Gentlemen,

I'd like to throw something into the mix here. . . not sure if it'll help or just curdle the cream. . .

One "fatal flaw" that I see to both SPA and CPA are that they are both "backwards looking" organizations. The obvious implication is that you will never get the organization to grow outside of the people that were a part of and remember "the good old days".

A corollary to that thinking is that you are, by the rulebook, eliminating any future innovation by restricting the designs to a certain period of time. There are a whole slew of guys flying AMA (2 Metre) pattern that are there almost solely because they love to design, build, and produce their own unique airplanes. The AMA pattern rules not only allow this, but encourage it by giving everyone an empty 2 meter / 5kg box to put whatever you want into it. In SPA and CPA, you can only put in an airplane that was built 30 years ago. . . Look at how many posts there are here on RCU that start out - "I'd love to fly this plane at an SPA event , but it has _______". (insert "retracts", "electric", "tuned pipe", "YS engine", or whatever). I believe that you could attract new blood by allowing and encouraging new designs.

I also think that CPA / BPA has many features that have the potential to attract alot of participation. First is simplicity of the maneuver schedule. Everyone says that the big dropoff in pattern participation happened when turnaround was introduced. Hmmmmmmm. . . . as one of my favorite country songs says - "Here's you Sign". I've long been an advocate of eliminating the turn-around maneuvers in the first two classes of AMA pattern. When I have tried to demonstrate pattern to a club member, their eyes glaze over when I describe that they have to string together a center, turnaround, and then another center maneuver - any one screwed up will screw up the next. Back to boring holes in the sky for that guy - pattern is hard!! It takes alot of motivation and guidance to get your flying to a point where you can go to a contest and not: 1) crash and 2) embarrass yourself. You just have to face the facts that not every flyer has that, so you can either sit up on your high pedestal and look down your nose, or you can design an event where the average Joe can come and have a good time and not feel like he is working an extra job just to participate.

Another point about the maneuver schedule. Not everyone's airplane or ability will allow them to fly the same maneuvers as everyone else when starting out. I recommend having the first class or two where guys can pick their own maneuvers from a menu, as long as the K-Factors add up to a minimum value. That way if a guy who only has a Four-Star-Forty, or even a trainer can go thru the menu and pick out a list of maneuvers he is comfortable with and PARTICIPATE. I believe that is the key, once you get guys to a contest or two then they will start walking down the flight line to meet, shake hands, and get to know the guys flying the higher classes who can then guide them to that piped .60 w/retracts. However, you also need to make it fun for a guy who wants to just go to a couple CPA/BPA contests a year, fly his 4*40 in the lower class and just watch the higher classes (read NO MANDATORYMOVE - UPS) and do that year after year after year. . .

I'm sure some guys will think I'm trying to "dumb down" pattern. . . not in the least. As I'm sure Vince (of Slap-Chop fame) will tell you, you gotta know your market. If your product is not selling, (also known as PARTICIPATION) you gotta change the product or come up with a new one. AMA 2M pattern is the Lexus brand of R/C airplanes. While the Lexus is a very fine product, you just have to realize that your market share is never going to grow past a certain number of people who can afford, or want to afford your product. I think CPA / BPA has the potential to take the F-150 market (http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com...ks/Ford_F-150/) of the R/C airplane world if the rules are properly written. . .