PaulBK

c'mon anna......if your "reality" was correct, then all the cheering from others in the SW would have pilots running to contests. and that hasn't happened either. let's find a more plausible reason for interest being on the wane...like maybe the run is over and the numbers are starting to stabilize. after all, this is utah. haven for mountain biking, hiking, skiing...but toy airplanes? no.

P

quist

My Feedback: (198)

Paul, The attitude of any type of flyer will influence fellow flyers epecially at a local level. We have had a large increase in IMAC pilots at my field in the last 3 years. I believe that has to do with what is actually going on at our field and not what is going on in other states.

As far as the other comment about people who only flew one contest. There are people who only fly the contest at there field, they are not serious about competeing and just want to have fun. For local club contests these people are good to have. Some day they may want to compete.

One last item, I think it is amazing that the numbers have increase when you factor in the increased traveling expense. The Camarillo, CA contest cost us $500 in room and gas.

wgeffon

My Feedback: (4)

I dont even want to think about what I spent to fly at the Shootout this year...[X(]
It was worth every penny though.

rmh

doom and gloom?
Obviously, you don't know me Anna --
My comments were meant to encourage some thought about growth in IMAC
I CD our contests each year -enthusiastically !

quist

My Feedback: (198)

That's what you get for riding in style. That was a nice ride!!

wgeffon

My Feedback: (4)

LOL.

Its paid for.... but putting $3.10 diesel in it for 3600 miles hurt.
Thankfully we split it.

piper28

As someone that's been debating giving the imac thing a try, I would have to say the larger plane size is definitely something of a concern. It does represent a fairly sizeable hurdle for getting in. (And yes, I recognize that you don't necessarily have to have the bigger planes at basic, but you're at a disadvantage.) That said, I'm not sure that the bigger hurdle isn't the amount of travel that'd be necessary to really have any success. I'd guess that's why it's only 17% you had that participated in 5 or more contests. (I know I was listening to the numbers at the NC regional, but didn't do the math off the top of my head to figure out how many contests you'd have to go to to have any chance at doing well for the season).

Silent-AV8R

The funny thing is that there IS a class for smaller, less expensive planes. It is called Mini-Mac. NOBODY flies it. NOBODY clamors for it. So I take from that while there are certainly a number of people who feel that large planes are required and choose not to spend the money, that most who are interested are willing to jump that hurdle.

One other point. If you are just trying it out, do it with what you have. Scale or not, large or small. In most cases you are at a greater disadvantage due to inexperience and a lack of the necessary skills than you are due to your airplane.

If you decide that you like competing, then you can determine if you want to spend the money and invest the time required to be competitive.

rmh

Mini Mac simply diluted interest at all levels
The idea of having unlimited plus small restricted sizes for all classes did not appeal-and never will
If the classes were size specific - the playing field would be more equal and of more importance - the appearance of a level field would exist.

Diablo-RCU

My Feedback: (1)

If IMAC participation is down, there are more than a few reasons why. Extraordinary gasoline prices last Summer made traveling to a contest very expensive. If you're hauling a trailer for a 40% plane or two, even more expensive. A tank of gas for a 40% plane costs about $2. It's about the same cost as flying something with a Moki 2.10.

Desertrat

My Feedback: (2)

The trailering I'll buy into. $2 for a 40% tank of gas - thats an exaggeration. Even worse comparing $2.50-$3.00/gal pump gas to $10.00-$18.00/gal alcohol/nitro. C'mon man, when you exaggerate that bad you lose credibility.

Now to your point: IMAC participation was not down. However, most people just went to one contest. I personally only made 3 last year, biggest reason I didnt make more is the time factor involved. It hurts to leave work on friday, hook up and drive all night, get up early to fly on Saturday, have a small amount of fun while sweating and studying unknowns sat night, fly a little on sunday, smile and clap then haul butt home so you can be dog dead tired at work monday morning, wondering how bad your wife is going to yell at you about not mowing the grass! And this is when it goes smooth. I know there are folks here who have gotten up to really bad weather on saturday after driving all night and asked yourself the question - "Is it really worth it?"

