world models intruder
07-15-2010, 09:06 PM
#31
My Feedback: (4)
RE: world models intruder
8178...I think everybody has gotten your message, (over the years), and knows the WM Intruder isn't true to the original . After all, the thread specified WM Intruder in the title didn't it. When he said "original", he meant the original WM Intruder...no reason to be offended.
Approval of the WM version was based on the "word" of an influential SPA member at the time as being true to the original. When it finally was released and they saw it wasn't, it had already been approved, so they made a decision let it stand.
It has turned out to be very beneficial to many pilots, (and SPA) who need a quick plane to put up or practice with, and for newcomers who want to see what competition is all about. In the end, it simply isn't a "deal-breaker" to the majority of SPA competitors...it would be nice if it were totaly authentic, (for example, we certainly have nothing against the new Phoenix 7 ARFmany have been ordered by our members), but the Intruder's other advantages far outweigh its most obvious disadvantage, (that the Intruder is not "faithful" to the original). If being faithful is more important than anything else to an individual, then don't buy one, but I'd advise leaving others alone who want to try it without the constant reminders that it's not authentic.... and making them feel the airplane is second-rate.
If the fact that many SPA-legal planes have been modified some, (mostly to accomodate the 4-stroke engines instituted due to noise rules at one of the organizations' primary contest locations), and you can't stand it, then, (as you have done), don't join SPA, (or have a good time competing and fellowshipping with others). The "genie" has been out of the bottle long before many of us even joined SPA...that decision to allow mods was made long ago, and most of us follow our own dictates with a live-and-let-live attitude. Joining in and accepting conditions as they are is more important to most of us than being a purist and staying away. It's still a free country...I think.
Approval of the WM version was based on the "word" of an influential SPA member at the time as being true to the original. When it finally was released and they saw it wasn't, it had already been approved, so they made a decision let it stand.
It has turned out to be very beneficial to many pilots, (and SPA) who need a quick plane to put up or practice with, and for newcomers who want to see what competition is all about. In the end, it simply isn't a "deal-breaker" to the majority of SPA competitors...it would be nice if it were totaly authentic, (for example, we certainly have nothing against the new Phoenix 7 ARFmany have been ordered by our members), but the Intruder's other advantages far outweigh its most obvious disadvantage, (that the Intruder is not "faithful" to the original). If being faithful is more important than anything else to an individual, then don't buy one, but I'd advise leaving others alone who want to try it without the constant reminders that it's not authentic.... and making them feel the airplane is second-rate.
If the fact that many SPA-legal planes have been modified some, (mostly to accomodate the 4-stroke engines instituted due to noise rules at one of the organizations' primary contest locations), and you can't stand it, then, (as you have done), don't join SPA, (or have a good time competing and fellowshipping with others). The "genie" has been out of the bottle long before many of us even joined SPA...that decision to allow mods was made long ago, and most of us follow our own dictates with a live-and-let-live attitude. Joining in and accepting conditions as they are is more important to most of us than being a purist and staying away. It's still a free country...I think.
07-16-2010, 05:56 AM
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Foxfire Village,
NC
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: world models intruder
Sorry to disagree with your assertion that I meant "original WM Intruder". I meant original in that it was the original kit I bought and flew in the 70's. Don't recall who actually kitted it. The photos are scans from my 35 year old slides. I have not personally seen a WM Intruder and I have no opinion on how closely it represents Kirklands original design. As far as modifications to the original designs goes, I agree that many, if not most, have had some modifications. That's what we did when we built kits in the 70's too. I only have trouble calling it an Intruder, or a Dirty Birdy, or a Phoenix, etc...... when the design starts becoming unrecognizable.
ChiefK
ChiefK
07-16-2010, 06:50 AM
#33
My Feedback: (4)
RE: world models intruder
ORIGINAL: ChiefK
Sorry to disagree with your assertion that I meant ''original WM Intruder''....As far as modifications to the original designs goes, I agree that many, if not most, have had some modifications. That's what we did when we built kits in the 70's too. I only have trouble calling it an Intruder, or a Dirty Birdy, or a Phoenix, etc...... when the design starts becoming unrecognizable.
