Hey, guys!

Don't know how many in here are interested in occasional competition... There are relaxed, unofficial events: Old Time Stunt and Classic Stunt - that allow us to fly the models we remember from our younger days, in a "sorta competitive" environment. ...Where fraternizing with old and new buddies is more important than who scores highest...

Old Time Stunt is for models known (kitted, published or provably from the era) before January 1, 1953. Two classes: spark ignition and glow, plus a small acknowledgment for diesel. Flying rules are those of the AMA 1951-52 Precision Aerobatics rulebook. Safety requirements are today's, of course.

Classic Stunt is for models "known" (as above) before January 1, 1970. Modern flight rules (and Safety Requirements, of course.)

As far as AMA is concerned, these are "Unofficial" events - and may it ever be that way!

But, look, even in the later - Classic Stunt - event, the "newest" models eligible are about 39 years old! Several guys taking up CL for the first time now may be a bit interested in CLPA (CL Precision Aerobatics). It adds a set of standards to work toward, instead of just hanging on while the model flies laps. And at a contest, you need to be prepared to get on your circle when called, start and fly according to the event standards, land and get off the circle promptly for the next guy. Your time between flights becomes a FANTASTIC learning experience!

Control-line fliers MUST depend on each other, for launching and retrieving at least. This goes further. There are few to no secrets among us. There is a great amount of sharing experience from those who have experience to those who need to hear about it. And, because they must be trustworthy enough to launch for us, they are good guys. That places a burden on us to deserve their trust, if only in launching/recovering their models... It IS a brotherhood - or to include the ladies: a "siblinghood?" - with a lot of positives to it.

N E Hoo - subject of this post is a new idea being discussed around the USA CLPA enthusiasts - "Super-70s CLPA" seems to be a useful name...

The Classic Stunt era ends with the Times Square ball dropping to announce 1970. The decade between January 1, 1970 and midnight December 31, 1979 saw a lot of great - legendary! - CL stunt models appear. More of us remember the 1970's than the 1960's. Perhaps there'd be more interest in a casual, friendly event - in the spirit of Old Time and Classic - for the decade of the 1970's?

For those who have enjoyed OTS or Classic "competition," or who would like to try it, do you think adding a Super-70's idea has value? As an AMA CD, I am concerned that offering too many events at a contest means problems finding enough judges, scorekeepers, scoresheet runners, circle time, etc., up to and including enough daylight to git 'er done...

A popular event MUST be considered, of course. A new idea that hasn't proven itself yet? Hmmm... IF the new idea grows widespread support over the coming flying season, that argues strongly for me (as CD) to include it in the Fall Tucson AA (all-CL) meet at Tucson, AZ. Because it is a new, and so far unproven, idea my fellow Cholla Choppers (and I, of course) are thinking to offer it (if at all) this way:

Classic and Super-70's fly simultaneously on the same circle, before the same judges. (The scoreboards will be posted by which event a flier entered.) Fliers will have to declare entry into EITHER Classic OR S-70, NOT both. Models from earlier eras than Jan 1, 1970 to Dec 31, 1979 will not be allowed in S-70. Classic deserves to be preserved as it is now. Support for S-70 faces this severe test - is it more important to fly the more modern designs than the Classic era designs?

(Practical consideration: we usually have a good entry in Classic at this contest. Several local club members, and regular out-of-town fliers, have published, etc., eligible designs for Classic and for S-70. The practical side: we wouldn't need to slot in another event/circle/judges problem by adding S-70, this time. We can estimate from the support for S-70 how important it would be to offer it as a separate event in subsequent contests.)

Anyone with opinions on this. PLEASE let me know. There are regional and national websites, and publications, for CLPA matters. They may be too subject to organized support or opposition to such an idea as S-70. Personally, I think it has great promise. (That's just me.) As the lady who ran so many VSCs (quoting from another site) suggested, we'll never know the merit of an idea until someone tries it.

I'm game, if there is reason to be.

Is there?

Mr. Lou:

You asked for opinions. I have one however as one that gave up CL in the very early '70s for RC, but is now becoming more and more interested in returning to such, my opinion may not be worth much. My opinion is of short description:
GREAT, FANTASTIC, and all associated words of same meaning.

