AN EXPERIMENT.......Give every top flyer in the world the same plane, with the same engine, all identical in weight and flight characteristics flying at the same field in the same conditions.

1)Would you see the same people winning competitions?
2)Do you think that the aircraft/radio combination separates flyer's who with the same gear are equally as good?
3)Is the person who spends the most money on airframes and motors have a better chance of winning.

Really it should be the most skilled person winning but at a field like the TOC with all pilots being pretty good does hardware start to influence the results................

AN EXPERIMENT.......Give every top flyer in the world the same plane, with the same engine, all identical in weight and flight characteristics flying at the same field in the same conditions.
________________________________________

Interesting concept. Full scale tried it with a plane called appropriately the One Design. There are a few models available for this plane. Didn't catch on.

Practice will make more difference in the outcome of a contest more than the amount of money spent if the equipment is of a somewhat reasonable type. There is little difference in the current breed of aerobatic type planes when produced in model type. Everybody has a favorite. Would a race be as interesting with only one type of car? Probably not. The top place qualifier at last years Masters flew a 35% plane. Every other pilot flew a 40% which was believed to be a necessity.

EXCAP232

FYI,
Last years masters was won by Pete Goldsmith flying his design scratch built 46% Cap 232.

As for the discussion, practice and dialed in equipment make the difference. I fly every week with Pete and Mike McConville and believe me these guys practice hard. Continually tweaking the programming and getting the planes flying the way they want them. Also their set-ups are pretty close even if their planes are different. TOC level pilots are a breed unto them selfs, any of the 21 could win on any given day.

John Diniz

They do it in auto racing it's called IROC. The full size One Design was a concept that never made it because people are individuals that want to change this or that, or don't like this color scheme. It was intended to remove the halo factor. I don't think that any of the One Designs that were built are exactly the same. Years ago Barron Hilton of Hilton hotels sponsored a contest with 3 identical Pitts' invitation only pilot names were kept from the judges. The hope was to get some TV exposure, but it didn't last either. Tom

I believe the difference is practice, practice, practice!! Too many people today try to blame or make excuses for their own lack of determination. Let's face it folks, a $1200.00 radio doesn't fly the plane for you! I DO believe that the guys that are winning frequently must have something that the majority of us DON'T have and that is TIME TO PRACTICE!!! Whether they are factory sponsored or independently wealthy or retired with the resources to travel and practice all the time! Now, don't misunderstand me here as I am not saying that they are not talented or deserving of their victories or top dog status, I am merely saying that they have the resources to be able to make R/C their life. I work 40 hrs./week as does my wife. We have two kids that are in school and active in extracurricular activities. There is just not the time in my schedule to practice, practice practice as much as those guys do! with all that said, ain't it a great hobby!!!!

regards,

Jeff

Peter Goldsmith did in fact win the Masters. In my post it says "The top place qualifier at last years Masters flew a 35% plane. Every other pilot flew a 40% which was believed to be a necessity." The qualifier is the pre-contest to determine those added to the invited list. The first place finisher in this group was Rob Sarlan our NE IMAC Regional director and placed 12th overall. Not bad for the entry into this level of competetion.

EXCAP232

AStrohog ,

Well Said .

Cheers .

Arjun

Skill, talent, equipment, time, motivation, discipline, heart, eyesight, weather, home climate, coordination, desire, and many other factors.

Mark

This concept would surely make F1 motor racing more interesting...

Anurag

EXCAP232,

I realized what you were talking about after I posted my reply. Please accept my apology, I did not intend to offend you if I did.

Getting 12 at the Masters with a 35% plane is a huge accomplishment. Hats off to Rob Sarlan!!!!

I think with judging the way it is, the larger planes present better to the judges. I don't think it is fair, just sorta the way it is. That's why I also compete in sailplane contests.

John Diniz

A good pilot can make a bad airplane fly better than a bad pilot can make a good airplane fly.

When I raced go-karts, we had a celebrity race. During the race, they played with each other, letting one guy pass, then another. Coming to the last few laps, one guy in a crappy looking kart pulled away from everyone else (people like Paul Tracy!) with apparent ease.

His name was Memo Gidley. He used to be a test driver for F-1 or Indy (can't remember), and now is a full time driver. It was amazing to watch his skill.

Mike

Its the pilot. Poor equipment doesn't help but it is the pilot. A few years ago a friend won Masters at the nats with a plane that required bottom rudder in rolls!?! We affectionately refer to it now as the banana.
Now he is a top contender in FAI and will outfly most people with their airplane. Practiced with him a few weeks ago and a club member let him fly his plane. He immediately did a beautiful 4 roll oppisite rolling circle into a rolling harrier into a rolling loop then knife edge loop. The owner of the plane said he never would have believed his plane could do those things.
Watched Mike MCconville (sp) put in great flights at the Nats finals with his Ultimate and everyone knows the problems with bipes! ( tongue in cheek)
Let a Master finalist fly my plane the week before the nats and he flew my schedule better than I do on the first flight. Killed the excuses for a new plane right away.
Burn more fuel and go to more contests. Practice with objective feedback is the best way to improve. Of course talent helps.

