR>> >> ----- Original Message
-----<BR>> >> From: "John Ferrell"
<JOHNFERRELL@EARTHLINK.NET><BR>> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
<NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >> Sent: Friday, January
05, 2007 4:46 PM<BR>> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small
Models ... good for the<BR>> >> futureofthePattern Event?<BR>>
>><BR>> >><BR>> >>> There is no need to worry
about rules changes at this time.<BR>> >>><BR>> >>>
Those of us dabbling with smaller planes are doing it with the <BR>>
existing<BR>> >>> rules. If winning trophies and satisfying
judging problems are <BR>> at the <BR>> >>> top<BR>>
>>> of<BR>> >>> your needs you will probably be best
served with whatever is <BR>> percieved <BR>> >>> as<BR>>
>>> the latest & greatest equipment.<BR>>
>>><BR>> >>> I have two boxes of trophies out in the
shed. The smaller box is <BR>> from<BR>> >>> when<BR>>
>>> nobody better showed up. The larger box is from events that did
<BR>> not get<BR>> >>> enough attendance to give away the
trophies. I don't have strong <BR>> <BR>> >>>
feelings<BR>> >>> about either box!<BR>> >>><BR>>
>>> I just want to fly more and enjoy it more. Right now that
<BR>> appears to be<BR>> >>> with<BR>> >>> a
little smaller airplane!<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> John
Ferrell W8CCW<BR>> >>> "My Competition is not my enemy"<BR>>
>>> http://DixieNC.US<BR>> >>><BR>> >>>
----- Original Message -----<BR>> >>> From: "george w. kennie"
<GEOBET@GIS.NET><BR>> >>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
<NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >>> Sent: Thursday,
January 04, 2007 10:40 PM<BR>> >>> Subject: Re:
[NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good for the <BR>> future<BR>>
>>> ofthePattern Event?<BR>> >>><BR>>
>>><BR>> >>>> Deano,<BR>> >>>> When
you reference " changing the shape of the event ", how <BR>> deep are
<BR>> >>>> you<BR>> >>>> suggesting things go?
Are we losing sight of the fact that we <BR>> are part<BR>>
>>>> of<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>>
> 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>> > No virus found in this incoming
message.<BR>> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.<BR>> > Version:
7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.6/617 - Release Date: <BR>>
1/5/2007<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > -- <BR>> > No virus
found in this outgoing message.<BR>> > Checked by AVG Free
Edition.<BR>> > Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.6/617 -
Release Date: <BR>> 1/5/2007<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>> NSRCA-discussion
mailing list<BR>> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>> <BR>> --
<BR>> No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>> Checked by AVG
Free Edition.<BR>> Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.6/617 -
Release Date: <BR>> 1/5/2007<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> -- <BR>> No
virus found in this outgoing message.<BR>> Checked by AVG Free
Edition.<BR>> Version: 7.1.410 / Virus Database: 268.16.6/617 - Release
Date: <BR>> 1/5/2007<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<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<P>__________________________________________________<BR>Do You
Yahoo!?<BR>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
<BR>http://mail.yahoo.com
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>