While you are most likely very familiar with this: http://stunthanger.com/smf/index.php?topic=12144.0 I will show it here just so other interested CLers may wish to investigate the topic. This is a position that somewhat parallels your idea, yet different in scope.

Of course, there is a strong wave of PAMPA that have no desire to see any changes to anything that PAMPA has going. Not to mean to be negative, but the individuals that now make kits for classic events will most likely not support your position, however rank and file modelers probably will.

While I have an Old Timer about ready to get tested with a Super Cyke, ignition, I also have some classic kits. I do not have much in photos of my models from the 50s thru 1970s, however the kit models I built in those days were too far modified to qualify for Classic.

One gripe I do have about current Classic and even Old Time Stunt is that there is much definition for the model, yet modern CL Stunt Engines are allowed. If it's OT or Classic, IMO the engines should be NO 4-Strokes, NO tuned pipes, and all props should at least be WOOD.

So there is my opinion about your plan and other opinions that you never asked for. BEST of LUCK for your plan and please keep the information coming.

Thank YOU!

Great idea! I would be interested in that for sure.

Hey Hoss,

I agree with the rolling date, always did. I have belonged to PAMPA since 1982, also. When Nostalgia class was started, the rolling date was a feature. Later, it became Classic Stunt and the fixed date was made. I didn't like it but there were a lot of models I liked including my fathers designs.

You have a lot of preconceived notions about what Classic Stunt is, especially for a CD. There are rules for Classic, they are on the PAMPA website and can be downloaded. PAMPA is a good SIG and the people that make it up are those responsible for it's success. Many are the guys you probably align yourself with (you come off as anti-PAMPA) and others aren't, but live and let live.

Point being is that on Stunthangar you say your designs are modified Thunderbirds and Noblers of the Classic era and are illegal. You also assert that there is some kind of documentation requirement. Both of these assertions are incorrect. Your modified Thunderbirds and Noblers are as legitimate and legal in Classic as any other model. There is no requirement for documentation other than a picture, a letter, or just your word at VSC. I can't imagine any other CD at any other contest wanting to exclude you for not having documentation of a modded Classic anyway. the idea is inclusion. Old Time is the event you can't mod the model, not Classic.

In the Stunthangar Scale thread that you posted on and then deleted you made it clear you had issues, that you apparently still carry, about the white pants, halo effect in Stunt. Yeah, I'm the other 20,000 hour guy. Your point is well taken. It probably still happens to some extent but don't let anti-PAMPA individuals be your only beacon. It's a fair event as much as IAC Aerobatics are, or Scale Masters events for that matter. It's a subjectively judged event.

Your assertion indicating that there aren't many for Super Seventies kits available is again incorrect. Many 70's designs are still competitive and in production right now. Look around for what's available. Build your old Thunderbird and Nobler mod ships from Classic, and your Mig for Super Seventies, go to some contests and see how you like the goings on. Your models are legal, your Mig soon will be in the Super Seventies Class, and you have your touchstone and let 'er fly from there. Go for the old engines, the reason the event has no rules on engines if for inclusion of those that have no proclivity towards the old engine hobby, but hey, I've had a Fox, a Tigre 35 and 46, so I guess I'm with you (I'm gonna cheat and use a plasma piston/liner in my ST 46 for my USA-1, though).You've got nothing to lose but your preconceived notions and negativity!

I'm new to R/C, building Scale (Fun and Sport) and Pattern (SPA and BPA, I dig the old designs) so we enjoy a lot of the same stuff, I'm sure. Go in with your eyes open and look for the good.

Heres a pic of me and Dad (new Captain on the 880 at the time) at the '67 Nats with his totally legal modified Smoothie, and my present Tiporare.

Chris...


P.S. Note that Grish 3-bladed nylon prop on Dad's Smoothie, not wood!

stuntflyr, I did not post here to get into some Pixxing contest with anyone. Lou asked for thoughts. I presented some. I have been away from CL stunt for many years and I am not qualified to pass judgments, however I do have thoughts, and they are very susceptible to being changed as I keep playing with learning CL all over.
FYI I was a PAMPA when it originally started. I stayed in for a long time, around 1980. Sometime around 2000 I joined again because of the magazine, Stunt News. That lasted several years. I ordered some PAMPA stuff. Never was sent. Inquiries went unanswered. At least the check was never cashed. [8D] I wasn't really into it then anyway.