Practice, determination, dedication is what makes these guys so good. Yes I am sure these TOC guys get just get everything furnshed for them. But they had to pay their own way to get there.

Do you think Tiger Woods got to be great at golf by watching it on TV all day. No he didn't. Where most of us has a couple of hours of leisure at home, he was probably hitting golf balls.

Did Michael Jordan, Larry Bird, Magic, become some of the best NBA players by not playing. No they practiced, studied the game, learned all they could. To become the best.

I met Mike Sauls in Oct '00 at a fly in. I asked him how often he flys. He stated "I fly 3-4hours a day, 3-5 days a week" This is from a person who, at the time, was a full time Mississippi Hwy. State Trooper.

He flys more in a week then i probably do in 6 months. And it shows, why he is a better pilot than I will ever become. Because he has more dedication, and commentment than I do.

here's different spin,

give a great pilot a poor airplane and watch how quickly he retrims and resets the plane to his likeing. correctly recognizing how to correct an airplane set up is just as much a part of the learning curve as flying the manuvers, and also takes time and bunches of practice.

the best learning experience I had a couple of years ago was letting a TOC flyer fly my airplane and listen to his suggestions on how to improve the set up. a plane that I was sure would never do particular manuvers was transformed almost by magic. :sunsmiley he certainly did things with it I didnt think were possible to my plane.

as stated by others, there is just no substitute for practice, practice, practice.

cheers

Hubb

in fuel. Have you ever been to a big event where a top guy crashes his plane, borrows one from another guy, and fly's a killer routine? Seen it. These guys go to these events weeks (days) in advance to do nothing but practice. I don't think it takes a top of the line plane, just a good plane set up correctly and practice. Look at the guys flying the Boxer's in pattern. These are not high dollar machines.

There was a picture floating around a while back of a young man buying a plane from Quiqui (Eli???????). Anyway, in one of the pictures you could see boxes, after boxes, after boxes of fuel. What does this tell you about Quiqui? I've seen him fly at several events. I bet you he doesn't use a full tank of fuel in his Excellence for all the shows he fly's that day.....so he must be doing a lot of flying somewhere.......

Pug

BTW Pugsley I didnt even read your reply until after I posted the picture. I think were definitely on the same page on this one.

I pretty much agree with what has been said but also I feel the plane is a factor at the top level. Into this comes how the plane is setup and the ability of the pilot. If two pilots had equal ability and one was flying a 2m top of the line airframe while the other was flying a 60 sized sport plane then the 2m would surely win the competition. I think the skill comes into play when a more highly skilled pilot flys the smaller 60 sized plane and beats the top of the line plane, has the pilot of the 60 sized plane needed to practice more? I think so. Surely the better plane has an advantage and skill and practice cannot be the only thing when planes are so different. Because 35% and 40% aircraft fly pretty much the same An extreme example shows this better: Why doesn't a TOC pilot fly a 60 sized extra at the TOC?? Because bigger flies better, maneuvers are easier and the maneuvers are slower.... So this means a bigger plane gives an advantage but for the average Jo Bloggs my opinion is that a specialized better flying well setup plane will give an advantage if flying against lesser planes.... From this you can give other things which will help, top of the line servos such as digital which are more precise, more reliable motors, eg (efi) and new composite light weight airframes which give a lower wing loading and fly better. This has got to affect the result's somewhat.

Ok.. but the question posed was.. Given the EXACT SAME SETUP.. would the pilots winning today still win? The answer is.. a resounding YES.

Equipment matters, setup matters, practice matters, skill matters. All of it.. When you get to the top level of ANY competition all factors must be there. Equipment, preparation, skill, practice. You can't be at the top lacking any facet of the equation.

As a reference.. I flew a 35% Cap232 in the 1998 and 1999 Masters, finishing 8th and 9th respectively. These in fact were borrowed aircraft both times. Had these been my airplanes, I could have certainly flown better as I could have practiced more.

Oh.. and FYI.. 35% and 40% airplanes DO NOT fly the same. The 35% is good for sure.. and really is where our models start to fly really well, but the 40% airplanes do in fact fly much better IMO.

Doug Cronkhite
Team JR

But Chip Hyde, just to prove afew points, just won the first superbowl of freestyle RC, XFC. He just happens to be one of the top pilots in the world, and he did it with a borrowed (35%) aircraft.This will atest to the fact that a great pilot can make all the difference. I used to race pro. motocross and I can tell you that the guys that realy hauled but could smoke most guys on bikes with much less power. We all knew there were some small suttle differences between the top motorcycle producers but they were basicly the same. Even if a top rider got picked up by a different sponsored bike he still was in the top of the pack because of his skills more than the small difference in bikes.