Rocketeer10

Each year at about this time, we start hearing more gossip than you'd believe possible. Maybe it has to do with the nearing end of the flying season, though there are still many good weeks left for serious scale flyers. The latest topic involves modelers apparently cheating at scale RC events, such as the AMA Nationals, Top Gun and at the U.S. Scale Masters, specifically when it comes to the builder-of-the-model (BOM) rule.

Really? Competitors cheating during scale competitions? I'd like to go on record and say I seriously doubt that any committed RC scale modeler would knowingly cheat in competition. Perhaps our definitions of cheating and interpretations of rules may have become confused.

To see the whole story see here: http://www.modelairplanenews.com/blo...31/rc-scale-ch eaters/

GY

cocobear

My Feedback: (2)

This is complete CR@P. The situation described is a year and a half old and nonsence. It is jealous people trying to bring down talented people because in there tiny little minds some people haven't paid there dues. If you can't beat em on the field, beat em with rumors and lies and stories they made up.

David Johnson

vpresley

My Feedback: (162)

It happens everywhere else, yes it happens at competitions. Human nature being what it is. To completely deny it is not realalistic. I am not accusing any particular person for the record, but it does happen.


Vince

ARUP

Beauty pagents!!! sheesh!

abufletcher

The MAN article itself is actually quite well written and doesn't amount to rumor-mongering. In it, the author argues that the BOM rule should be updated to a "51% rule" to take into account changes in kit manufacturing.

http://www.modelairplanenews.com/blo...cale-cheaters/

Rocketeer10

Thanks abufletcher.
it is true this is a very sensitive issue and my intent in posting the link here was to offer up the 51% solution for discussion... I think we all agree that " ill will " does drive a lot of the infighting, and I know personally modelers who have been labled "cheaters" who did not deserve this insult. But nevertheless, have stopped competiting because of it. Love to hear others comments on the topic as spelled out in the original article.
thanks
GY

Oberst

It's a good topic that abufletcher once brought up before, and I became a target and was suckered in the arguement. It's to easy to cheat and I'm afraid that what is honest to some, isn't honest to others. I'd only compete with the plane I built because I believe in Karma. Dishonesty has always got me nowhere, and usually came back to haunt me later on.

Also if I did such a dishonest thing like that, the trophey would mean nothing. And I wouldn't feel that I deserved bragging rights.


Pete

cocobear

My Feedback: (2)

Oberst, you hit the nail on the head! In the scheme of things, this stuff is so inconsiquential, I can't imagine what could drive someone to cheat. The only actual reward is the sence of well being and accomplishment for a job well done and that would not exist if achieved through cheating. As to the whole 51% thing, unfortunatly that is also a mirage. Who determines the %?

js3

My Feedback: (3)

The problem lies in the intent and interpretation of the rules. I read the article and the point was made that a person sold a framed up P61 to another, then contested the BOM rule at a later contest. Now, to me there isn't much difference in acquiring a framed up "kit" and "building" a foam and glass bird say from Yellow AC. Or to take it a step further, look at the level of completion of BVM jets.

Also mentioned in the article was the issue of laser cutting. Who cares if the parts are laser cut by a kit cutter or die crunched by a machine? Same difference to me.

Kits and technology as well as skill and ability have greatly evolved since the BOM rule was implemented. So too, the rules must evolve. I would be for exploring cautiously the 51% rule.

.02

John Redman

My Feedback: (8)

I believe the rules as written back 40 years ago may be in need of an overhaul personally. The best answer for it would be for a new rule set to come out and become the new law. Some would complain but within the first contest year all arguments would subside and things would move along. The hobby has changed dramatically for the most part. If we stay with the builder of the model rule we may only continue to drive the extinction of this segment of competition. Frank Tiano and the Top Gun program has driven the competitive scale arena for the past decade and kept it alive at a truly national level. Some would say the Nats do this as well as the Scalemasters, but all in all they rarely see the article coverage as Top Gun does. They are still very viable contest but as we try to compete in the current economic times, if you as a competitor was to only be able to attend one of these three events, which one would you elect to attend?

From that statement I think Frank continues to work the issues thart arrise every year after his event. For example when those who built models they loved (let's just say a Piper Cub or Sopwith Camel) and had a hard time competing at Top Gun with the wonderfull winds of hell, the jets would routinely dominate in the flight arena due to their higher wing loadings and tricycle landing gear. Frank adjusted the rules to try and even the bar. Reason for this is he did not want ot loose or leave anyone out. All in all his ideas worked quite well. Most of those jets had (fully built at a factory) composite structures which made framing the model quicker. Not really easier, but a bit quicker. It wasn't until the lipstick came to life that the model came to life, and in the end that is what scale modeling is all about.