Whatever that means? As Manpower Director for the '72 NATs (Navy hosted Glenview, AMA manpower) and at the first non-Navy '73 NATs, Oshkosh, I saw some things especially with several "Elites" that caused "notions" that conceived themselves.
They are on my computer. Been there for a while.
A Nobler I flew in the 60s had a tricycle gear and better flaps. T-Bird of same time frame had a very streamlined fuse, clipped wings, fuse. tail moment was 1.35" longer and wing mounted gear.

3.0 Model Requirements: The purpose of the event is to encourage the CONSTRUCTION and flying of control line stunt models designed, published, or kitted prior to the year 1970. It is a fact that many old time stunt designs continued to compete in the event subsequent to the inception of the “modern� pattern; therefore their appearance in a Classic-Era Event would not be out of character. Any design may be entered, provided the contestant has convincing evidence of the designs compliance. Challenged contestants may show dated published plans, magazine construction article, dated photographs and/or letters of confirmation of the date of the design. Plans of un-kitted, un-published designs must be made available to the PAMPA membership.
3.1 Eligible Designs: It is expected that the contestants will comply with the spirit of the event and enter only qualifying models which as closely as possible accurately reflect the aerodynamic layout and appearance of the original model. In order to assist the judges, it is suggested that the contestants provide reasonable proof that the model presented was actually design, published, or kitted during the period of eligibility as defined in Paragraph 3.0 above. This proof could include kit plans, magazine articles and/or plans, photographs and documentation signed by the original designer. It is suggested that the judges ask the contestant if any changes have been made to the model presented.

6.0 Trimming: Trim devises, such as adjustable tip weights, leadouts, and removable landing gear (removable for transportation) which allow the entrant to adapt to the contest site and conditions are allowable. This would not allow the substitution of tricycle gear for a conventional gear, or vise versa, however such alteration of the original design would be subject to Paragraph 5.0 above.

If I am going to get slashed in "Fidelity" points why bother?
If you are speaking of my reply to Mr. Crane, I believe you have some misconceptions and perhaps Basic Reading 101 may be in need of a review. I inferred that there are strong PAMPA supporters now producing Classic kits, and they just may not care for anything that creates less sales in that established department, while also requiring those kit producers to add more to their lines of manufacture.

Now to Lou Crane, My apologies to you, Sir, that your well thought out plan for something new has to be tainted with such off-topic one-up-man-ship as in these two posts. Hopefully, you will keep up your good work.

Hoss; Oh, I see how it is.
Lou, please excuse me for trying to get this guy happy! See you at Tucson soon. I'm all for it, I have my RJ Derringer at the bench now.
Chris...

Lou,
That class sounds to me like it'd fit right into our present offerings and enhance any contest where it's offered.

Old time is for models up to '53 (OT rules)
Classic is for models up to 70 (Classic rules)
Super-70s is for models from 70s only.

No conflicts there. Although the way you describe your introductory contest, it sounds like there is a model conflict that isn't apparent from the proposed rules.

It appears to me that it'd provide an additional opportunity to flyers for more contest flights and incentive to build additional planes. And for some of us, to fly some of our existing ones that don't get out much any more. [8D]

The way I see it, the only conflict a potential entrant would have was where to stuff the extra model he now would want to take to the next contest.


What isn't clear from your post #1 is this:
If the rules of Classic and OT are as described, that flyer who just brought his model into the circle would only need to tell the judge what timespan the sucker is from. And by the rules as described, a Super-70s model isn't eligible for Classic. What did I miss?

Hoss, Chris and Rock -

I'll try to match this so it touches all of our concerns...