Size matters. Nobody can truely argue that small airplanes are competetive. If you are serious about IMAC, you will have to get a big airplane eventually if you want to be competetive. Dick I agree with everything you say, but the reality is the general majority of the membership really does not want to change the format. And I understand to a degree because IMAC was founded on that principle that there would be no restrictions on the aircraft size. As long as folks continue to show up to enough contests, there will be no format change. Here in South Central, the trend has been more and bigger contests. The good news is Pattern offers a format with size restrictions - Interestingly, the cost is very similar when you get to the upper more competetive classes - hmm.


Roger

Dean Bird

My Feedback: (39)

That's the part that keeps confusing me. Participation isn't down. It was up this year compared to last year. More people are involved as CD's, more people are trained and involved as judges, and more pilots flying contests. Sounds like a great trend. Anna Wood is the Arizona assistant in the Southwest. She told about some more things that are being planned to encourage the new pilots coming in. It all sounds like good trends and a good focus on the new pilots coming in.

Participation in two of our Southwest states are down. That means that the participation in the remaining four states went up even more than those states lost to have an overall increase for the Southwest Region. I can't speak for the Utah pilots and their interest, but Dick is a consistent buzzkill on most of his posts in the IMAC forum. Representatives and pilots from the other states are promoting their contests, poking fun about who has to fly against who, talking up the great contest sponsors, and giving reports after the contest about the good time it was to meet everyone and hang out. Dick's posts are just consistently about how bad it is and how wrong it is. Dick, your heart may be in the right place, but it's got to be a total buzzkill for any Utah guys that may look up to you. What's ironic is that for all the opinions you have about the problems in this segment of the hobby, I don't see your name anywhere on the list of 2005 participants:

http://www.mini-iac.com/EditModule.a...iew&ItemId=191

Tons of us are flying in the Southwest, the contests are being run better, we're meeting new people at every contest we go to, the contest sponsorship is fantastic, and we're having a blast!! The people with the positive attitudes and the fun spirits are already talking about how much fun it is to be practicing next years sequences, thanking IMAC again and again for getting next year's Knowns out so fast, and giving each other a hard time about what class they're going to be in. So many positive things going on!!!

Dean Bird
2005 Tucson Shootout Intermediate Class Champion
2005 IMAC Southwest Region Intermediate Class Champion

Flip and Fly

Hi all,

I have never flown in a IMAC competition, but plan to give it a go next year. After reading all this thread I like the idea of size restrictions to classes, as Dick stated. I will be flying a 34% type setup because I don't want to be too disadvantaged. Lets face it, if you are going to compete its nice to be competitive. Also its about the most I am willing to spend. Its a huge jump from 33% to 40%!

If the weight was the parameter that determined the various classes, the competition would then be shifted to getting the best flying setup for that weight. That would be interesting, and not only money and size would rule, next to pilot skill!

And please don't tell me that size don't matter in the smaller classes, Like I have heard from others. I have a 28% Extra, and a 37% Ultimate, no contest! Ultimate is far more stable, and the Ultimate is not the best setup for IMAC.

rcblimppro

Piper, I have seen alot of 35% and 40% airplanes in the basic class and for the most part they are not being flown in such a manner as for them to be an advantage over a 50cc airplane. The market is full of good guality fine flying 50cc airplanes that would be a really good way to get into IMAC. Too much emphasis is being placed on airplane size. In Advanced and Unlimited I would agree that a larger bird is needed but I think that in Basic and Sportsman one could be competitive with the smaller airplane. Practice and a good coach would be a better investment.



Shawn

Dean Bird

My Feedback: (39)

Shawn is on the money in his opinion. A 40% plane doesn't win you trophies. Good thumbs and a coach that can tell you what you're doing wrong are HUGE!!

Look at the guys that took the trophies in the Southwest this year.

Basic
DJ Noerr
Vaughn Harral
Andy Portman

No 40% planes there (Andy did get a 3.0m late in the year and flew it at the SW Championships, but flew the 2.6m during the year.). There was a pilot at the Riverside contest and the SW Championships that flew an electric plane with a 58" wingspan. He flew really well and beat guys with big planes because he had the skills!!

Sportsman
Eric Powell
Bernie Boland
Joe MacGregor

Eric flew big planes all year, but only finished in 1st place for the year after winning the SW Championships. What improved during the year was his flying. He was getting beat by the smaller airplanes earlier in the year. Bernie and Joe both fly 33% airplanes. It's their thumbs that make them competitive, not the size of their airplane. They beat LOTS of guys with bigger airplanes all year long!!

Check out the Advanced class. Ryan Hart took 2nd place for the season. Yep, flying a 33% Aeroworks Edge!! He beat guys with bigger planes all year long. It's the thumbs guys, not the size of the plane.

Will a bigger plane make any pilot better.... maybe. But a big plane doesn't win trophies. You have to be a good pilot to place well. Getting a bigger plane doesn't give you the skills. Lots of practice with a good coach makes the difference.

So everybody get those 2006 Knowns, someone that can help you with what you're doing to lose points, and have a blast!!

I hope to see all the familiar faces and lots of new ones at the Cactus Classic on February 18th and 19th, 2006.

Have fun!!!


Dean Bird
Sun Valley Fliers
Phoenix, AZ

rmh

Well from the old buzzkill(?) viewpoint - yes of course you can do well with smaller planes and skills .
Now then -why are 40% models used in close competition in Unlimited ?
easy answer - they are easier to fly and score well at that size .
That , IS an advantage -anyway you slice it .
This is not my first run around the track- all I am suggesting is that the actual advantage as well as the perceived advantage exists and is -to some fliers - a real issue
Because it really is.
I think that a class size parameter would help attract more fliers .
If you want to fly the biggest -most expensive setups - do it - in Unlimited
If you are really an occasional competitor in say - Sportsman - 30%-0r 33% type models are a lot easier on the budget and transport requirements .
I want to see more guys come in and participate -without feeling intimidated
Frankly I don't give a darn about what size model you like or fly but for a contest -I think size grouping is a good idea.
There you go- more doom n gloom.

babflyer

My Feedback: (2)

Imac is difficult and not for everyone. I see the word coach used a little bit in posts before mine, I see that, and interest at your local field in general to be more important than plane size. I for one tried imac once about 4-5 years ago. It made me a better pilot and am glad I tried it. I didnt care for it at the time though (the actual contest) for several reasons. I wont go into what I didnt like to much but the biggest things for me were flying in bad weather and kind of boring really the first day, nothing but knowns. Someone stated above about taking up the whole weekend, one day contest would probably draw people from farther away and up attendance for most contest I think. As far as size restrictions I dont see that as a way to increase attendance or level the playing field. In the lower levels pilot skill is going to outweigh what plane you have for the most part. If they ever would make size limits in lower classes you would be hard pressed to find many good pilots with 35-40% planes that have never actually tried imac dig out a smaller plane to try imac out. Imac is difficult to do if your the only one at your club interested, trying to fly the sequence without a caller is next to impossible for me anyway. I can fly most of the manuevers that would be required in advanced but I cant hardly fly basic and remember the figures in the proper order. It takes lots of practice and some dedication to actually practice and not jjust burn holes in the sky, its hard. I look at it like nascar, I should be able to race with a stock taurus, or quad racing, they should make everyone take off those race parts that are expensive so I can race my utility quad lol. Thats not the case, any one that is serious about what they are into finds a way to fund those expensive parts. Imac is no different, only serious pilots will excell and why change rules for those that aren't serious about it. I plan on trying imac again next year but if I couldnt fly my 33%ers in sportsman or possibly intermediate you wouldnt see me at all.

