RE: 2005 MAAC Nats  
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Tower Hobbies
Enter up to 4 keywords or Tower stock numbers
Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
       



All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> M.A.A.C. >> RE: 2005 MAAC Nats Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>  

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 8/8/2005 3:12:20 AM   
Jim_McIntyre



Posts: 2078
Joined: 4/5/2002
From: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Status: offline
It never ceases to amaze me how Mark and Kenny continue to "state the facts", claim to know the minds of Canadian modellers, and have a crystal clear view of the future of aeromodelling....

At least Ken has now come out of the closet with his anti-competition stance.

Guys, one is not exclusive of the other. I for one have made some of the best acquaintances at competitions. I will not repeat the !"try it you might like it" statement Mark referrs to, most children learn that at an earlier stage of development....

Jeff, you often appear to be a voice of reason among the caucaphony ...

Mark ... a friendly word of advice if I may: you can express yourself in text quite well at times ... I think you would find a wider audience if you were to spend your time online refining progressive ideas instead of spawning controversy under the guise of "!informing the masses".

_____________________________

http://scalebuilder.org

(in reply to can773)
       Post #: 76

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 8/8/2005 8:13:37 PM   
Sharpy01



Posts: 600
Joined: 9/9/2003
From: Kenora, ON, CANADA
Status: offline
...ok, you lost me again Jim.

It was Keith that pointed out the facts related to his event and the future of aeromodelling is something that is up for discussion and it's ok to have an opinion.

Harway was only in here for one reason and you know that. He doesn't care what we think or say, only that we are "saying anything" because he has chosen to dislike me and has no interest in any civil discussion.

..............I had to look up "cacophony". Not spelled the same as you did, but it appears to be the meaning you were using?

cacophony
n 1: a loud harsh or strident noise [syn: blare, blaring, clamor, din] 2: loud confusing disagreeable sounds

See, I've learned something new. Thanks man for helping me on "informing the masses".



< Message edited by Sharpy01 -- 8/8/2005 8:14:15 PM >

(in reply to Jim_McIntyre)
       Post #: 77

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 8/8/2005 10:06:19 PM   
Jim_McIntyre



Posts: 2078
Joined: 4/5/2002
From: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sharpy01
...ok, you lost me again Jim.


Sorry Marc, it was a general statement, not specific to this thread.

Yeah, I was ranting in response to your statement that read like more manipulation. So much is lost in text.

Cacaphony/Caucaphony ... I've seen it spelled both ways, basically the antonym of euphony ( which could be an interesting play on words i.e. phonyms by rearranging syllable emphasis).

As for Ron.... I've had occasion to meet Ron on many occasions and count him among the few friends I've met in modelling that I know I can trust to be there when needed. His heart is in the right place, and you continue to tread on it by criticising events he invested heart and soul into as a volunteer.... what other reaction would you expect?

_____________________________

http://scalebuilder.org

(in reply to Sharpy01)
       Post #: 78

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 8/9/2005 12:10:22 AM   
Sharpy01



Posts: 600
Joined: 9/9/2003
From: Kenora, ON, CANADA
Status: offline
Jim;

You know, I've never met Ron in person and won't challenge your assessment.

Too many folks took things to a personal level immediately. THere were a few who became obsessed with labelling me as "anti-eveything" right from the start because I disagreed with them on some hot-button issues and of course the event that you allude to. They never took the time to listen to anything once they deemed me a "threat"...............and still apparently do.

Most of them I would still have no problem sharing the sky with and would probably enjoy sharing a beer because they're wrong about most of their perceptions.

too bad really.

(in reply to Jim_McIntyre)
       Post #: 79

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 8/9/2005 1:44:25 PM   
Jim_McIntyre



Posts: 2078
Joined: 4/5/2002
From: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Status: offline
Yes, it is too bad.

I'm not sure that they are wrong..... after all, Ron and the others were not only in attendance but worked hard as volunteers. You and Ken and a handful of others I didn't see at the event (or any others of signifigance) claim to have the "inside sccop"....

Despite the financial hits the event took by absorbing hardships like teams being abandoned in Montreal by Air Canada (a class move if you ask me), the event was, at least to my reckoning, a grand success. In fact, if you count exposure time on Discovery channel and several Networks (CTV, Global etc.), Magazine coverage, you might even say it was a financial success if you were to factor in the advertising benefits.

Should the same plan be executed again? Probably not. Should we learn from the mistakes? Yes. Were there unforseen circumstances? Yes. Should we host another? Unlike some claim to speak for modellers across Canada, I will only speak for myself knowing that I echo the sentiments of several hundred I've personally met at and since the event, and the countless more I've exchange email with ever since .... YES!

_____________________________

http://scalebuilder.org

(in reply to Sharpy01)
       Post #: 80

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 8/9/2005 2:40:57 PM   
Sharpy01



Posts: 600
Joined: 9/9/2003
From: Kenora, ON, CANADA
Status: offline
Quite frankly Jim, I've grown tired of the "volunteer" cry. We're all volunteers, including the three plus years of being my zones ZD and I'm there to help out my zone whenever I can so we can loose the poor, hard done and trodden volunteer schtick. I gave up holidays and March break time with my family for 3 consecutive years to attend AGM's that were far from fun, not to mention all the behind the scene stuff and looking after my own zone's issues. I doubt Ron and others would like a side-by-side comparison of volunteer time spent during my tenure.

Agree that we got value for our money? Not a chance. Aside from the mag coverages that barly mentioned where the event took place, many regional events take place that get the same local TV and paper coverage. I've seen the discovery channel blurb and the message for that coverage was that aeromodellig was very expensive, difficult and time consuming. A single event loosing over $63,000.00, no matter how you slice it, is unacceptable to me.

....perhaps someone from the Tillsonburg Club would like to point the multitude of new members their club gained from that one event? Our regional, private/community sponsored event last year earned us 30+ new members and a brand new club! Perhaps you would like to compare?

Furthmore, the expectance by you and others that me/we/us should drop everything to attend an event that we have little interest in is unreasonable and borders on arrogance. Sorry, have fun, but I'm afraid I don't care ............. unless it involves large amounts of the memberships money.

Jim, it was no surprize that world scale lost all that money. It was obvious from the budget from the first day I read it, that we were setting up for potential big loss, but nobody wanted to listen.......................they cried, we are just "volunteers" and you are "anti-everything" and we don't like you because you dare to question us......... And now, it drives them nuts that I was right. That's the reality.

As for learning from it? The board never did get a promised report from the committee detailing what mistakes were made. They simply folded up their MAAC funded tents, cried summore that they were volunteers and walked away.

As for holding another World event? Keith already did and it was successful, both from a flyer standpoint and from a financial standpoint. Bravo! However, those same bunch don't want to accept that either because they were at odds with Keith as well and continue to take pokes at him and the Mag whenever they get a chance. That despite the fact that Keith turned the Mag into something respectable. They don't seem to care about making things better, they're more interested in settling old scores. IMO


(in reply to Jim_McIntyre)
       Post #: 81

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 8/9/2005 7:08:19 PM   
Jim_McIntyre



Posts: 2078
Joined: 4/5/2002
From: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Status: offline
We're each entitled to our own opinions, be that they agree or not.

You state many things as fact that I could dispute but, I am neither the expert in these matters (any more than you are), nor do I wish to dredge up this tired old discussion once again.

Once again, I will speak only for myself in saying that I acknowledge Keith's success and once again send kudos his way for a job well done.

Your take on the broadcast is interesting, I for one, thought it was made clear that the hobby is quite varied but that competition at this level can be quite expensive and require a great deal of skill and dedication.... One cannot control the media, and they (like others I could mention) do seem to need to put their spin own on things.

30 members from one event? Kudos to the organizers of you "regional, private/community sponsored event".

Marc ... here's your opportunity to turn your efforts from criticism to contribution; maybe you could let us in on your secrets for recruitment. I've attended many Community events, even focused events (e.g. Boy Scouts, Air Cadets etc.) that failed to produce those kinds of numbers....

_____________________________

http://scalebuilder.org

(in reply to Sharpy01)
       Post #: 82

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 8/9/2005 7:58:01 PM   
Sharpy01



Posts: 600
Joined: 9/9/2003
From: Kenora, ON, CANADA
Status: offline
Agreed, the scale thing is over. I stand by what I've said/did. No apologies.
---------------
In relation to the new/club/members;

The secret to those numbers is that they already existed.

It's a point I tried to get across a number of times. Some of the retailers I have spoken to tell me that there are certainly more than MAACs 10-12K members out there flying or they wouldn't be in business. One retailer suggested MAAC may represent as few as 1/4 of the flyers...........maybe less.

To be fair, most are not "new flyers", but past members, current back-field flyers scattered about that caught wind of the efforts of our Current ZD, Jeff Esslinger, a number of other zone members who were approached by the councel of the resort town of Gimli. The event went off well for the first time last year, brought together some of those "non-maac" flyers who then inquired about setting up a formal club.

It's great to work with kids and young folks to set the seeds and be good citizens, but there are ready made flyers/members scattered all over the place. The Gimli event, like most, is a fun event, showcasing every conceivable type of aircraft and reaches a wider potential audience. Much had to do with the efforts of the organizing members (no, I am not one) and the advertising partnership with the city to get the word out. It displayed/reminded a bunch of scattered flyers how much fun getting together with like-minded modellers could be and provided their motivation to enquire.

No secret, show them it's fun and that it isn't necessary to dedicate your life and all your liesure money to participate.

Heck, as a follow-up to my recent post on the 90yr old Tigermoth builder.........................I found at least 7-10 model flyers in the area of the two small towns I visited. Heck, those guys are even flying with the rudder on the evelvator stick (mode 1?) which is how they learned themselves.




< Message edited by Sharpy01 -- 8/9/2005 8:04:46 PM >

(in reply to Jim_McIntyre)
       Post #: 83

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 8/9/2005 9:17:06 PM   
Jim_McIntyre



Posts: 2078
Joined: 4/5/2002
From: Claremont, ON, CANADA
Status: offline
Demographics change across the country, I doubt there are many "rogue" flyers in the greater Toronto area, the only places large enough to be RC friendly tend to be the handful of RC fields in the area.... Park flying or line control on the other hand, that's a whole different matter....

As for recruiting existing modellers, I have direct experience as I was one of the founding members of the Huntsville Model club around 1974 I believe. Increasing membership is a noble cause, and I think providing a stable, available and effective training program is much more key to this cause. Something my home club (Ajax) has done, and continues to do quite well. Unfortunately, not all clubs (in fact, I would have to say a majority) are keen on training or even hosting newbies. You may know Clarence Ragland as he is well known for espoucing his views on this, I happen to agree with him, and use his Instruction technique, after witnessing how successful his approach (Ragland method; basically Kinesthetic learning) is. This is something I think most clubs serious about recruiting (and instruction) should evaluate.

_____________________________

http://scalebuilder.org

(in reply to Sharpy01)
       Post #: 84

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 8/9/2005 10:20:37 PM   
Sharpy01



Posts: 600
Joined: 9/9/2003
From: Kenora, ON, CANADA
Status: offline
Yep, I'm familiar with Clarence as we did some correspondence when I was on the board. I also like his technique and his points are valid regarding clubs not being too active with newbies.

I don't have an answer when it comes to "non-welcoming" attitudes at any particular club. If members can't see benefit to welcoming and helping newbies, then I suspect the longevity of that club will die along with their members. It certainly wouldn't be much "fun" playing in a club like that.







< Message edited by Sharpy01 -- 8/10/2005 1:54:36 PM >

(in reply to Jim_McIntyre)
       Post #: 85

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 8/10/2005 1:00:33 PM   
britbrat


 

Posts: 3299
Joined: 6/15/2004
From: Deep River, ON, CANADA
Status: offline
I can't speak for other regions, but in our immediate club area I personally am aware of "rogue" pilots. Their numbers are equal to ~ 15% of our active club membership. They just don't want to be part of a club and the accompanying safety restrictions.

(in reply to Sharpy01)
       Post #: 86

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 8/10/2005 2:48:36 PM   
fliers1



Posts: 534
Joined: 11/30/2001
From: Lockport, NY, USA
Status: offline
Unfortunately, for the most part, there is little that anyone can do in finding a solution. AMA's new Executive Director Don Koranda fully recognizes the situation, but like anyone else doesn't have the power to do much, if anything about it. Don has proven to be very open to discuss the problem (slow/no growth) and club's attitude towards the public. So perhaps, there might be a tiny glimer of light showing.

See: http://www.modelaircraft.org/mag/August2005/execdirector.htm

Take care,
CCR

_____________________________

www.abchobbyshop.com- information

(in reply to britbrat)
       Post #: 87

RE: 2005 MAAC Nats - 8/10/2005 3:28:11 PM   
can773



Posts: 1642
Joined: 1/25/2002
From: Calgary, AB, CANADA
Status: offline
There is a similar situation in Calgary but its mostly associated around park-fliers who dont do RC stuff large enough to warrant joining a club......by chance many of these guys are also into indoor flying.

Well at our indoor venues (2-3 times a week usually) MAAC is mandatory (requested by the facility owners).....so many joined in order to fly indoor. Many of the guys who were not MAAC members at least now are, although they still dont belong to clubs. At least they are being exposed to those that do and gathering a better appreciation of all the hobby has to offer!

Now for the scary part Not sure how many of you are seriously into park flying....I do it a fair bit when schedule allows (usually early spring/later fall after competition season is over)....the ability of these models is incredible. We have guys here who are into the need for speed thing and get a lot out of their planes. I know of a one instance where they have been testing for speed in the local park (with one guys radar gun...you know where this is going)......hitting the 200 kph range IN A PARK! Sure enough the model failed and the bullet shaped fuse luckily was flying flat enough that it crashed within the park instead of the houses. Another popular model here "the Whiz" is quite easily capable of doing 100+ kph on 2s packs and cheap CD rom motors.....routinely flown in parks.

A lot of these guys have never belonged to clubs and have no experience with larger models so I dont know if they quite grasp the potential danger of some of the models they are flying.....I am involved as much as possible and try to pass along some sense of responsibility and it helps I think......but the issue is all of modelling will be painted with the same brush the day their is an accident at the local park (and I have no doubt there will be). With the surge of electrics and the huge increases in performance it wont be long before larger models start showing up in parks......it would be a peice of cake for me to fly my 10.5 lb Enigma (2.2 kW power system) at the lar