1.) Hoss, I remember - pleasantly - meeting you at a NATS - in the 70's? - where you did something Official in connection with one of the CL Events. You liked to 'challenge' fixed standpoints, then - which is FINE. I'm glad to see you in here lately. The only point you made that I feel uncomfortable with is your suggestion that it is that mfrs of Classic-era kits may try to suppress an idea like Super-70s. Just how much clout is there in a few guys hiring laser cutting for parts and packing boxes one by one in their basements or garages? There are only one or two "kit" makers who have a much larger operation that than. It certainly isn't enough, in most cases, to control or influence much. There is a fairly large mfr back east, what's left of an all-time hero outfit in Illinois, and a very nice effort in SoCal, all offering kits of a quality we couldn't even dream of in the 50's, or 60's. Sig Mfg is still among us with their traditionally nicely made kits, great plans and (usually) very decent wood.

***By accident more than by plan, I happen to be a plank-owner (founding member) of PAMPA. It's just that I got to the 1973 Oshkosh Nats, where it happened. You were an active modeler then, surely you remember how little membership there was in AMA in general, and CL in particular. PAMPA, MACA and NCLRA got started about then, and THEY all helped revive and sustain CL interest ever since, IMHO.

***Not everything I've seen done by, with, or against PAMPA makes total sense to me. There's still strong feeling on each side after a recent serious disagreement. That is to be regretted. There are good ideas and willing workers on both sides of any issue you care to point out - I'd prefer it if there were a bit more willingness to "meet minds" on both sides where a few are reluctant to even listen to the other. And, trust me?, it is basically only a few blinkered loudmouths who agitate the hardest of the feelings and comments. I don't consider you, Chris or myself as that pig-headed stubborn. (Hope I'm right on that .)

***Instead of staunch and long-serving PAMPA "stars" and of the "Classic Kit Mfrs" being the cause of one problem, consider the influence of the ARF and ARC mfrs. You cited, and stressed phrases from, PAMPA's Classic Event rules about building and flying models of the specific era. ARF/ARC mfrs get no benefit from that idea; their products do not encourage building. Some major mfrs offer ARFs - e.g. the first CL ARF to appear was a Nobler, from TopFlite, what's left of the original TopFlite company... These have helped people get into CL Stunt. If you prefer to build, and I, AND Chris, do too, don't you feel a sense of being somehow cheated against when someone either buys an ARF, or buys the labor of an expert, to AVOID the time, money and effort involved, then tells you you shouldn't get recognition because you DID put in the necessary work?

***anyhoo, I consider PAMPA still to be more open and supportive of stunt than any private mfrs club, and MORE OPEN to negotiating new and different ideas than anything else I've seen over the past 36 years or so PAMPA has been around. At its best, it is more democratic, in the sense of open to more ideas from more people, than other factors have shown themselves to be. THIS IS PART OF WHY I PUT THE QUESTION IN RC-UNIVERSE - there are many who look in here who are not active in other mainstream CLPA forums. I, for one, would like to hear comment not just from both extreme edges of sometimes sharply divided "sides."

2.) Chris - if you're still with me - I'm trying to keep as cool about differing opinions as I can. NOT caving to them, but -if it can be done- hearing them and going from there. Hoss is basically a good-guy, but sometimes likes to 'present' as confrontational. Glad to see you in here, and very glad to see Mr. Horrace C. in here, too. I think we need as many ideas as possible, from people who accept the basic agreement that the wishes of the majority - fairly measured - prevail. Like OTS and Classic, it took a significant while for those ideas to percolate to national acceptance. Some ideas now being insisted on in some places may, eventually, do that, too. Eventually. NOT RAHT NAOW just because someone hollers louder...

3.) Rock, if YOU are still with me...
The separation between Classes that we're looking at for our Fall contest is made when when a contestant signs up. We are about settled on the idea that one contestant won't be eligible to fly BOTH Classic and Super-70s in Tucson this Fall. Both events will be flown on the same circle, before the same judges, in the same "block" (flight order, circle usage, officials, timing) to prevent things getting out of hand with an overkill of different events run separately. Scoresheets will show which event the flier entered. The scores will be posted according to the event entered - A Classic entrant's score goes on the scoreboard for Classic; a Super-70s entrant's score on the Super-70's scoreboard.

***The restriction of Super 70s to models from within the era - January 1, 1970 to December 31, 1979 - ONLY, is largely so that we don't encourage an event that will likely kill Classic. The rolling cut-off that Classic started with, stopped making sense when larger-engined, foamie stunters became dominant. That is a hallmark of the 1970s, although there were a few pioneers in such at the end of the Classic years. For a fairer test of interest in Super 70s, it would only confuse what we're trying to establish, to allow Classic, and even OTS, models to enter a Super 70s event.