Flip and Fly

Well I can see that flying in competiton improves the skill required. However if I fly a 40% with little skill, and some one else flys a 28% with a little skill, we will both not realy get it till we learn the proper way to do things. So practice for sure!!!

Now if a pilot works at it, the real competition begins, a 40% plane is simpler to fly. Soooooooooo, what is ultimately the best setup when two persons are really trying hard, even in basic! 40%

So I still like to cut the cost to compete, and even the board for those who try! 33% is a good size, not to expensive, and they do fly well overall. And I will work at it.

And from a design point of view, limit weight, and people will work harder to get just the most from that size, otherwise 40% rules [&o]

rmh

Babflyer - a 33% is considered small - I flew 33% in Advanced and Unlimited but I got kinda weary of driving up to 400-600 miles for the regionals after doing that in pattern since 1973 .
So I took a breather and tho I still fly 33% down to 5 ounce foamies (really a hoot) I may start again next year .
But no 40% no thanks . Just too much work --and I am very familiar with them.
Limiting low classes to smaller models -like 33% is what I think may (maynot) make the difference for some.
Based on feedback I get -
As long as I am at it
since when does suggesting possible changes-in the interest of increasing participation, make one a "buzzkill" or a " gloom and doom" person?

paf

My Feedback: (1)

I don't see how limiting the size of the planes would attract any people. It will cost you $300+ just to attend the contest (hotel/gas/entry fee/food). If you can afford that several times a year, you can probably swing the extra $1000 for a better/bigger plane if you really want to be competitive in upper classes.

There's bunch of other sports/activities where extraordinary amounts of monies are wasted for no apparent reason and people still do it, because they want to.

Big planes don't give you any advantage below intermediate/advanced anyway. I must have spoken to at least 15 people in last year with 25%+ planes about IMAC, trying to convince them to come to a contest. Not a single one ever showed up. Most of them lack the skill and/or don't have the patience to learn, can't afford the trip, don't have the time and mostly DON'T HAVE THE DESIRE.

I think it'd be easier to attract skilled/resourceful people into IMAC based on "coolness" factor (look at R/C car events) rather than trying to make it "affordable to everyone".

P.
2005 NE IMAC Unlimited Champion

Flip and Fly

As a complete outsider, and never having ever flown in a IMAC event, I don't see why there is such a negative response to limiting the classes from Intermediate and under to say 33%. Is it possible that all the people against it fly 40%. As a intermediate level contestant, I still feel that 33% rules make it a more fair playing field. Just my humble opinion!

40% planes cost more than just 1000,00 big ones. And what if the worst happens[]

rmh

Interesting responses -both positive and negative.
Rationalizing ones own opinion was expected .
I rationalized mine also.
If IMAC participation grows with no changes to present setup - -I am obviously wrong in my thoughts as to a possibly better course to attract others .

Flip and Fly

Well after all is said and done, I will be the best I can be with my 34%

Silent-AV8R

Class limits will not accomplish anything. In fact, they will limit participation since you will be excluding people from the outset. Not a good way to get interest up. And in the end, it is a moot point because at this time the very soonest you could get a change in the rules would be for the 2009 - 2010 rule cycle. The 2007 - 2008 rule proposals are in and there is no way to add anything at this point.

What I find very interesting is that there are a number of pilots moving back to 33% to 35% planes for Freestyle. I also hear lots of talk about people wanting to fly smaller planes (100cc) again due to size, transportation, cost, and complexity.

Ben Diss

My Feedback: (23)

I learned this from cycling. I think it applies here as well.

The four "T's" are talent, training, technique and tools.

Talent - What God gave you.

Training - How much you work to exploit your talent.

Technique - The little tricks we learn that make it easier.

Tools - Stuff that costs money.

Sure, a 40% plane helps, but not as much as raw talent, practice and a good coach.

-Ben