Author Topic: Nats Results? (Read 4608 times)

Andre Ming · « **on:** July 25, 2016, 04:40:04 AM »

Inquiring minds want to know:

Who won what? Who all was there? Which combat event was best attended, least attended?

Come on... if you were there fess up!

Thanks!

Brad LaPointe · « **Reply #1 on:** July 25, 2016, 06:13:07 AM »

Andre ,

I believe that the daily write ups are still on the AMA site . Lots of good pictures and results . These were well done . All I remember is a Moldavian won F2D . Too old to remember the rest and getting too burned out to make contests (this year) .

Brad

Bob Mears · « **Reply #2 on:** July 25, 2016, 07:33:21 AM »

http://www.modelaircraft.org/events/nats/natsnews.aspx

Dave Edwards · « **Reply #3 on:** July 25, 2016, 04:45:59 PM »

F2D AMA NATS 2016 final standings
27 entries, triple elim
1. Igor (undefeated!)
2. Vitaly
3. Alex P.
4. Mike W.
5. Greg W.

AMA NATS 1/2A Combat
12 entries
1. Chuck Rudner
2. Greg Hill
3. Brian Stas
4. Rod Christie

AMA NATS Speed Limit Combat
20 Entries (a Nats record)
1. Bill Maywald
2. Chuck Rudner
3. Ed Bryzs
4. Greg Hill

F2D Fast - 15 entries, rain delayed the start this morning so we shifted to single elimination
1. Neil Simpson
2. Jim Ehlen
3. Brian Stas
4. Bill Maywald

Big Block Fast Combat
12 Entries
1. Ron Columbo (3rd year in a row!)
2. Don Jensen
3. Chuck Rudner
4. Jeff Hanauer

Andre Ming · « **Reply #4 on:** July 25, 2016, 04:59:10 PM »

Thanks all for your input and help!

Wow... set an entry record in Speed Limit Combat, eh? Looks like the other events also had creditable showings.

Are we seeing a resurgence of combat?

Andre

Bob Mears · « **Reply #5 on:** July 26, 2016, 07:53:26 AM »

Yes we are. It is mostly due to MACA input on Running the events and having the team trials at the Muncie site. This is my opinion anyway. Dave is running great, clean, predictable, and professional events. Lots of this is done with the help of MACA officers and members, and MACA funding. And due to better participation, AMA has also input for a better event. We now have Concrete pilot circles, a permanent combat location, and some talk about a road to the combat site. None of this happens without our SIG (MACA) and the MACA Members making it happen. Dont think your MACA dues are wasted. Your seeing the results at the NATS!

Dave Edwards · « **Reply #6 on:** July 26, 2016, 06:09:13 PM »

About 8 years or so ago, the NATS was hardly attended with only a handful of entrants then Chris Gay took the initiative to revive the NATS and now we are reaping the benefits with good turnout and representation from across the US (and some international fliers). Next year is a TT year and we are proposing to combine the NATS and the TT in Muncie in July as we have the past few cycles so we can expect even bigger turn out.

So far, word of mouth and quality of the combat has improved our numbers every year. If there are suggestions on how to improve attendance further, we will take it into consideration.

Rich Perry · « **Reply #7 on:** July 29, 2016, 10:18:58 PM »

I want to thank everyone involved with the combat Nats this year. I found the events I was involved in to have been run very smooth, and went off without a hitch. One of the best contests I have attended in my career honestly. I was very impressed.

I wanted to throw out the reason why I am involved in CL combat again after a 14 year or so absence. The first thing was I was completely disenfranchised with the FAA registration issue with radio control. Also, I have found myself having less and less in common with RC over the years. When I attended my first CL combat contest in KC with the Minors last fall, it just felt like I had come back home. I could talk about engines, and aircraft design again.

Model aviation for me really centers around competition, aircraft design, and camaraderie. I have realized that CL combat is place that encompasses all of this.

It feels great to be home!!

Rich Perry · « **Reply #8 on:** July 29, 2016, 10:23:35 PM »

One more thing, I feel that event 329 (Slow Combat) should have the rules changed to a standard speed limit event. The dust has settled on this class at this point now, and this seems to be the simplest path to making it a rule book event. Just kick all of the silly fuel system and airplane dimension requirements out. Then we can just run event 329 everywhere. Not sure what the process is to get this through MACA and then the AMA, but I feel it is time to solidify this event.