***Does that help? The reasons to limit a flier from entering both Classic and Super-70s are that we are sure to have at least one guy stuck with flying two different models, back to back with no break, or at least an entrant somewhere else on the site flying or officiating in another event when called to the Classic/S70s circle. The idea to offer Super-70s is basically to see if there is good support for it in an actual contest. It's so much easier to sit back and say, yeah, yeah, good idea. YOU go do it at your contest, and maybe, just maybe, I might support your efforts...

***So, at worst, we'll be out one extra set of awards. At least, we're offering a chance to see if there is promise in Super 70s in our part of the country. A show of strength, not necessarily a huge entry, but of decent support, can lead to Super 70s growing into an event that HAS to be offered separately. ...e.g., NOT combined with Classic.

Thanks Lou,

The event sounds great, I have waited a long time for something new to do in CLPA.

I think it'll revive a few guys interest and maybe add a few newer ones. There are a nice selection of kits available.

When I can I'll participate.

Chris...

OK, Lou, you've answered my question. Super 70 will affect the number of entries in Classic at your meet. The people who fear that Super 70 will compete with Classic are correct. If I were to show up at your contest wanting to fly both, I wouldn't be able to. Thanks for clearing that up.

You've got a clear case of confrontation and it's understandable why people would argue about that. I suppose the contest management had to keep the event list totals down in order to make the entire contest do'able by the manpower available. It is what it is. Hopefully, other contests won't have that problem and the stunt world won't have to decide which of the two events should survive at meets.

Thank you for the reply, Lou, however maybe just a few quick explanations are in order. Yes, maybe I am somewhat confrontational, but usually only when faced with inequities that seem to happen between groups of good-'ol-boys and politics between "back-scratchers." I am an out-in-the-open personality and I don't make deals in the back room.
At the '73 Oskosh Nationals, I served as Man Power Director plus being Assistant CL Director under the late Bob Vojslavek, CL Director. A protest was filed in the Carrier event, overidden by the Event Director, who ruled for his action, the contestant appealed and it was passed up to me. I voted with the contestant, the ED then appealed to CLD Bob, which decided with the ED, I appealed to NATs Director Ron Morgan, and of course RM decided with the ED and CLD. I still think the Contestant was right with the rules that were then in the "Book". However, no ill feelings resulted.
I don't think I was challenging a fixed point. Actually I was upholding something not fixed at that time. IMO, if it's not prohibited, then it's legal.

Those that speak up to the right folks at the right time have tremendous clout over the masses. Your example is a good one, as those are the folks that will speak up to the right people at the right time. They are now operating at/near their maximum capacity and would have to go big time should they decide to get into another group of airplanes. That takes more time and bigger facilities so more investment. Just like owning a business, one can hardly be static for long. Either keep up with the changes and grow or go downhill.
Just look at the modeling situation now, compared to 30 years ago. First it was "Tower" subsidized by B. Paul, knocking the LHS and most distributors. Then, comes the Tower "owner", Great "Pains" who bought out WE's import rights to OS and ST, then went after all the U.S. kit mfgers. They basically owned it all. BUT, Look at the discount stuff now from other parts of the world. The GP hat is covering many spots, but they well feel the competition.
These garage operations will feel a pain when competition changes to require changes to their current form of operation.
Brodak can afford it, but will the others????