ChiefK
Sorry to disagree with your assertion that I meant ''original WM Intruder''....As far as modifications to the original designs goes, I agree that many, if not most, have had some modifications. That's what we did when we built kits in the 70's too. I only have trouble calling it an Intruder, or a Dirty Birdy, or a Phoenix, etc...... when the design starts becoming unrecognizable.
ChiefK
The point I was trying to make is that some , (particularly 8178) feel that anything other than a "faithful" reproduction of the original should be something to look down your nose at. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being a modeler who wants to build a perfect replica, (though fiberglas and foam is also not exactly true to the original either depending on how picky we get), but vintage R/C pattern is a big umbrella, and everyone should be allowed to pursue their hobby as they see fit. I personally get tired of the constant put-downs directed toward SPA, and the fact the planes are somewhat modified. Let's just let it go and "live and let live".
As you pointed out, back in the day, planes were constantly being experimented on...actually a lot more that we do in SPA. This was even more true in the late 1960s. I have a picture (taken in 1965 when all of this was happening), of a Taurus with a swept wing flown by Howard Thombs. Nobody told Howard he couldn't experiment with Ed's design. The idea that the plane must be 100% authentic to be considered acceptable nowadays is an arbitrary standard of acceptability that some are trying to impose on everyone.
When the main emphasis is place on the COMPETITION WITH vintage planes, rather than the VINTAGE PLANES themselves, then people shouldn't be made to feel their WM Intruder is second class. Actually the WM Intruder is probably BETTER suited to SPA competition than Kirkland's original.
07-16-2010, 11:22 AM
#34
My Feedback: (15)
RE: world models intruder
I agree. Late 60's, we were also taking the Hartman Zeus glass fuselage, cutting a foam or a built-up Taurus wing, sweep it, minimum diehedral, mating it to the fuse. Didn't call it anything, but still had the Taurus look. Did anyone come along and tell us that it was not a Taurus ? Never heard anyone say anytning. Whether these bird's meet certain spec's or not, the old pattern plane's were experimented with, over and over.
Look at the scale plane's. How many "unskilled eye's" scale enthusiast's can tell if an ME-109, has had certain mod's? Like Duane said, "live and let live".
Crank
Look at the scale plane's. How many "unskilled eye's" scale enthusiast's can tell if an ME-109, has had certain mod's? Like Duane said, "live and let live".
Crank
07-16-2010, 08:20 PM
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Foxfire Village,
NC
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: world models intruder
Duane,
I think the issue has a lot to do with the fact that SPA offers a list of acceptable airplanes for SPA competition. It doesn't say "modified" airplanes, it simply says this or that design based on the date it was originally conceived. I recall when I wanted to build a 60 size version of Kirkland's Mustang X. I got hammered by SPA members. I was told about the unwritten "3% rule". But, as you know, the modifications allowed for O.S.91 airplanes are nowhere near the 3% rule. I've seen photos from SPA events with airplanes that don't even resemble the stated design.
All I ask for is consistancy in application of the rules. I don't see that enlarging or shrinking the original design parameters is worse than completely changing the original design parameters. Either we allow modifications or we don't. I don't care which way SPA goes so long as it's consistent in application of the rules. To me, if it looks like a Dirty Birdy it's a Dirty Birdy. I don't really care if it's a little larger or smaller. If it doesn't look like what it's supposed to be, then it's not in the spirit of the rules, but is, in fact, an original design. If SPA wants to allow original designs or more extreme modifications, that's OK with me too. I think we just want to know what's allowed and what isn't.
ChiefK
I think the issue has a lot to do with the fact that SPA offers a list of acceptable airplanes for SPA competition. It doesn't say "modified" airplanes, it simply says this or that design based on the date it was originally conceived. I recall when I wanted to build a 60 size version of Kirkland's Mustang X. I got hammered by SPA members. I was told about the unwritten "3% rule". But, as you know, the modifications allowed for O.S.91 airplanes are nowhere near the 3% rule. I've seen photos from SPA events with airplanes that don't even resemble the stated design.
All I ask for is consistancy in application of the rules. I don't see that enlarging or shrinking the original design parameters is worse than completely changing the original design parameters. Either we allow modifications or we don't. I don't care which way SPA goes so long as it's consistent in application of the rules. To me, if it looks like a Dirty Birdy it's a Dirty Birdy. I don't really care if it's a little larger or smaller. If it doesn't look like what it's supposed to be, then it's not in the spirit of the rules, but is, in fact, an original design. If SPA wants to allow original designs or more extreme modifications, that's OK with me too. I think we just want to know what's allowed and what isn't.
