[8D]

I was at Woodland also, and it was or seemed like about a 40mph non stop wind. It is kind of like I said about a "promoters" option. If you have this beautiful scale model - and scale pilot, why not invite them if they did not qualify. On the other hand how is that fair to qualifiers. The Woodland deal was a special situation; With already poor turnouts, you would wipe out a good portion of what showed up in Hemet, and many would have qualified if they could have flown.

At some point in the last couple of days, I think there are more problems than "can be solved", but then later, I think they can. I don't have all of the answers, and I haven't come across all of the issues either.

I see the situation as this: With my deal there two phases, a change in rules as to judging etc., and there is a 'format' change as to how the flying is done. If for example, it is decided to consider the whole deal, you sit down and run some scenarios as to a "fantasy" Masters and work through what happens compared to what happens now. You would have to honest and admit there have been serious issues in the past. At the end of the actual changed contest (whatever is actually done), you objectively look at the criticism and problems and change again if it is necessary. I believe now is time to make a serious change and try to set it apart from others, then tweak the new rules.

As to the sponsorship and location, a sponsor is going to want recognition, and that means getting the word out and public to attend, see their name. Sponsorship is Advertising money, and the pay off is exposure for the Sponsor, so the meet needs to be exciting enough to attract someone other than contestants. This is what happened at Mile Square in L.A., it drew a large crowd, from inside and outside the park. In order to do this the show has to pick up the pace and be more exciting, and entertaining.

Dennis

I think that a lot of nitpicking can be avoided by making the format up as two separate competitions. Static and Flying. Do we really need an overall FLYING scale model champion who got there mainly on his static score?I have judged a regional event, and the type of flying left me cold. Five minute cross-country circuits to do a 5sec. fly by!Very boring for judges and spectators. Binoculars would have helped!Pilots who enter an aerobatic capable model and choose to do 'rate one' turns and easy 'straight and level stuff'?As a judge I would have to give 10 to a Mustang on an overshoot procedure as opposed to an 8 or 9 to a faulty slow roll by another Mustang. Very unsatisfactory.There should be NO unjudged 'passes'. All flying should be judged(if it is close enough to see?)It seems tht 90% of the flight time is spent in getting into position for the other 10% of the flying which is judged!I am not surprised that judges have been seen talking to each other while the pilot takes his model on sight seeing trip round the countryside! I guess that is why we have to have so many flight-lines operating at the same time, so that the event can be completed in the two or three days it takes to run one of these things.It is definitely NOT a Show, and would make sponsors hard to find I should think.I can understand some contestants asking fo a free style option. It needs something!

[8D]

I'm sorry...It is not my intent to insult anyone. I was merely trying to make the point that growth at the championships seems to be a concern

[8D]

Under the circumstances, I don't believe there really was a choice....which is my point. Growth(numbers) or competitors(lack of) at the Championships required that all be qualified.

Under ideal conditions, where numbers are not the driving concern, a couple of possibilities come to mind. All could have had their money refunded, apologies for the weather offered and the next qualifier and date offered. Unfortunate, but we all take that chance when we decide to go a qualifier that is not near enough to determine the weather when we wake up in our beds that morning. In my case, my model wasn't ready but had it been, and I saw the winds blowing and read the forecast for the qualifier site, I might have elected to stay at home figuring all flying would be cancelled anyway. An alternative might be that a weather-related cancellation automatically qualifies all that enter. This way, folks that see potential weather problems at the site can still plan on going and fly if the forecast is not accurate or get qualified if it is and a long drive not wasted. I have no problem with this provided it is a standard Scale Master rule applied at all qualifiers.

I would really like to see someone from the Scalemasters (in an official capacity), declare that concerns have been heard and as a result, a new approach will be implemented at next year's Championships. It only has to be a single aspect: flight judging, static judging but something new that will be tried. If this happens, then the voices have been heard. I hope so. between all three sites, this thread has been viewed by almost 3000 people. I would hope that convinces the masters officials that this topic might have some merit.

