RE: IMAC legal planes  
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
       


Composite-ARF Extra 330L 2.3M ARF - ARF
Seller:  TheEdge
Details:   $495.00   |  10/3/2008   |  Classified Ad
We will rotate YOUR AD in this spot if you select "Forum Featured" when placing or editing your ad!

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> IMAC >> RE: IMAC legal planes
Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: IMAC legal planes - 1/31/2008 4:16:49 AM   
sweetpea01



Posts: 1959
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Oak Harbor, WA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dick Hanson

I bet there is not a "scale aerobatic model" on the market that will not pass admittance into a IMAC contest
The reason is that - the intent of IMAC ( yeh, I go back that far) was scale like aerobatics with scale like models.
This has been strreeeetched a bit to keep interest in IMAC.
So to those wondering what will "pass" . grab yer favorite kit and show up . I bet you get to fly.
And really--- that's what was intended .
The only guy I ever saw get booted from a scale aerobatic contest (TOC) was Hanno Prettner - He deliberately showed up with a totally unrecognizable model and called it a xxxxx biplane . he pi---ed n moaned that he had unfairly been singled out .
---- him.


I agree 100% DH. If its recognizable as an aerobatic airframe then have at it.

What gets tricky is things like the Funtana vs the Katana. Do you let the funtana fly since it doesn't have the same type wing?

The resounding answer I got from other CD's was NO.


It is all about the fun to me and trying to stay inside the rules.

_____________________________

www.propnuts.org
www.hobbiesxtreme.com

(in reply to dick Hanson)
       Post #: 26

RE: IMAC legal planes - 1/31/2008 1:54:17 PM   
dick Hanson



Posts: 10057
Joined: 12/12/2001
From: slc, UT, USA
Status: offline 		Yes - If the price of gas doesn't kill me -I will try to make it to NLV this year .

_____________________________

I am watching you
Libby

(in reply to sweetpea01)
       Post #: 27

RE: IMAC legal planes - 1/31/2008 1:56:33 PM   
dick Hanson



Posts: 10057
Joined: 12/12/2001
From: slc, UT, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gungadin

Gosh Mr Hanson, you must really be old. I hope when I get as old as you I can still fly airplanes and that I have great memories of the good old days just like you.

No reason you can't - Listen to yer mom n teachers , eat good wholesome foods and avoid dirty books.

_____________________________

I am watching you
Libby

(in reply to Gungadin)
       Post #: 28

RE: IMAC legal planes - 1/31/2008 5:16:22 PM   
sweetpea01



Posts: 1959
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Oak Harbor, WA, USA
Status: offline 		Dang......I'm Screwed........

I haven't done any of those

_____________________________

www.propnuts.org
www.hobbiesxtreme.com

(in reply to dick Hanson)
       Post #: 29

RE: IMAC legal planes - 2/1/2008 12:59:17 AM   
Gungadin


 

Posts: 171
Joined: 2/19/2006
From: Madison, OH, USA
Status: offline 		Well if it worked for you Mr. Hanson I bet it will work for me too. Thanks for your advice. Those that know me say I need all the help I can get.

(in reply to sweetpea01)
       Post #: 30

RE: IMAC legal planes - 2/1/2008 2:25:06 AM   
Rcpilot


 

Posts: 6555
Joined: 3/20/2002
From: Arvada, CO, USA
Status: offline 		I've never seen a CD toss a guy for showing up with a "scale" aerobatic model. If it looks even REMOTELY like your Giles, Extra, Edge, Cap, Sukhoi, Yak whatever -- you're in.

I flew an LT-40 at my first IMAC contest. Basic class.

I HAVE seen a guy get told that he couldn't fly a Funtana in Sportsman. He flew it the year before in Basic and came back expecting to move into Sportsman with that same airplane. He was pissed off and made a big stink about it. As soon as he figured out that nobody was going to give him any sympathy, he shut up and packed it in. Went home. In my mind, flying a Funtana is no different than showing up with a H9 Showtime or a 4*60. It isn't a "scale" replica of ANYTHING, so you don't get to fly it beyond Basic class. Rules apply to ALL of us, so suck it up.

I hate the rule about pilots and dash panels. It's too ambiguous. Either modify it so that a guy flying a 40% plane has to have a 40% pilot--or get rid of it. It does no good to have a rule like this if guys are going to use a 10% pilot in a 40% plane.