ChiefK
07-16-2010, 08:55 PM
#36
RE: world models intruder
That's a really cool looking Taurus derivative. The swept wing, short nose and period paint makes it scream, "60's!".
In Classic C/L Stunt the year cut off handles all of the models allowed. If dad built a modded design or kit and you have a picture, a letter, or just show up with it and some one likes it, it's in. That way the event is very inclusive and allows for a plethora of designs to compete with rather than there being just a few that everyone flies.
C/L Old Time had a hard rule about "published, or kitted" and several very well known and desireable models were illegal. Made for hard feelings from 30 years ago which still are felt today. The majority of the contests held now allow Old Time models from the era if they were known to be built and flown before the cut off date. A much better solution, I feel.
In any case, the legal model list for SPA has two Intruders listed; Kirkland Intruder and World Models Intruder.
Chris...
In Classic C/L Stunt the year cut off handles all of the models allowed. If dad built a modded design or kit and you have a picture, a letter, or just show up with it and some one likes it, it's in. That way the event is very inclusive and allows for a plethora of designs to compete with rather than there being just a few that everyone flies.
C/L Old Time had a hard rule about "published, or kitted" and several very well known and desireable models were illegal. Made for hard feelings from 30 years ago which still are felt today. The majority of the contests held now allow Old Time models from the era if they were known to be built and flown before the cut off date. A much better solution, I feel.
In any case, the legal model list for SPA has two Intruders listed; Kirkland Intruder and World Models Intruder.
Chris...
07-17-2010, 05:43 AM
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Foxfire Village,
NC
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: world models intruder
ORIGINAL: stuntflyr
C/L Old Time had a hard rule about ''published, or kitted'' and several very well known and desireable models were illegal. Made for hard feelings from 30 years ago which still are felt today. The majority of the contests held now allow Old Time models from the era if they were known to be built and flown before the cut off date. A much better solution, I feel.
In any case, the legal model list for SPA has two Intruders listed; Kirkland Intruder and World Models Intruder.
Chris...
C/L Old Time had a hard rule about ''published, or kitted'' and several very well known and desireable models were illegal. Made for hard feelings from 30 years ago which still are felt today. The majority of the contests held now allow Old Time models from the era if they were known to be built and flown before the cut off date. A much better solution, I feel.
In any case, the legal model list for SPA has two Intruders listed; Kirkland Intruder and World Models Intruder.
Chris...
The lack of specificity in the rules is what continues to drive these conflicting opinions.
ChiefK
07-17-2010, 06:47 AM
#39
My Feedback: (15)
RE: world models intruder
Well ........................ This stuff has been hashed and re-hashed, over and over and over, again and again. In 1969, GM Chevrolet, made 89 1969 Corvette, L-88's. Currently registered in the US, are approximately 118 of them.
If someone has the exact number's, correct me. This is some high dollar stuff. The replica's still passed for matching number L-88 Corvette's. Even trained eye's could not tell the difference, or could prove the knock-off's were not original's.
I believe that if all SPA entrant's have to be pure as the plane's were in those day's, you would have to eliminate 80% of all SPA entrant's. I think the rule's maker's for SPA are doing just fine, even if they are bent a little.
What is the issue anyway ?
Crank
07-19-2010, 07:54 AM
#41
My Feedback: (4)
RE: world models intruder
As "Crank" says, this issue of mods has been hashed over and over again. The issue is raised primarily by disgruntled, (not saying you are), outsiders. To a certain expent I see your point. I can offer the best explanation I can, then it's up to you to accept it, live with it and come and fly with us, or stick to your principles and stay away.