As the world has continued to grow and change this past year we saw a Skymaster ARF jet perform in the Expert class. Now it was repainted, with more detail than was done at the factory and it did well. Some would probably blow a gasket but the bottom line is Frank knows what is going on here and is trying to keep the segment alive and strong. End result in my opinion is builders are going away. He allowed this to continue to keep the event strong. This could be the program for the future. If you think builders are alive and well and in large numbers take a look at what the main manufacturers are bringing into the market; they are not kits my friends!

I like the 51% rule and if it can keep the scale competitive segment alive then so be it. Times are changing and we need to keep up to ensure we stay ahead of the game. Dave Johnson spoke on here earlier and if you have ever had the opportunity to see one of his Albatros's I can say this with absolute certainty. No matter who frames that model (believe me Dave builds his own from the beginning and always will!) it is the way Dave finishes that model that will blow you away. The detail of radiator lines, corrugations in the radiator, covering, etc that makes that model what it is! Who glued in F-1 and F-2 doesn't make a darn bit of difference; it is Dave's touches that delievr the high 98+ static scores in the circle! Like I said Dave does it all and does it at a professional level most only dream of. The key is to keep the segment alive and going for another 20+ years!

Ram-bro

My Feedback: (101)

The eents nd the hobby are all based upon the modeler/hobbiest being honest . None of these rules can be proven so it comes down to heresay and accusation. If a contestant is gonna cheat he is gonna cheat. heck once I figured out the rules, I could have been considered a cheater in some events. Education and integrity are the 2 things needed that can be taught, ignorance and pride are the 2 that are fostered

abufletcher

I feel certain that no one is entering these contests with any real intent to "cheat." And without INTENT what counts as "cheating" is really just all about interpretation. The guy who "finishes" a BVM jet or "forked-tail fighter" from Yellow Aircraft ( http://www.yellowaircraft.com/props/p38.htm ) has done one kind of building and the guy who build a Mick Reeves Camel has done a different kind of building. We could argue forever about which kind of building is "harder" or which is "real building." Personally, I'm more interested in the "inside stuff" than the "outside stuff" so I have my own biases....but that's all they are my own personal biases that aren't even shared by all other WWI builders, let alone those who prefer aircraft from other eras.

I don't compete, but I sure am thankful for all the people who do...and for all the people who organize these events.

cocobear

My Feedback: (2)

I agree with John Redman regarding the old fashioned rules. The world has moved on from the world of "Expert", "Designer", scale contest. I have actually been politicing for a more run what you brung approach. Conest, whether scale, pylon, whatever, are always going to involve driven people. As such, there is always going to be the odd bad apple with the win at any cost attitude. I say, bring em onn. Do your best, compete, have fun, and get better. Yes, I am a highly competitive person and try verrry hard at anything I do, but, this is a hobby and supposed to be fun. People who feel the need to cheet to win should be pittied rather than scorned, this disease must extend to all aspects of their lives. Now a more productive thread would be one which builds on John's idea about out of date rules and what would it take to get folks out participating. I personally don't care who built what, I want to beat em all:-) BTW, Let the ARF's play with us. They still have to beat you.

DJ

Avaiojet

Learn how to build.

vpresley

My Feedback: (162)

All this the world has changed crap is rediculous. Either you can build or you cant. Good Morals, Values, and the Truth should never change with the winds of fashion. If you cant meet the standard, you dont play. Its too easy to lower the standard. But that seems to be the way we are headed these days. Oh yeah they call that progress. Old fashioned Values are out of fashion these days. It took many years to raise the standards, will only take a few to lower them again. Just stop and ponder, is that where we want to go, because its easier?

Vince

cocobear

My Feedback: (2)

I don't wish to be standing at the Nationals with two other guys.

vpresley

My Feedback: (162)

At least the 2 other guys, will have been honest and truthful and true sportsman, not the other type that we see so much of these days. Ya think?

TFF

The simple thing is the rules are there and have been there a very long time. Does not matter if you like them or not, if you are going to play.
I built one plane for contest that was totally unflyable. First 4 flights were crashes. I spent a year pinning my hopes on this plane and it was total junk. That effort of course is not seen at a contest, but if someone is trying to shortcut when others put in effort, what would you expect someone would say?
Rules can be changed, but it is not going to magically happen. People who want to fly under a different set of rules are going to have to lobby for them and show up if they get what they ask for.