Are you required to have 2 dash panels in a twin seat plane, such as an Extra 300L? Or a Giles 202? If there's 2 dash panels, then why not 2 pilots? Or one pilot and a student? I have NEVER seen anyone put 2 people in a twin seater. Never.

< Message edited by Rcpilet -- 2/1/2008 2:26:02 AM >

_____________________________

Airplanes have expiration dates. It''s just not printed anywhere on them.
I''m not really an airplane pilot; but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

(in reply to Gungadin)
       Post #: 31

RE: IMAC legal planes - 2/1/2008 5:05:05 AM   
sweetpea01



Posts: 1959
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Oak Harbor, WA, USA
Status: offline 		I'm with you on the pilot rule......it has too much wiggle room. But it has yet to be dropped or changed.

I liked the TAS rule of PILOT/DASH or no fly. Then it never brings your score into account.


If the rule was re-written......here are a few takes from me

-As for 2 seat planes......I guess I'd have to say since we are a "SCALE" aerobatic class according to AMA then you would need 2 dash panels, but 1 pilot would be ok because you can fly it with one person but the plane would still have 2 dashes.

-The pilot would have to be 3-D lifelike and the shape of a human

-The pilot must be within 10% scale of the plane (gives room for the guy who got a 40% pilot from some company but it looks like a 30% in his large plane)

-Pilot/Dash or no fly (get rid of the deduction)


Then the rule isn't as vague

_____________________________

www.propnuts.org
www.hobbiesxtreme.com

(in reply to Rcpilot)
       Post #: 32

RE: IMAC legal planes - 2/1/2008 5:41:04 AM   
Rcpilot


 

Posts: 6555
Joined: 3/20/2002
From: Arvada, CO, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sweetpea01

I'm with you on the pilot rule......it has too much wiggle room. But it has yet to be dropped or changed.

I liked the TAS rule of PILOT/DASH or no fly. Then it never brings your score into account.


If the rule was re-written......here are a few takes from me

-As for 2 seat planes......I guess I'd have to say since we are a "SCALE" aerobatic class according to AMA then you would need 2 dash panels, but 1 pilot would be ok because you can fly it with one person but the plane would still have 2 dashes.

-The pilot would have to be 3-D lifelike and the shape of a human

-The pilot must be within 10% scale of the plane (gives room for the guy who got a 40% pilot from some company but it looks like a 30% in his large plane)

-Pilot/Dash or no fly (get rid of the deduction)


Then the rule isn't as vague


I'll go along with that. I have a 300L and it's got 2 dash panels. I also put 2 pilot figures in, just to be different. Cost me a couple ounces, but thats alright.

I don't really care what "scale" the pilot is--it just needs to fit and be the same scale as the plane. It needs to LOOK like it's the right size. Within reason. I think we both agree that a guy showing up with a pilot head the size of a grape in a 40% plane should be asked to help scribe and sit the event out. I don't really care what size the distributor of the pilot bust SAYS it is. As long as it FITS the size of the plane and looks "normal".

I am a joker, and I like to laugh-it-up most of the time. I'd rather put Homer Simpson or Kermit the Frog in my planes. It wouldn't hurt my feelings if they just got rid of the rule and said "Pilot Optional"

But if we're going to be anal about it -- then clarify the darn rules.

_____________________________

Airplanes have expiration dates. It''s just not printed anywhere on them.
I''m not really an airplane pilot; but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

(in reply to sweetpea01)
       Post #: 33

RE: IMAC legal planes - 2/3/2008 12:19:51 AM   
rfmullig


 

Posts: 74
Joined: 12/5/2005
From: grand rapids, MI, USA
Status: offline 		The pilot rule is just REALLY @&%$ing STUPID!!! What do they want to do? Play make believe? Maybe I'll use a ping pong ball with a smiley face.
Rob

(in reply to Gungadin)
       Post #: 34

RE: IMAC legal planes - 2/4/2008 2:46:15 PM   
OnTheEdge



Posts: 1166
Joined: 1/14/2002
From: Drums, PA, USA
Status: offline
quote:

I have NEVER seen anyone put 2 people in a twin seater. Never.


Here's one:



I'm in agreement that Imac either get rid of the pilot/panel rule (my preference) OR make it require the pilot be scale in appearance (i.e. no stuffed animals or Bart Simpson) and of a scale size close to that of the plane.