My model won't be going to Indiana (is that the next Championships site?), due to the distance, but I will plan to enter the local qualifier(s). Perhaps, I might see some fundamental changes there....that would be a good start

Apologies again for my earlier post...I have the highest regard for those who compete at this level

[8D]

Everyone, I have read with great interest the comments regarding a number of issues.
There are a number of good ideas that have been proposed and I would have to agree with these. there are ways to fix the static judging, but it is more of looking at the rules around judging, then it is about changing the intire format. 3 views have to be part of static, showing the aircraft at the same angles etc that the documentations shows is a great idea for color and markings. maybe the static score should not count as much toward the final. Thats a hard one, as this is a Scale contest. Flight, you need enough manuvuers to show skill level, you can always shorten the flight time from 12 minutes to say 10, still plenty of time if you have your ducks in row and are ready to go. If you want the flying to have more of an impact, but leave the static as half the final, very simply you can introduce a K factor into the 5 required manuvers. I will guarentee this will change the flight postions. We have done this on a trail basis with the Mid States Scale Classic and it did shuffle the flight results, the good flyers will still always work their way to the top. But simple elective manuverus will not carry the weight that a well flown figure 8 will. The 5 required manuvers are the backbone of the flight rounds. Allowing judged turn around manuvers on eaither end of the flight box will also speed things up. As for mundane manuvers, or being able to fly different manuvers, I really don't understand this statement. As to the rules, you can fly any manuver that the subject aircraft was capable of performing, you are not limited to those listed in either AMA or USSMA as long as you provide the judges with two things prior to flight. 1. That the full scale could perform such manuver and 2. a discription of the manuver. If you fly an aerobatic aircraft, you had better be doing aerobatic stuff, It's call scale flight, I don't know too many owners of aerobatic ac out there that fly aerobatics. Some need to actually reed the entire rules section in USSMA.
As for the Championship itself, A new approach here is a must in order to continue and to attract top notch competitors but asdditionly to attract a new generation of builders into the scale hobby.
I was the CD for the Championships in 04, yea I know, alot of high static scores. But the event itself attracted a tremendous amount of spectators, roughly 6000 over the 3 days of flying. It was very well put together by a club large enough to handle it and that had the finical resources to put it on. It not only was successful from an attendence standpoint, but put a sizeable amount of green in the piggy bank of three different chaitable orginizations. My point is this, in order to put on a succcessful event you have to have a club volinteer that has 1. Club with a large enough active membership to host it (60-80 members) 2. The money in the bank to take care of local expenses, which will be sizeable if you plan on putting on more than a competitor get together. 3. Suitable location, both hard service and nice grass, not a bunch of clumps in vicinity of each other. 4, local business and civic orginization wanting to participate. The pickins getting pretty thin when you look at the list above. Yes it would be nice if it were held in the same location every year, with financial support to carry it through regardless of weather, economics etc. How can you do this? NATIONAL SPONSER USSMA needs to persue a nationally regonized sponser outside the hobby such as Garmin, Sprint, Red Bull or whatever, let them put their name on it in some fashion. With corporate sponsership you add a whole new deminsion to status!!!
I ve rambled on long enough. Thanks for listing or reading
Johnny O

Chaz, Try tipping your upwind wing downward and holding your heading with the rudder. Have managed to hold a very lightly loaded bipe dead straight for 300 feet in even a 20mph dead cross wind. I got that tip from Jim Sandquist. Took me from the scores you described to 9+'s with lots of how did that happen questions. It will seem very awkward at first. As to the B25 vs WW1 judging, I have seen a huge improvement in the "education" of the flight judging in the last 5-7 years. OK, optional, I feel that there are no easy manuevers. Everything requires practice for repeatabillity. A real good rectangular aproach is not easy IMHO. As to the free style type flight, I am in absolute agreement with ChazM, it is already graded. In addition, as judges are human (maybe a stretch :-)), the way your aircraft behave s in the aledged wasted time effects there impression and thus your scores.

DJ

[8D]

I'll add my probably unwanted opinion as a dedicated (I think) scale modeler who probably won't ever compete (for a host of reasons). In my idea of the perfect scale contest, the static judging would be absolutely brutal. Rivet counting brutal. Brutal enough that the scores start spreading out more evenly over the point range. Brutal enough so the scores would probably fall on a normal bell curve. No one who didn't find themselves in the top 5 on static should have any hope of walking away with a prize with good flight scores.

In my fantasy Scale contest, the flying (and the judging of the flying) would be all about artistry. Historically accurate artistry. The flight as a whole would be "choreographed" to evoke a feeling befitting the era and the aircraft. It would be a theater piece. Maybe even allow formation and "mock combat."

