Hey guys.... after flying for several years and then taking several years off I am planning on getting back into the hobby full swing this season and compete in IMAC. I am practicing the Basic and Sportsman sequences on G3 and have 2 questions.... One is purely factual and the other an opininion question.

#1 what is the proper sequence of events to take off and begin the sequence? In other words is it take off upwind, 180 turn and begin sequence downwind or what? Is the first maneuver to be performed upwind or downwind? I am drawing a blank on what has happened at the contests I have watched and want to practice it correctly on G3 so that it will be natural when I start the real thing when I get my planes done.

#2 I have several years of experience flying and do so pretty well.... but like I mentioned havent flown in over a year and never in IMAC. Do you guys think I should fly Basic in my first contest just to get a feel for things or should I fly Sportsman if everything feels pretty good? For the time being I am practicing both sequences on G3 ... the Basic feels easy on there and the Sportsman is coming along well.

Thanks for your time!

Scott

First, the sequence can be flown in either direction. Generally, most start into the wind but it's not required. Just tell the judges which direction you will be flying. If a spin is involved in the sequence, it is much easier to do if it is started into the wind. So select the direction that puts you into the wind for the spin.

If this will be your first contest, I would suggest "Basic" if for no other reason than to see how the contests are run and still be a part without a lot of pressure. The higher up in the levels you go the more ( longer) you get to fly, the sequences are longer.

Chipper,

How are ya. I bought your Ultimate. I guess I'll be competeing with you this year as I am doing the same thing. Look forward to getting my butt stomped by you

LOL Bubba... good to hear from you ... not sure who will be stomping butt ... especially if I dont get one of these two planes in the shop done soon and ready to start practicing. I have the Carden Cap I was getting after I sold the ultimate to you and then I just recently picked up a new Comp ARF 2x2 extra. Thinkin the extra will be gettin done first since it whould be easier to complete.

Any Idea what contests you might fly this year? I think I am doing the 2 that are pretty local to me (TOC of Maryland and the Capitol Classic) and then one or two more... maybe one up your way.

Thanks for saying Hi

Scott

Comp 2x2, Yea, I was looking at those and decided to do the Kangke Cap232 with a Roto35Vi and I practice with the GP Gene Soucy Extra and AeroFly. The Extra flys well but the Cap232 is easier for me. I seem to be much smoother with it

I haven't given much thought yet as to which meets I'll be at but the 2 you are thinking about are not to far for me. The only others that are usually around here are in Reading or Allentown and that's about the same distance as going to yours.

Scott,

I would highly advise that you attend the judging clinic April 9th and 10th down at Charles County RC. It's just below PGRC and less than an hours drive for you. I say so not so that you will judge but so that you will know how to fly the manuevers so that you will get the best possible score. You will want to know what the judges are looking for.

Bubba- I would suggest that it would be good for you to do too if you can make it.

I would suggest Basic to start- there are some good flyers in Basic and Sportsman so you can be sure that the competition won't be too easy. I wouldn't get too worried about the take off and landing sequence- there's not much to it- just take off, fly a trim pass or two and enter the box from the direction of your choosing.

Will look forward to seeing you and Bubba at the contests.

Dave

PS- I don't want to hear about how you can't get that Cap ready to go...... I'm almost done with its replacement....

Ditto, the best thing one could recommend is to print off the Flying and Judging Guide, read through it and attend a seminar. It's much easier to fly a proper sequence when you know what the judges are looking for .

I'd also recommend starting in Basic. At least for one contest. Also, after you fly your first round, volunteer to scribe for an experianced judge for the next higher class. You can learn a lot about what's going on.

Welcome to Imac..............Mark

P.S. if you start out in Basic, you can use your Cap or 2x2 Extra. If you fly Sportsman, the 2x2 might not be legal.

Also, download the judging summary card. It has 99% of what you need to know on a single page. Saves LOTS of wading around the nearly 40 pages of the rulebook!!

Also, almost all CDs will allow the CA 2x2 to fly any class. At least that is the latest word from what I hear around.

Bill

Thanks guys, I'll go signup for the seminar asap

Yep, download the card and laminate it. Stick it in your radio case. You will use it a lot more than you think.


As for the 2x2, How can a CD allow it above Basic? (not doubting they do/have, I just can't see how). What full scale Extra was it modeled after that the math + 10% will give you a fuse length the same dimension as the wing? Next we'll be seeing a full blown pattern ship up there in Unlimited. Geesh.........

.......Mark

Personally, I would not. But I know that many are.

there are three things to consider:

1. whether the two by two has an advantage over other airplanes, which it doesn't.

2. what purpose is served by turning away a would be competitor.

3. there are lots and lots of airplanes that compete in imac that do not meet the scale requirements of the rules. sorry, but it's true. when i was on the rules committee i spent a lot of time researching this issue, and the findings were illuminating. which is why, btw, the 10% limit was eliminated in the prior rules cycle. the current one is pretty meaningless, and if it was imposed, an awful lot of airplanes would be disqualified. so i wouldn't make a big deal about it.

we went through this with jim oddino, the writer for rcm who flew a 2 meter giles. the result was he wrote some very nice things about us in the magazine - seemed like a pretty good trade-off.

Paul

Paul,

Does this mean that any 2m pattern plane may now compete in the different classes of IMAC? This would appear as a very slippery slope. I could easily see two years from now that every plane flown in IMAC is based off a pattern ship. Sounds like the line once drawn in the sand for acceptable models has now been erased.

Regarding the scale rule, at least the CD's look for planes that LOOK like scale so no pattern planes are allowed.

As for the original question, I would suggest you to get a good caller and if possible fly with him every time you practice and compete. You will get more than only a caller, you will get some "relation" and that helps a lot.