Not only an active modeler but I opened a Hobby Shop in Mt. Prospect, IL, in 1970, because I thought I was going to get furloughed from UAL. I started big with CL, however I quickly saw the handwriting on the wall, learned to fly RC, and became another RC shop. I saw how well used RC models sold, so I began finding what I could in ARFs as well as a very strict consignment program. DuBro had some for a while and there were the Lanier, all heavy and expensive. Then Hobby Shack in LA started importing some nice ARFs. I was buying as many as they would sell me, and selling them at 10% ABOVE HS's advertised price. Couldn't keep them in stock. It wasn't long before others were searching the market.
I also started importing the Hinode Radio, 27mhz. but I could sell it for $125.00. They went out fast. Finally I got shut down because they failed to meet certain FCC standards. Good while it lasted.
I leased out the HS in '74. Bad choice, but all worked out well. The individual went beyond bankrupt in 2 years, I came back, got it going again, it got too profitable to use as a tax deduction even under the very liberal laws of the Sub-Chapter S Corp. in the pre-Regan years. I sold it out, not as a business, but to a good guy that I was helping along getting established with a shop known as Venture Hobby in Wheeling. The place there is still operating but my friend, the original owner, is retired now as he sold out the business.
So, you see Lou, I have been around this sport for a while. Even just the process of Osmosis assures that I have some information about the trades.
I ,too, hope you are right. Note early on I said, effectively, that my absense from CL for so long makes me feel not qualified to get back big-time in rules discussions, and while I presented thoughts as requested, I am willing to learn present things.

Actually NO, I do not. I like to build more than fly. I am a lousy builder and painter, but I do it any way. In this society we live in today, very few new modelers will ever be builders, as compared to the number of fliers. It's our society. When I was a kid, I came home from school, did my chores (lived in the country on 40 acres and there were animals to care for) then went out back and flew CL, or went hunting, or fishing until dark. I copied my homework from some girls on the 20 minute bus ride to school in the AM.
Kids today do not have such options. Too many parent-pushed activities, too much homework, and not enough use of their minds for personal discipline rather than "....following the crowd..." which is easy.
Without ARFs, there would be a lot fewer people interested in modeling, and the world of electrics will make even fewer "modelers" just more tinkerers for a short while.

EDITED TO ADD: While I do have a couple RC Arfs flying plus an ARF Trainer, now a rebuilt one after a kid in the Club's TAG program got passed my limitations and crashed it big time, [], I don't do many ARFs because I prefer having something I built. OTOH, I recognize what ARFs do for aeromodeling along with the changes therein due to our changing world and society, so I say let them come.
Now as a real strong PAMPA member, Lou, just who makes the rules for Control Line Precision Aerobatics? Since almost all of the Contest Boards now are recommended to be made up by members of any applicable SIG, is there a member of the CL Aerobatic Board who is NOT a member of PAMPA? IMO, although not now connected as I once was, IMO it seems that PAMPA is responsible for removing the majority of your appearance points - which separates the pilot-built from the ARFs. In addition, I see the bonus points for the 1 minute start is gone. I loved that because my engines were choke - rotate prop - feel "BUMP" - signal - one flip and running, I ran to handle, checked up is up, signaled release and in 40 seconds from signal I was airborne. Who took that away? Someone selling fancy engines that don't always start with one flip??? That is, IMO, kind of like AMA now having a Marketing Committee composed of model industry executives: Don Anderson, Eric Meyers, & Jay Graves. [sm=72_72.gif]

Whether one likes it or not admits it or not, this whole thing has gone far beyond a bunch of good guys flying toy airplanes by any means be it CL, RC, indoor or what. I received my baptism of fire with the situations that brought AMA General Rules, Sanctioned Competition, paragraph 18, 18.1.b into play ref. the 3 day rule for protests. Then a well recognized name in aeromodeling, CDing a competition where individuals were working to get on a Team, actually went into the office at midnight, along with a buddy, and they "rechecked" the scores of the CL Stunt event. The administrators of the competition were unaware of this recheck until the next morning, when I was informed by the CD that the recheck placed the CD's buddy 1 point over me in CL stunt. [:-] The CD refused my protest because I had not filed it within 1 hour of the close of that event, the day prior. HOW? It had not happened then!
Well, that was passed on up the food chain, and heart-burn came into play. The 3-day rule resulted, but I remained 2nd Place in that event. OTOH that CD never got that well-paying CD job again, as long as that annual contest remained active.

Confrontational??? Well, don't make no stink, won't be no stink! Have a happy whatever makes you happy. [sm=thumbup.gif]

Hoss,

Another welcome back!

Glad you were able to outline your participation and accomplishments for the newer guys. Right, we did meet at Oshkosh '73! As I recall, I got a good impression, and admired your clear and firm opinions as much then as now...

