KidEpoxy

804-
Oooh, a Three In One.
[ul][*]the Stryker being flown[*]by an identified PPP member[*]with his card on the board <not an issue in this thread>[*]on a day when the PPP agreement was in effect
[/ul]

please refer to post 197,
in particular could you address this part:
Perhaps you are trying to say the PPP Only local rules are worded that it only pertains to flying?
OK, lets see that.
Show me that the local PPP only rule is worded that it only pertains to FLYING the models.



Identified PPP member? MA identified the group as a PPP club.
If you have some hard data to say it was an Open member... lets see it.
This of course is having us assume there is no local PPP only rules of course.

When the PPP agreement was in effect?
Again it is the classic The Pic is not what it appears, its out of context.
Great, lets hear that said by the club or the guys,
rather than imagined by internet folks that when MA syas it is a PPP club pic it really isnt.

You have several plausible theories, and you say it would be easy for you to prove any of them.
So do it.
Support your theories,
show the facts as to how the hand in the cookie jar is not taking cookies
we all agree that there are lots of ways for you to easily prove your theories.

804

My Feedback: (1)

Without contacting the Vegas Aces, you'll never know.

KidEpoxy

Not my place to prove YOUR points.
You just forwarded 3 points,
You prove them.

... or maybe retract them if you are so inclined as to not support your text....always an option.

804

My Feedback: (1)

If someone snaps a pic of me standing next to one of my female clients, not "flying" her, so to speak, just standing next to her, does my wife have grounds for divorce, based solely on that photo?

KidEpoxy

You are still proposing the local PPP restriction is applicable only to "flying".
Ok, lets see that limit in the text of the local rule.

I'm not saying that what you are claiming to exist is impossible,
sure they could have limited their PPP Only rule to just Flying.
I would love for you to finally present the facts to support your argument of 6 month now.

Perhaps you are trying to say the PPP Only local rules are worded that it only pertains to flying?
OK, lets see that.
Show me that the local PPP only rule is worded that it only pertains to FLYING the models.


MA called this a PPP club.
If you have any evidence to show otherwise, or local limits to the PPPfulness of it,
we would all love to finally get this put to bed.

804

My Feedback: (1)

Nope, Kid, not gonna do it.
I've taken time out of my working day a couple times to call Muncie to get info on debates here, which, being self-employed, actually cost me money.

I say they are innocent until proven guilty, you say they're guilty until proven innocent.

And we'll never know..., well you know the rest.

Kemosobie

Are you stating that the picture of someone holding a model(that does not meet PF 2lb 60mph) in a picture is a violation of AMA rules if the person is a PPP card holder and a member of a PF club?

Kemosobie

I'll call them. KID write the question want answered and I will call AMA monday.

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

.....enough with the "sidewalk lawyering" already, nobody is impressed with the fountain of knowledge spewing forth here about Due Process, Constitutional rights, or anything else like it.
The photo is a simple reminder of how unenforcable that the basis of the entire program is, which is the speed limit.
It is ironic that the first group PPP club photo we know of had to contain guys holding +60 mph models.
Nothing more to it than that. Draw your own conclusions.

Bob Mitchell

Amen

KidEpoxy

Hey,
if we are all just gonna say it was wrong
and that was no more than a Woopsie on MA's part
I'm cool with that.

Its one of those problems where the attempts to justify it is a bigger deal than the event its self

804

My Feedback: (1)

KidEpoxy

What the heck is that?
Does = "Yeah, I concur and endorse the above post"
or something less than us all having a little laugh at MA not noticing a verboten plane in PPP club pic?

aeajr

My Feedback: (2)

Kid,

It looks like this discussion dates back to June and the group is debating whether a member holding an F27 Stryker in the photo of a PPP only club is a violation?

I admit that I have not read every post, so I may not of caught the answer to this question. And I can't find that issue of MA. Did anyone verify that the model he is holding is, in fact, a Stryker C? The Stryker and Stryker B would have been well within the PPP rules. The Stryker C would not.

In any case, assuming this was a C, what action have you or anyone else proposed? A letter to the AMA to ask why a Stryker C would be in a PPP photo? Or perhaps a fine of some kind? Maybe revoke their charter.

I am not making light of the discussion. I think a good issue has been raised. I just don't know what action is being recommended by you, or by the group. Or is no action contemplated?

KidEpoxy

Action?
What action, besides a chuckle online at a major faux pass of PPP & MA.
Sure, it would be nice to get MA to put an explanation to clear this up,
but I am a realist and figure that wont happen.

But you have a good point for keeping the facts straight:
Is that indeed a F27C version of the Stryker.

AFAIK, the C model is yellow, and the F27B is a tan & gray cammo.
If we can get some verification of this, along with the colorscheme of the original F27,
we can confirm which model of Stryker is the yellow one in the picture.

aeajr

My Feedback: (2)

The C was came from the factoy with a tiger stripe kind of paint job.

Of course there is nothing preventing someone from doing something similar with a B, but if it is tiger striped I would assume it is a C.

KidEpoxy

[link=http://www.modelaircraft.org/insider/08_07/insider_july08.pdf]http://www.modelaircraft.org/insider/08_07/insider_july08.pdf[/link]
That July 08 Insider has the decent res picture of it... far left

aeajr

My Feedback: (2)

Yep, that looks like a stock Stryker C. Dat should be a no-no in a PPP club.

Now, how could it be made legal?

1) restrict it to 2 cell pack
2) change the prop pitch speed
3) Change motor to a lower kV.

It could happen, but I would bet it did not.

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

Maybe the PPP could establish a waiver program like the jet turbine guys have to jump through to allow flying their 60 mph planes at full throttle in a tailwind? I think the average PPP speed demon would gladly pay an additional $28 for this endorsement. [8D]

KidEpoxy

CP
So that would be
$30 PPP
-$10 No PPM
+$36 add MA
+$28 Speed Waiver?
=$84

You have forgotten that all the rights privileges & features a $56 PPP With MA has given up
is only worth $2.

... uh, assuming they actually give up those things like alt caps and speed limits

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

Well, we sure don't want to charge too much for the high speed waiver, or it could take all the steam out of this program's momentum.
Package up the whole works for $58 and throw in the DVDs, too.

aeajr

My Feedback: (2)

The whole premise behind a Park Pilot club is to make the club neighborhood friendly buy assuring the neighbors that plones will comply to the PP standard. So weivers would not be appropriate. That Stryker C does not belong there. Period. Besides, it is screaming loud.

combatpigg

My Feedback: (3)

Well then how are you going to police all the 60 mph planes that do 70-80 mph downwind passes? Have them drag anchors around?

804

My Feedback: (1)

Enough with the "sidewalk aeronautics", already. Nobody is impressed with the fountain of knowledge spewing forth about Stryker A,B, and C's, downwind passes, drag brakes, or anything else like it.

What next, discussion about ground speed, TAS, IAS, radar accuracy, density altitude?

KE said it's no more than a whoopsie on MA's part, nothing more to it than that, draw your own conclusions.
[8D]

Muroc1

Maybe it was the only plane that guy had that day? Who knows. Maybe it was the only photo of the group before it became a PPP only club. Who knows. It certainly makes for some good forum fodder, doesn't it?

Ken, since this seems to be a real thorn in your side, have you tried to contact Darrell directly to find out the story behind the picture and the Stryker in the photo?

Frank