Ken Burdick · « **Reply #9 on:** July 30, 2016, 09:06:27 AM »

it's been said before and most would agree with that suggestion.

The Seattle guys use 80 mph for a speed limit, require shut off's for safety and have a very effective and simple set of rules. Gene Pape would be the guy to contact.

K

Rich Perry · « **Reply #10 on:** July 30, 2016, 11:42:14 AM »

I think keeping the speed at 75 so shut offs can be avoided would be the way to go. Keep it as simple as possible. 75 is what seems to be flown everywhere else as well, and is a good speed. I can still keep my planes in the air at the 5200' altitude I fly at here.

Andre Ming · « **Reply #11 on:** July 30, 2016, 04:46:59 PM »

Completely agree about avoiding shut-offs: 75 MPH.

Dave Edwards · « **Reply #12 on:** July 31, 2016, 05:49:09 PM »

In the end, I am not sure that consolidating the rules for speed limit wouldn't have much effect as it seems everyone is happy flying their own local rules for legal equipment and scoring. At the NATS, for instance we fly rulebook speed limit 329 with a rules exception for any plane/fuel/engine. Here in the midatlantic we fly similar equipment but with a cumulative points system rather than an elimination bracket. Rules seem flexible enough to to work however you want to run your competition.

Rich Perry · « **Reply #13 on:** August 01, 2016, 05:52:58 PM »

I guess my thoughts were to have the rule book event (329), more closely reflect what is actually being flown. I am not fully up to speed on the rules for scoring of 329, but running it cumulative points rounds or elimination works well either way. And as long as this is advertised in advance of the event.

For clarity, I did not put this idea forward to gain more entries at the Nats necessarily, as I do not think this would do that, but I think it would make it easier to advertise the event. I was actually surprised to see that no changes had been made to event 329 after all of these years, upon my return to CL combat last year. I may be missing something, but it seems odd to retain an event, that nobody flies.

Bob Mears · « **Reply #14 on:** August 02, 2016, 08:10:13 AM »

Its been a long time since I've done anything with rules. I think rule changes come up in cycles. I'll look into it and change the slow rules to what we used at the nats. Change nothing except any aircraft and a 75mph speed limit. I think thats a great idea Rich. The old slow combat is dead and speed limit is growing. No sense in re-inventing the wheel, just modify what we have. Then folks will know what to expect and have it as an official event.

john e. holliday · « **Reply #15 on:** August 02, 2016, 10:30:32 AM »

I think proposals can be made now. The rule cycles in two year segments. It in the rule book and also on the AMA site. The last combat I flew was at Argosy Casino field against the late and great Marvin Denny in a speed limit event. Needless to say when we flew it became like the early days and ended in a mid air and no points. We forgot about the cuts and bonus for a clean match which meant no broken planes. Will do it again as soon as the knees let me.

Rich Perry · « **Reply #16 on:** August 02, 2016, 12:15:33 PM »

Bob, be sure to allow pressurized fuel systems. Wouldn't it be funny to have 329 go from being the least flown event, to one of the most!

Dave Edwards · « **Reply #17 on:** August 02, 2016, 06:55:01 PM »

Thanks guys - a few particulars to remember if you rewrite the rules - 1) engines up to 0.40 should be ok, 2) pull test and line sizes need to cover 0.15 - 0.40 engines 3) speed limit of 75mph does not need a shut-off but anything higher it is required 4) 329 scoring is ok as is 5) at the NATS we make pilots start their own engines and we dont use the 2nd stop watch to make it easy on the judges but I dont think this needs to be the official rules 6) suggest wording that speed limit can be measured before combat begins (6.85 sec per two laps) or at any time during the match, if fast, pilot must land and not gain any more points until speed is fixed.

Bob Mears · « **Reply #18 on:** August 03, 2016, 08:09:39 AM »

To be compliant with AMA rules, if the airplane goes over 75mph, it would need a shutoff. 6.85 with a streamer will result in over 75 mph without a streamer. The number used at other events is 7.3 sec. in two laps with a full streamer. I think this what should be proposed for an official speed. I'll leave the line pull as is, and leave the required .018 lines no matter what engine is used. No limits on airplanes except speed. Anything else?

Bob Mears · « **Reply #19 on:** August 03, 2016, 08:11:09 AM »

And no shutoff required.

Bob Mears · « **Reply #20 on:** August 03, 2016, 08:16:52 AM »

I am going to start a new conversation named slow combat rules and get out of this nats results.