Now I'll crawl back under my rock.

Research in the field of testing theory suggests that most people are unable to consistently discriminate using a 10 point scale. That is to say, results using a 10 point scale turned out to be no more reliable that results using a 5 point scale. So in reality the difference between, say, an 8 and a 9 was really just illusionary.

[8D]

Isn't it true that the POINT SPREAD at the end of static judging is what is hard to overcome in the flight scores, not the placement?
If the first place static is 99 and tenth place static is 97, then that tenth place guy (or gal) has to make up 2 points.
If first place static is 99 and SECOND place static is 95, then the second place guy has to make up 4 points.
If the flight competition was done first, the people back in the field would feel like they have a hard time to catch up. Since static competition is done first, it is the other way around.
This contest is equally about both static and flying and that shouldn't be changed. If you can't excel at both, you shouldn't be in the top rank.

Well spoken Alan!!! ChazM, yes, I am talking about a subtle slip. As to the wind shift, sure, reaction is part of the game whether a WW1, WW2, or a jet. Again, rather than the flight rules, this should be a discussion about who, what, and how competes. with out attracting newbies, in ten years there will be five of us staring at each other. The goal (I think???) is fun, fellowship, and learning to be a better modeler/flyer. As 9of9 pointed out, I had my ***** handed to me my first season. I talked to people, listened to those who did well and went home and built a new model. The next year I won twice. A bigggggggggggggggg thanks to Roy Valincort who explained a static book isn't a history of the aircraft:-)

[8D]

Chaz, to clarify things a bit.
Turn around manuvers at the end of the box are not typically judged as a seperate manuver, yes they are judged in realism of flight, but if they were judged as an elective manuver, you would certainly reduce the flight time, speeding everything up.

The K factor would make everyone really practice the required manuvers in all sorts of flying conditions. The attitude of the ac is not judged, the placement, precision, and realism are what are judged. If the ac has to crab, slip or whatever to achive the desired effect than that is what it has to do. Just like a full scale. If the CD does his job properly, the judges should all be aware that the lightly loaded ac are going to have a tuff time in crosswind conditions. No one would normally fly a full scale cub or whatever in a normal 15-20 direct cross wind. Think what the componet is on your model with 15-20. Look at the flight rounds from the last qualifier you attended or if someone as all the flight scores, which manuvers normally have the lowest scores. Fig 8, landings, and fly-bys all required. What manuvers normally have the highest scores, desending 360, 180 turn out etc. What about the mechanical option with a manuver, 5pts right out of the gate if the switch worked pretty much. With a WW1 bird you don't have alot of mechanical or different fly-bi's options. Most all competition uses K factors to level the field.

does the best builder / flyer normally win. Of course. Here is an example of how the K factor works.

TO FB FIG8 ELEC ELEC ELEC ELEC ELEC LDG RF
K2 K3 K5 K4 K2

9 8 8 8 8 7 7 8 9 9 81
18 24 40 8 8 7 7 8 36 18 175

7 8 7 9 9 9 9 9 8 9 84
14 24 35 9 9 9 9 9 32 18 168

As you can see, the pilot with the best elective scores wins the round with an 84 and the pilot that flew the required manuvers had an 81, throgh in the K and the whole thing changes. Even if he scored all 10's in the electives he would still be behind by 2 pts.

Unfortunately none of these ideas changes the look of Scale Masters, it may get a few more entries, but.
JohnnyO

Oppps, I see the scores did line up with the manuvers. looked good before I posted. Anyway if you line up the individual scores under the tabs you'll see what I mean.

Sorry about that
JohnnyO

I can't speak for the ScaleMasters event, but at Top Gun this year, the difference between first and second in Team Scale Static was just a few thousandths of a single point.

Bill, Waco Brother #1

Sounds to me like the scoring system (not the judging itself) needs to be "renumbered." This isn't Olympic swimming!

You obviously did not see the entrants.

Bill, Waco Brother #1

I'm not trying to knock either the quality of the models or the judging, but any grading scheme that operates on thousands of a point needs to be "re-scaled."

But, then again: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." And TopGun clearly aint' broke! But let's not deceive ourselves into thinking that we are really making meaningful distinctions between thousands of a point.