I'm going to be honest here. SPA is not the kind of organization that likes to ENFORCE rules, because it puts a damper on the fun and comaraderie we value so highly. The rules are put out there, (BTW the 3% rule concept is very old, and everybody knows it isn't enforcable anyway...even if we wanted to), and people are expected to follow them under an informal "honor system". The "Duck Rule" is the unwritten name for a rule that we go by...the plane is supposed to "closely resemble" (from the rules), the original so that it is instantly recognizable. In all honesty, there are a couple specific examples (of SPA-approved planes) where the envelope has been pushed to the limit, but none the less have caught on within SPA that I would frankly have to call them "Geese", not ducks. Thus far the infringement has not gotten to the point where leadership has come in and "clamped down" on these planes, primarily because the other pilots haven't complained. All such "clamping" would stir up a lot of strife within the organization, and that's something we don't want. Maybe some plane will appear some day that gets enough people riled up to the point where it's time to "stir the pot"...but not yet. Change within SPA is driven by active pilot concensus...you get enough people upset about the same thing, it changes.
As for the Mustang X, scaling of a plane either up or down is universally accepted within SPA as something that shouldn't be done...period. Everyone agrees. Even if the scaling is to a point where a legal engine is used, it doesn't matter...scaling up or down is something that hasn't been tried, and if someone tries it now, and just comes out to fly, it won't be allowed. We as an organization are not going to open the door to scaling.
This may not make complete sense, or be consistent, but we are not "majoring" on rule enforcement, and it "kills" unity in the organization when controversies arise. The "scaling issue" is one controversey we don't have...yet, so we have to draw the line at opening that door.
Duane
I'm going to be honest here. SPA is not the kind of organization that likes to ENFORCE rules, because it puts a damper on the fun and comaraderie we value so highly. The rules are put out there, (BTW the 3% rule concept is very old, and everybody knows it isn't enforcable anyway...even if we wanted to), and people are expected to follow them under an informal "honor system". The "Duck Rule" is the unwritten name for a rule that we go by...the plane is supposed to "closely resemble" (from the rules), the original so that it is instantly recognizable. In all honesty, there are a couple specific examples (of SPA-approved planes) where the envelope has been pushed to the limit, but none the less have caught on within SPA that I would frankly have to call them "Geese", not ducks. Thus far the infringement has not gotten to the point where leadership has come in and "clamped down" on these planes, primarily because the other pilots haven't complained. All such "clamping" would stir up a lot of strife within the organization, and that's something we don't want. Maybe some plane will appear some day that gets enough people riled up to the point where it's time to "stir the pot"...but not yet. Change within SPA is driven by active pilot concensus...you get enough people upset about the same thing, it changes.
As for the Mustang X, scaling of a plane either up or down is universally accepted within SPA as something that shouldn't be done...period. Everyone agrees. Even if the scaling is to a point where a legal engine is used, it doesn't matter...scaling up or down is something that hasn't been tried, and if someone tries it now, and just comes out to fly, it won't be allowed. We as an organization are not going to open the door to scaling.
This may not make complete sense, or be consistent, but we are not "majoring" on rule enforcement, and it "kills" unity in the organization when controversies arise. The "scaling issue" is one controversey we don't have...yet, so we have to draw the line at opening that door.
Duane
07-19-2010, 04:50 PM
#44
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Foxfire Village,
NC
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: world models intruder
You are absolutely correct Duane. Allowing rather extreme modifications to satisfy the needs of OS .91 users but not allowing moderate scaling to allow a .40 size airplane to be powered by a .60 (or even downsizing a .60 size airplane to fly with a .40) makes no sense. I certainly appreciate all you do for SPA, but I am unable to understand the logic here. I'll leave it alone from now on because I truely believe that SPA provides a terrific outlet for those of us who grew up with pattern in the 60's and 70's, but I'd sure appreciate it if the issue could be addressed by the SPA rules committee. If a logical policy is not approved, I'll learn to live with the existing arbitrary illogical policy.
I'm actually on the side of allowing reasonable builder freedom to "customize" their projects (as we did back then). I like the concept of requiring maintenance of at least a "reasonable" (recognizable) likeness of the subject airplane. Virtually everyone makes some modifications, so why not remove the controversy and let the rule book coincide with actual practice? There'd be a lot fewer rants about this issue and we could all move on to becoming better pilots.
I'm actually on the side of allowing reasonable builder freedom to "customize" their projects (as we did back then). I like the concept of requiring maintenance of at least a "reasonable" (recognizable) likeness of the subject airplane. Virtually everyone makes some modifications, so why not remove the controversy and let the rule book coincide with actual practice? There'd be a lot fewer rants about this issue and we could all move on to becoming better pilots.