You mentioned campaigning a pair of somewhat modified models in the Classic or (potential) Super-70's eras. IF the basic models were known before 1/1/1970, they would go into Classic, under the idea we're working towards out here. If anyone objected to wheel pants, modified tips or cowling on a known Classic OR S-70 model, a dated snapshot or something like that should satisfy the Event Director. These are unofficial events, anyway: there is no elaborate appeals procedure. If a protest comes up, it is primarily the Event Director who makes the call. If the guy lodging the protest isn't satisfied by that, he can discuss it with the Contest Director. I'm confident he could get the same "second opinion" from the ED just by asking him again.

There aren't many protests in these unofficial events. The general spirit - of having an enjoyable time flying models we may have flown back then, or wished we had, or for the younger guys, trying the legendary models they've heard about - seems to have worked pretty well since OTS got its first national exposure in a MAN article in 1979. It extends to the Classic era, which is now getting a bit long in the tooth but very popular. Super- 70s may join in, in this basic spirit. It seems worth a try.

Hobbies are hobbies. We don't get big, fancy salaries for getting involved in them. (Usually QUITE the opposite, right?) We engage in a hobby bescause we like what's involved in it. Further, and this sometimes causes some stiff discussions, we do what we like, within the total range of what that hobby offers us. RE CLPA - some like to build, some don't. OK, where's the problem? OTS, and later Classic, and perhaps a Super-70s event, are based on some degree of tradition. If not, they'd be current, not named for a prior era...

Awarding excellence of workmanship and effort is a long-standing tradition. It may or may not be applied at a given contest - the organizers make that choice. It's not safety-related, so for a Sanctioned Contest, AMA is generally happy to allow exceptions like dropping BOM, provided that all advance publicity and advance entry forms spell it out clearly for everyone who might consider attending. ...Unless, of course, the event is listed as the Official CL Precision Aerobatics Event #322 - Age Classes, BOM required. Even there, it could be local option to drop BOM (with advanced notification)... But, with the Official Skill Class Events available, most go with them, instead.

Another thing some of us "enjoy" is proving the "provenance" of a design, and what EXACTLY the original model was. Gee, fellas, these are not Arabian stud stallions, or AKC pedigreed world champion bloodstock critters... For those of us who like to dig up the precise history, GREAT! - that adds to their enjoyment. For others, it is close enough to go with the first versions that got published or kitted. Why not? those are the ones we first learned about, in so many cases... And, if we remember one we modded, back then, and have any kind of snapshot of it, why not do that again?

And, when we do see a thoroughly researched and replicated original, it makes a subject for a potentially interesting discussion, at least. The builder gets an opportunity to share why that's important to him. When we see a beautifully crafted and finished model, again, there can be a lot learned in the "how'd you get that effect" area. And, again, some ego boost to the responsible party. All feel-nice stuff, all around, unless someone chooses to dump on it.

The models still have to fly. That is the payoff. That's why we build flying model airplanes! An overweight finish can ruin flying ability; engines, parts and accessories - from long before we knew how to do better - carry their own handicap. When all this stuff flies well, it is memorable - perhaps as much for the flier as for spectators...

Since it takes at least two, usually, to fly CL, we get to meet people we trust, and who trust us. Generally a great bunch!

Rock,

You could see a couple of guys bring one or the other.

However, at a lot of contests you find some guys flying in a PAMPA event with a Banshee, Twister, Super Chipmunk, Stiletto, Genesis, Derringer, etc that cannot enter Classic as these designs are after 1969 and these entries would be in addition to Classic, not instead of. Too many guys want to see Hunt F-105's and Macaluso F-14's than want to keep this from happening!
I think it'll be a few more, and a few less, but the argument for and against I think is more about how to do it, rather than whether to do it or not.

Thanks for the comments.

Chris...

Chris,

...good point on the "how" rather than the "whether" to do it...

At this point, the "how" is an approach to making it clear "whether" we do it again. If Super-70s shows good support, we also know that Classic has good support. The discussion turns to whether or not Classic and Super-70s should be fully separated events, without the either-or factor. Then the "how" question, again, but with the practical areas of staffing and field capacity being examined more closely.

If it IS popular, it will get the needed support! Those who want it to succeed will help make it possible. We've been doing that for a long time: Some of the guys who'd like to fly the event often do not, agreeing, instead, to serve as officials so that the event CAN be flown.