I also have no problem requiring two panels in a twin but I couldn't see requiring two pilots though. After all, a twin seat aerobatic plane will only have one person in it during a competition.




Attachments
Click to see fullsize image.
Click for fullsize


_____________________________

Avoid zen aerobatics...when the ground........and the plane.......become as one.

(in reply to Rcpilot)
       Post #: 35

RE: IMAC legal planes - 2/4/2008 8:20:54 PM   
sweetpea01



Posts: 1959
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Oak Harbor, WA, USA
Status: offline 		Please go to the AMA website and fill out the rule change forms and submit them.

Or at the very least contact your region Pres. That is the only way the rule will change.



Also the rule already states lifelike so that throws out the stuffed animals/Bart simpson but does nothing for the size.



_____________________________

www.propnuts.org
www.hobbiesxtreme.com

(in reply to OnTheEdge)
       Post #: 36

RE: IMAC legal planes - 2/8/2008 9:42:18 PM   
Rcpilot


 

Posts: 6555
Joined: 3/20/2002
From: Arvada, CO, USA
Status: offline 		Here is a link to the rules change form:
http://www.modelaircraft.org/PDF-files/Rules%20Change%20Form.pdf

Here is the actual rule section 3.1 and 3.2
http://www.modelaircraft.org/events/rulebooks/scaleaerobatics.pdf

Here is what I am doing:
I've checked the box for INTERPRETATION
Brief summary of the proposed change.
Paragraph 3.1 and 3.1 with reference to the human pilot in the aircraft. Either eliminate the requirement for pilots and instrument panels OR make a ruling that the pilot must be representative of the scale of the aircraft in size.

Currently, the rule is written so loosely that pilots with 40% planes are showing up with pilots and instrument panels that are unreasonably small (5% or 10% in size). If we're going to have a rule about pilots in the planes, then the pilot needs to be the same scale (size) as the plane.

Not that the pilot must have hand stitched clothing and a scale helmet, only that the pilot must be the correct SIZE.


Exact wording proposed for the rule book. (List paragraph numbers where applicable. Example: Change “quote present rule book wording” to “exact wording required”. Attach additional sheet if needed.

This is how I am writing the change:

There are no pilot requirements

OR:

3.2 All classes except Basic require that the pilot must meet the requirements defined in Rule 3.1. The pilot must be scale relative to the size of the airfraft being flown. For example: a 35% plane must have a 35% pilot. A 25% plane must have a 25% pilot and a 40% plane must have a 40% pilot. Deviation allowed for +/- 5% in size in the event that an exact size pilot is not available. The point is, the pilot must look like the correct size for the aircraft being flown.
The Basic Class is open to all competitors with a monoplane or biplane aircraft. There is no minimum size requirement for any class. Contest Directors may make an exception for a model of a full scale aircraft that was built for IAC competition, but has not yet competed. Proof of the latter is the responsibility of the contestant.

Many people would simply prefer that the rule was eliminated altogether. I personally feel that it is ridiculous to require a pilot, just to compete in IMAC competition.

You guys can write what you want. The above is what I'm sending to the AMA when I send in my membership application. Probably not for awhile. I'm broke right now.

I also added 2 boxes to indicate what type of flying that I participate in. I created a 3D box and checked it. I also created an IMAC box and checked that.

Currently, we are not represented. If you check the SCALE box because you like to fly scale aerobatics --you're getting lumped into the group with all the warturd, Pilatus Porter and Cessna 172 guys. There needs to be a designation for guys who only fly IMAC type planes. And there needs to be a designation for guys who prefer 3D. Neither are represented on the forms.






_____________________________

Airplanes have expiration dates. It''s just not printed anywhere on them.
I''m not really an airplane pilot; but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

(in reply to sweetpea01)
       Post #: 37

RE: IMAC legal planes - 2/8/2008 10:46:16 PM   
rfmullig


 

Posts: 74
Joined: 12/5/2005
From: grand rapids, MI, USA
Status: offline 		RE: the Little man aqnd control panel.
So what the heck is being judged? Flying ability or how well we can play "let's pretend".
Other aspects of the planes are not even close to being scale, such as thrust-to-weight ratio. So why the rule about a little man?
R

(in reply to Rcpilot)
       Post #: 38

Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> IMAC >> RE: IMAC legal planes
Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]





Jump to: