424 Rule Clarification NO COMPOSITES  
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 >> Pylon Universe - RC Pylon Racing >> Q-500 Racing >> 424 Rule Clarification NO COMPOSITES
Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>  

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
424 Rule Clarification NO COMPOSITES - 2/17/2003 9:34:42 PM   
vector-RCU


 

Posts: 69
Joined: 1/17/2002
From: Melville, NY,
Status: offline 		I guess I just have one guestion regarding the proposed rule for 424 construction. Will you still be allowed to use carbon fiber in the construction or fiberglass? Spars etc. How would you glass the center section of a wing on a Scat Cat, Dodger, Intimadator etc?

The airframe specifications for this event are identical to those for Quickie 500 (Event No. 428) with the following exceptions: [SIZE=3][COLOR=red]Wing and tail construction. Wings must be constructed of either all wood or wood sheeting over a solid foam core. [/COLOR] [/SIZE] Wings manufactured in molds designed to produce hollow core composite wings, is prohibited. The last three inches of each wing tip may be made of any material. The intent of the rule is to keep the cost of participation to a minimum.

Thanks,
Lewis

< Message edited by vector-RCU -- Feb 17 2003 4:46PM >

_____________________________

WWW.LCSPERFORMANCE.COM
       Post #: 1

424 Rule Clarification NO COMPOSITES - 2/20/2003 10:09:41 AM   
regis



Posts: 74
Joined: 1/7/2002
From: La Plata, MD,
Status: offline 		This issue has been discussed among the PGRC pylon fliers. Good intent – but I think you know that there is no measurable advantage between a composite 424 airframe and a wood 424 air frame "all else being equal". The new recruit most likely does not even know about the $500 quickies. This type of proposed rule will only enforce the myth that $$$ wins races. If the ‘Veterans’ believe composites are faster, then we really do have a perception problem. The new guy will soon discover that all motors are not the same – which is when he may become disillusioned. Yes, it is important to make the event affordable. It is also important to keep it fun too - not take it too seriously, but enforce the rules. Right now 424 is experiencing a rebound primarily because the Predator is both affordable and competitive; and because the TT 40 is both affordable and competitive. What happens when the new flier finds out that some TT 40s exceed AMA rule limits? What happens is that he(she) feels justified in bending the rules too (we have seen it done): there goes the fun. I meet a lot of ex-pylon fliers at other types of RC contests. The main reason given for quitting was that others were 'cheating'. Some of them are now flying $1000 composite sailplanes - money was not the reason for quitting (and I assure it was not their lack of ability). I do not think I can stress too much the need to Keep It Fun. For some fliers, a composite airframe may be what is needed to keep it fun. All in all, I think the proposed rule will result in a wash - probably won’t make a difference.

Bottom line: I do not think the proposed change will have any measurable effect on numbers. My point is that it is based on a myth (a myth that we perpetuate) and does not address the reasons why pylon racing doesn't attract and KEEP more fliers.

< Message edited by regis -- Feb 20 2003 10:27PM >

_____________________________

Regis 0o

(in reply to vector-RCU)
       Post #: 2

424 Rule Clarification NO COMPOSITES - 2/20/2003 10:05:48 PM   
luv to race


 

Posts: 479
Joined: 12/10/2002
From: Liquored, FL,
Status: offline 		Oh no! more talk about "composite vs. balsa/foam" .... this conversation is never going to die.

The "newbie" should be concerned with two things, having fun, and flying safe enough that he/she doesn't kill us "veterans". He should however be made aware that in our little world of racing model planes, that there are two roads two travel with airplanes. Save some bucks (fly foam/balsa) OR, spend some bucks (fly composite). His or her opinions are strongly varied by the people he is surrounded by, and the people that teach him or her about our hobby..

Team "get it on"
you only go as fast as your pocket book allows you too!

LTR

(in reply to vector-RCU)
       Post #: 3

424 Rule Clarification NO COMPOSITES - 2/21/2003 12:05:02 AM   
Bill Vargas



Posts: 1570
Joined: 1/6/2002
From: Team Coldies, CA, USA
Status: offline

< Message edited by Bill Vargas -- Mar 27 2003 7:51AM >

_____________________________

If it ain't leaking oil, then something's wrong,,, USMC, RETIRED!

(in reply to vector-RCU)
       Post #: 4

Dollars for Racing - 2/21/2003 12:41:59 AM   
PJ_TankPilot



Posts: 396
Joined: 1/16/2002
From: Phoenix, AZ, USA
Status: offline 		I belong to the camp that believes the no-composite rule will attract and keep more new racers.