07-19-2010, 08:35 PM
#45
My Feedback: (15)
RE: world models intruder
This is gettin' too complicated, I just erased this last msg. Look at this old stuff, my tx is on the left, rest of part's comiing. I have more old stuff, let's talk about old stuff.
SPA is just about set in concrete, at least we have a SPA and now BPA organization, and we don't have to do any work, just show up, talk SPA stuff. The CD's, club's, etc., put on a lot of work, just getting these contest's sanctioned, then everything that has to be done, flyer's, judging tune-up's for club member's, etc.
What if we didn't have a SPA ? Then what ? Chief, everyone understand's where you are coming from, but why should we be splittin' hair's at our age? Just go to a SPA meet, fly some round's, and enjoy it.
Here is my new boat, see the Studebaker influence? Does anyone know the guy in the attached photo? Duane, you may know him. Also, a picture of a modified DB.
Crank
SPA is just about set in concrete, at least we have a SPA and now BPA organization, and we don't have to do any work, just show up, talk SPA stuff. The CD's, club's, etc., put on a lot of work, just getting these contest's sanctioned, then everything that has to be done, flyer's, judging tune-up's for club member's, etc.
What if we didn't have a SPA ? Then what ? Chief, everyone understand's where you are coming from, but why should we be splittin' hair's at our age? Just go to a SPA meet, fly some round's, and enjoy it.
Here is my new boat, see the Studebaker influence? Does anyone know the guy in the attached photo? Duane, you may know him. Also, a picture of a modified DB.
Crank
07-21-2010, 07:48 AM
#49
My Feedback: (4)
RE: world models intruder
ORIGINAL: ChiefK
.... but I am unable to understand the logic here. I'll leave it alone from now on because I truely believe that SPA provides a terrific outlet for those of us who grew up with pattern in the 60's and 70's, but I'd sure appreciate it if the issue could be addressed by the SPA rules committee. If a logical policy is not approved, I'll learn to live with the existing arbitrary illogical policy.
I'm actually on the side of allowing reasonable builder freedom to ''customize'' their projects (as we did back then). I like the concept of requiring maintenance of at least a ''reasonable'' (recognizable) likeness of the subject airplane. Virtually everyone makes some modifications, so why not remove the controversy and let the rule book coincide with actual practice? There'd be a lot fewer rants about this issue and we could all move on to becoming better pilots.
.... but I am unable to understand the logic here. I'll leave it alone from now on because I truely believe that SPA provides a terrific outlet for those of us who grew up with pattern in the 60's and 70's, but I'd sure appreciate it if the issue could be addressed by the SPA rules committee. If a logical policy is not approved, I'll learn to live with the existing arbitrary illogical policy.
I'm actually on the side of allowing reasonable builder freedom to ''customize'' their projects (as we did back then). I like the concept of requiring maintenance of at least a ''reasonable'' (recognizable) likeness of the subject airplane. Virtually everyone makes some modifications, so why not remove the controversy and let the rule book coincide with actual practice? There'd be a lot fewer rants about this issue and we could all move on to becoming better pilots.
The pilots tend to get riled at things that could directly affect the outcome of contests, such as supposedly "unfair" power advantages. Another hot topic right now is the selection of maneuvers for each class that happens every two years. Maneuvers will change for 2011-2012.
For an example of controversies we try to avoid, we had a big "discussion" about electrics last year that finally resulted in them being BANNED outright because of all the hubbub. We lost members, and some people were upset. We hate this when it happens, so we try to avoid stringently enforcing every little rule, and try to follow the "honor system" in the rules regarding mods, and let member concerns drive changes. Actual members who compete are not as concerned about the mods as readers on RCU threads. My best advice is to join SPA, fly with us, and see how you feel after a season.
07-21-2010, 04:31 PM
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Foxfire Village,
NC
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: world models intruder
Duane,
I am a SPA member. Tried real hard to get to Asheville for your SPA contest last weekend, but just couldn't get my plane ready in time. Planning to try for Knoxville. We'll see how it goes. A photo of my Deception attached...
ChiefK
I am a SPA member. Tried real hard to get to Asheville for your SPA contest last weekend, but just couldn't get my plane ready in time. Planning to try for Knoxville. We'll see how it goes. A photo of my Deception attached...
ChiefK