ARUP

John Redman- I agree with everything you say but the builder has to be able to glue former 'one' to keel 'B' accurately before the finishing touches can be applied to generate a beauty contest winner. I would not be a fair judge because there is no way in Hades I'd ever give the nod to an arf that is refinished or a pre-assembled kit that needs assembling and painting! To me, scale contests are subjective so I don't participate in them. It's kinda like watching figure skating- I can't do it, athleticism is evident but how do you separate the winners from losers? By the subjectivity of judges! Folks will argue about documentation, etc. but it still boils down to interpretations! I'll take a good old fashioned Australian Rules rugby contest any day if I want to see a winner and loser! I do like to look at scale airplanes and only build such.

semeraro

Ilike scale competition even though it scares the heck out of me to fly in front of judges. Ienjoy going to contests. Icant say I have seen any cheating at the contests Ihave been at. I think the rules are ok. The spirit of the rules is what counts. Builder of the model is trying to ensure that your static score is deserved I think. I dont think a day will come when you can buy an arf that will static in the high 90's out of the box. Considerable work would be required to bring one up to par. At that point you have probably put in your 51 percent or whatever. If you are worried about Dave Johnson selling me his albatros and me competing with it (hey it could happen) then you limit the number of times a particular model can be used in competition like they do at top gun. If there are to be rules changes they should rather be focused on making it more fun to participate in competition so that we grow the hobby rather than make the rules so complex nobody wants to bother. In that spirit Ithink we could open up a "run what you brung"class like DJ said. Judge the class for static just like in expert and fly it by the same flight rules. The only difference would be you can fly anything. Documentation required and all, no builder of the model rule. Lets try that and see what happens. You preserve the other classes and yet open up for experimentation. It would be an interesting test of the waters.

And if you dont want to compete then go to one of the many flyins around the country like the Hoosier Dawn Patrol this weekend (shameless plug). Enjoy the hobby with your buddies and dont worry about the cheaters, if they even really exist.

Dave Semeraro

R8893

My Feedback: (20)

Dave, I believe an event that fits your description was approved with the last round of AMA rule changes. It is called Open Scale and the rules are on page SC18 of the rule book. Basically sport Scale with no builder of the model rule, ie., static judging of purchased or ARF models. I'm curious if anybody has run a contest including this event.

My comment to the scale rules board whenthis was proposed was that if they passed this set of rules, they could simplify judging by having contestants present their cancelled check as documentation and most $$$ wins.

Chuck

Avaiojet

You cannot fight these people.

There's to many non modelers out there. Including non modelers supplying product to the industry.

It's a big click and it's getting bigger.

I call them "Hobbiest come Lately"

semeraro

Hi Cuck,

Yep you are right. There already is an open class. Ihad a look at the results from the last couple of Nats and it looks like they combined fun scale and open. At least the scores are reported that way. I guess they static scored the few open competitors like fun scale, 5 pts for a picture of the plane. There always seems to be quite a few people flying fun scale. Ialso had a look at the scalemasters site. They have an open class also but there were only a few entries in open as SM. At the nats the fun scale class has had the most contestants in the years Ihave been going. Scale Masters only had about 4 guys in open. There were more team scale entries than that.

Idont know what that says about the BOMrule. The absence of it doesnt seem to stimulate competition after all. Guess Iwas wrong. Judging from the numbers I see at the Nats it appears that facing the static judge is what drives most pilots away. There is always a large turn out for fun scale that seems to support that theory. The fun scale guys do seem to be having a blast. I guess they have less of an emotional attachment to their planes and enjoy flying when they dont have the same amount of time invested as someone in expert. I dont know. Ithink fun scale has been good for the hobby. Many of the guys flying fun scale are not flying any other class. Some of the other classes do also fly something in fun scale.

scale dail

My Feedback: (8)

I feel that the builder of the model rule could use a little updating, to reflect the new construction methods. Such as many jet models that have composite components like the wings. There is still a lot more work to be done. It is a different kind of work than cutting out balsa parts. But a Skymaster jet that has the retracts doors and control surfaces all installed and glued, just needing servos and paint, might not belong in expert class. That is the only class that requres the B.O.M. rule. All other classes someone else could be the builder. There must be a class that rewards the builder, even if there are only a few that show up.

TFF

One thing I noticed is I have never noticed Open at a regular contest. Scale Masters championship, TG, and the Nats, stated above, are the only places I know of, and they are not regular contests. Seems like the class needs to be offered even if no one enters it right away. It will be soft in the beginning, but if it is not offered, then it will never catch a following. I prefer to enter BOM classes, but it is time to have both.