My main reason is based on a factor that is rarely mentioned in these discussions. I don’t know how many airplanes it takes for the average newbie to become competitive but, IMO, it ain’t just one. These discussions often imply the difference in cost is that of one airplane. IMO, woodies are more often repairable after damage than composites, which compounds the cost problem.

There is a good chance a newbie who chooses to fly composites will be forced to quit due to empty wallet syndrome.

_____________________________

Warbird racing exercises your adrenal glands.
PJ Herman

(in reply to vector-RCU)
       Post #: 5

424 Rule Clarification NO COMPOSITES - 2/22/2003 1:58:34 AM   
kane


 

Posts: 255
Joined: 6/28/2002
From: Arlington Heights, IL, USA
Status: offline 		I wrote the rule proposal with the intention of unifying the current 424 rules. The purpose was that if the rules were unified across the country we could someday see 424 at the NATS.

If anyone has any ideas please submit them to the AMA contest board.

Dan Kane
(The guy with poor writing skills)

_____________________________

Dan Kane

(in reply to vector-RCU)
       Post #: 6

"Kill Us Veterans" - 2/22/2003 10:19:38 AM   
MaxQ


 

Posts: 91
Joined: 2/10/2002
From: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Status: offline 		As a "newbie" to AMA 40 size pylon racing, it's my opinion that AMA 424 is meant to be a entry level event intended to provide a logical step to compete in AMA 428 and ?? I'm confused why a "veteran racer" would be competing in 424(other than helping the club promoting the event). APRA rules states no composite airframes, however if somebody wants to compete with a composite or a TT40 turning 17K plus, I personally don't have a problem. For me AMA 424 is the event to learn, compete, experience the "rush" of pylon racing and then move on. To compete with a 428 "style" aircraft or a 428 experienced pilot, is just a another learning step to be competitive at the next level.

MaxQ

(in reply to vector-RCU)
       Post #: 7

424 Rule Clarification NO COMPOSITES - 2/22/2003 5:58:19 PM   
Ed Smith


 

Posts: 2851
Joined: 12/29/2001
From: Brantford, ON, CANADA
Status: online 		[QUOTE]As a "newbie" to AMA 40 size pylon racing, it's my opinion that AMA 424 is meant to be a entry level event intended to provide a logical step to compete in AMA 428 and ?? I'm confused why a "veteran racer" would be competing in 424(other than helping the club promoting the event).[/QUOTE]

Not everybody agrees that 424 should be restricted to "Novice" racers. Some would argue that 424 is just another event. To compete in 428 and/or 422 requires a fair amount of expense for the equipment, time to maintain it all, time and cost of travelling. Not everybody wishes to compete at this level. However they still enjoy racing. 424 offers this group of people a low cost, lower key brand of racing. I consider myself a "Veteran" racer purely because of the years I have been doing it. There will come a time, some say it already has, when I can no longer keep up with the 428s, Q40s or the nine to ten hour drives to compete. I would hate to think that there was some rule in a local event that I have helped promote preventing me from participating. So think carefully before we make rules preventing certain groups of people from entering

One day you will get old!!

Ed S

(in reply to vector-RCU)
       Post #: 8

424 Rule Clarification NO COMPOSITES - 2/23/2003 12:28:24 AM   
JohnBuckner



Posts: 3999
Joined: 12/23/2001
From: Kingman, AZ, USA
Status: offline 		My Sentiments exactly, thank you Ed. Additionally it is also my feeling that the wood/plastic thing is not that big a deal but what is important is a uniform set of rules accross the country as in 428, otherwise 424 will always be a poor stepchild.

John

_____________________________

"Keep your controllines tight"

(in reply to vector-RCU)
       Post #: 9

424 Rule Clarification NO COMPOSITES - 2/24/2003 7:11:49 PM   
kane


 

Posts: 255
Joined: 6/28/2002
From: Arlington Heights, IL, USA
Status: offline 		I am very confused, In earlier discussions the push was to unify the rules across the country. To do that I looked at the 2 largest sections of the country flying 424 (NEPRO and APRA). It is my understanding that both (NEPRO and APRA) have rules in place that prohibit the use of molded wings. Is this true?

IF it is true what is the big deal? Now it will be in the AMA rules instead of only being in the NEPRO and APRA rules. IF events are currently being flown this way why are we arguing about it?

Ed, please clarify how this rule will limit your participation? I don't ever recall you flying a high $$$ composite airplane?????? This rule will allow you to build a wing just not in a mold made to manufacture composite wings.