I don't know how good you are, but I thought I was good when I started and found myself in basic the whole season. Please don't think basic is a waste of time. It is only if you are way ahead of the competitors.

I have been refused qualification for an IMAC event in California with the FUNTANA 140S. This plane is as close to a KATANA from a scale standpoint as the EXTRA 2x2 is to an Extra..... And I can even have a instument panel and a clear canopy!

http://www.aero-model.com/ProductDet...?productID=428

Just curious. What contest and when did this happen?? What class did you try to enter??

OnTheEdge,
Isn't the 300s close to square? Outline is wrong but if I remember right (been a few yrs since we scaled it) a it has a shorter wing compared to the other extras

I see it has been a while. Thanks for the info OnTheEdge

Hey v-snap, No, not from the specs that I have found. See below link for 300s specs:

http://www.pattywagstaff.com/planespecs.html

IMAC has never taken serioulsy any fidelity to scale requirement, the rule has been applied as more of a spirit than letter - if it looks scale it is, if it doesn't, it isn't. Pilots don't have documentation, and CDs are not trained on how to evaluate scale. If someone is turned away, it is becaues the CD, or someone in the background, feels threatened that an unsuitable airplane marks the decline of IMAC. IMAC is not about to be overrun by pattern planes, but I fail to see anything gained by turning away a would be competitor.

pk

Here in lies the problem. "Looks" is quite subjective/qualitative, 10% +/- of known number is objective/quantitative. While scale outline still must be a factor, there is no gray area when it comes to the 10% rule.

Also, it's not about turning away a competitor. Sorry but we're not even sure how you could come up with that one. Every contest I've been to has a contest director that works his/her butt off for MONTHS to get folks to show up and make the contest successful, enjoyable and memorable. Turning away a competitor for the sake of turning someone away doesn't even register in their minds. If they have to regretably do it, it would be for reasons spelled out in the rules. As a matter of fact, most of the CD's that I know would, at that point, offer up their own plane for that person to compete with.

Just out of curiosity Paul, if you were a contest director and someone showed up with a plane that metered @ 105 db at a field where sound is an issue and such was made clear up front, would you turn a would be competitor away?

.........Mark

mark:

you are right, there is no gray area, the problem is that it is ignored, so regardless how precise the language is, the result is meaningless. Keep in mind that IMAC went three years without a scale percentage and IMAC then and IMAC now are the same - with or without a percentage, nothing changes. But spend some time measuring fuselage cross sections and talking to the mfrs about how scale is determined, and you will find out pretty fast that there are plenty of airplanes that don't meet the requirements of the rule. As I said earlier, this is not a new issue. It was beat to death years ago when a scale inspired Giles and Extra were in the pattern community, and the IMAC rules committee spent considerable time trying to find a way to make damn sure that these airplanes couldn't compete. I think at the time, there had been two people who had been turned away because the airplanes weren't "scale". But let's talk about the present - do you think that CDs take the time to check scale fidelity? No. They work under the assumption that as long as it looks scale it is. this has nothing to do with the efforts of CDs - which I know a little about - this is purely a rules issue, in the same camp as the box excursion downgrades - they are all but meaningless.

Paul,

The 10% scale rule and box excursion rule I would think are simply not strictly enforced as opposed to being ignored. I personally like having the rules there to try and keep IMAC within the SPIRIT of its intended purpose. Without the rules, there would be no stopping someone bringing a 40% pattern ship (extreme example) and competing in unlimited. If we remove the 10% scale rule, it would then seem appropriate to remove the !QUOT!scale!QUOT! from scale aerobatics.

Hi Paul,
I don't think it's the fact that they don't take the time to measure every plane (ignore the rule so to speak) but rather the fact that mostly all of the planes that show up are quite popular kits/arfs. In other words, they don't need to do this as these planes already have a track record of being flown in other contests over time. You know as well as the rest of us that if a manufacturer releases specs of a new plane and those specs fall outside of the rules, there would be quite a bit of talk and discussion on that plane long before the first kits go into production. If someone shows up with a 2x2 plane, then I think the CD will spend some time with a ruler and the rule book.

I'd imagine this is what occured with mithrandir and his Funtana (2x2 measurments). It would appear that this was also the case you refered to with the Giles and Extra from the pattern community. Let's face it, a full blown pattern ship will fly better than a scale model of a full size aerobat. I agree with those from Imac that spent the time to see that these planes were or were not within the Imac rules.

Is the procedure of scale rules enforced at each and every contest perfect? No. But I think they have the ability to reasonbly dq something that is far outside the rules. If it's not far outside the rules, then I'd imagine the CD would allow the plane to fly. I know I would.

........Mark

P.S. As a suggestion, perhaps we should take this to a new thread if we want to continue our discussions, we have really taken Scott's original question way off topic. Sorry bout that Scott[].

<<they don't need to do this as these planes already have a track record of being flown in other contests over time. You know as well as the rest of us that if a manufacturer releases specs of a new plane and those specs fall outside of the rules>>

mark, what i know is that i spent considerable researching this topic several years ago and what i found was that several airplanes were not legal under the rules, and that several mfrs ignored the imac scale requirements. nothing has changed. so, no, i don't know "as well as the rest of us".

as for noise, since i am unaware of any relationship between db level and field retention, i don't understand the question.

PK

Mark,

I just took a look at the 2X2 Extra on the Comp ARF website and I have to say that, based on my current understanding of the rules, I would have a very difficult time telling someone they couldn't fly that plane in an IMAC contest. Read that to say that, if you come to the CAPI with this plane we'll let you fly it in the contest.

It looks very much like my 3 meter CA and just as scale to me as many other planes that have flown in IMAC contests for many years.

Dave