My goal with all of this was to promote 424. This current rule proposal should not be new to anyone. Due to the fact that it is currently being enforced in the contests you attend.

Dan

_____________________________

Dan Kane

(in reply to vector-RCU)
       Post #: 10

424 Rule Clarification NO COMPOSITES - 2/25/2003 12:18:32 AM   
PJ_TankPilot



Posts: 396
Joined: 1/16/2002
From: Phoenix, AZ, USA
Status: offline 		>>IF events are currently being flown this way why are we arguing about it?

For the same reason we argue about any rule. There are people who don’t like the restriction and want it removed. I am not one of them but I can assure you there are people who want to fly a composite airplane in APRA.

_____________________________

Warbird racing exercises your adrenal glands.
PJ Herman

(in reply to vector-RCU)
       Post #: 11

424 Rule Clarification NO COMPOSITES - 2/25/2003 4:18:00 AM   
Ed Smith


 

Posts: 2851
Joined: 12/29/2001
From: Brantford, ON, CANADA
Status: online 		Daniel,

My post had nothing to do with the composite wing question. I was responding to the comment about why "Veteran" racers would want to fly 424. THere has been some discussion on this subject. Although I have not seen any rule about this I have heard suggestuions that if 424 was offered at the Nats certain racers would be excluded.

Ed S

(in reply to vector-RCU)
       Post #: 12

424 Rule Clarification NO COMPOSITES - 2/25/2003 5:52:20 AM   
regis



Posts: 74
Joined: 1/7/2002
From: La Plata, MD,
Status: offline 		If AMA rules are more restrictive than local rules, then there is a problem. There is no problem when local rules are more conservative. Problems only arise when you can not race the plane you have been flying at your local contests. As far as I know, ARPA, NEPRO and my local PGRC rules are compatible with AMA. And I think you will find most other local 424 formats are as will. Let the local organizers restrict composite wings (whatever that means). Just don't change AMA 424 rules - there is no need. But first we need to get 424 to Muncie.

As for restricting who can fly 424 at the NATs: Right now that is a mute question. Let’s get 424 scheduled at the NATs first. Do not add any more roadblocks. I personally think the venue would benefit if 428 fliers did not fly 424. Run 424 in the morning using 428 fliers to help. Run 428 in the PM using 424 fliers for help. I will predict that if 424 is added to the NATs venue, it will surpass 428 by the 4th year. [COLOR=orangered]But first we need to get 424 to Muncie.[/COLOR]

One more comment: I am neither a novice nor am I an expert. You wouldn’t want me flying a competitive 428. When I started flying F1, 2 minutes was a few years away. A TT 40 would win any 1970 F1 race. 424 is not exactly a ‘beginners’ event. Most local events need the experts to enter in order to justify the event. I do not think that would be the case at the NATs. [COLOR=orangered]But first we need to get 424 to Muncie. [/COLOR]

_____________________________

Regis 0o

(in reply to vector-RCU)
       Post #: 13

424 Rule Clarification NO COMPOSITES - 2/25/2003 7:59:20 PM   
kane


 

Posts: 255
Joined: 6/28/2002
From: Arlington Heights, IL, USA
Status: offline 		OK EDWARD,

Enough with the proper name crap, I feel I will have to run and hide from you when I see you next (don't beat me please!).

OOOOPS! I misunderstood your comment. As far as I am concerned you can fly anything you want.

Regis, I feel and others feel that the AMA rules need to cleaned up prior to 424 being run at the nats. This proposal is my attempt to make the rules written in the AMA rule book match the rules being used around the country. IF accepted, the argument that the rule book event isn't being flown cannot be used.

Dan

_____________________________

Dan Kane

(in reply to vector-RCU)
       Post #: 14

424 Rule Clarification NO COMPOSITES - 2/25/2003 8:15:57 PM   
DMyer


 

Posts: 491
Joined: 10/16/2002
From: Potomac, MD, USA
Status: offline 		Regis,


"As for restricting who can fly 424 at the NATs: Right now that is a mute question. Let’s get 424 scheduled at the NATs first. Do not add any more roadblocks. I personally think the venue would benefit if 428 fliers did not fly 424. Run 424 in the morning using 428 fliers to help. Run 428 in the PM using 424 fliers for help. I will predict that if 424 is added to the NATs venue, it will surpass 428 by the 4th year. But first we need to get 424 to Muncie."


As far as restricting 424 to only novices.... we have already been there and done that at PGRC.... remember all the races with only 6 pilots? 424 needs experienced pilots as well as novices for two reasons.... 1) to fill out the field and have a better