New event proposal.

[Glenn (Gravitywell) Reach]

OK....it seems that the old, tried and true stunt venue has been around as long as Methuselah and perhaps its time for a wee bit of a shake-up.  Now I know that there will be many out there that will have none of this new fangled change thingy and will be quite vocal in their disapproval, but life must move forward or we would all be doing the old stunt pattern still.

So how about this:  SPEED STUNT.  Its the same pattern, done the same way with one small change....its also heavily scored on quickness of doing it.  The pattern is still judged on completeness, roundness, perfect pull-outs, etc., but then an added attraction of doing it FAST!  Perhaps even dropping down to one lap between maneuvers to speed it up even more.

Now I know that this will change a lot of things, but it may break us out of this mold we have driven ourselves into for the last fifty years.  Discussion?

Try to be gentle with me! 

[Mark Scarborough]

this has actually been proposed,
the reason this event has lasted 50 plus years is because it has not changed,

[Tim Wescott]

It might be cool for a goofy fun-fly event -- that I would be happy to fly in, even.  But I don't see it gaining much traction otherwise.

[Russell Shaffer]

Flite Streak with an FP40 should be about right.  Let's do it.  There should probably be a speed cap, though, to keep it slow enough to be judged.  Maybe about 70 MPH?

[Tim Wescott]

Flite Streak with an FP40 should be about right.  Let's do it.  There should probably be a speed cap, though, to keep it slow enough to be judged.  Maybe about 70 MPH?

Russel's speed limit makes me think that maybe the event should be structured so that a combat guy can take a slow combat plane, slap a wheel and a tailskid on it, and fly.  Or maybe even allow for hand launch (with automatic loss of takeoff points, or maybe give a lap for "takeoff" and then up to 20 points for level flight).

• Russel's speed limit -- but make it 80MPH
• Mandated line length -- 60', +/- 6"
• Allow tank anywhere (so you can slap an extra tank on your slow combat beast
• A "speed judge" gets the time from wheels off the ground to wheels on the ground.  Speed bonus is one point per second less than 360 (six minutes).
• Speed bonus only applies if pattern points awarded
• Line size & pull test is appropriate for something going 80MPH -- slow combat again?
• Appearance points?  I lean toward skill-class stunt rules -- get 'em if you built it

[Brad LaPointe]

A variation of this was tried in Toronto . The Jim Walker event combined stunt ,speed ,and scale . It isn't run anymore. The rules may still be on the MAAC site or the www.balsabeavers.com site .

I think the judges were less than impressed with the lack of time between manoeuvres. A bit of a filler event imho .

Brad

[Howard Rush]

If you want to fly fast and do tricks, I recommend the combat event.  It's more fun anyhow.

[mike londke]

If you want to fly fast and do tricks, I recommend the combat event.  It's more fun anyhow.

  Yep.

[Glenn (Gravitywell) Reach]

this has actually been proposed,
the reason this event has lasted 50 plus years is because it has not changed,

Actually the modern stunt event is NOT lasting and within a few more short years should be almost dead.  Its very unfortunate, but I believe very true.  Also change is something that must happen for anything to move forward.  Our flying fraternity is being lost at an alarming rate and who are replacing them?  Perhaps something faster and perhaps more fun would generate more interest?

I thank the few that were actually thoughtful and provided some excellent advice and criticism.  It is my opinion that if you limit the speed, you detract from the event.  But the flier must take into consideration that the judges must be able to score the flight.  If they go too fast....they will loose points because the judges won't be able to follow.

And I believe your right about the laps.....the judges would need the two laps to get ready to judge the next maneuver.

[bob whitney]

  how about adding another lap between manuvers

[Dan McEntee]

Actually the modern stunt event is NOT lasting and within a few more short years should be almost dead.  Its very unfortunate, but I believe very true.  Also change is something that must happen for anything to move forward.  Our flying fraternity is being lost at an alarming rate and who are replacing them?  Perhaps something faster and perhaps more fun would generate more interest?

    May I ask on what you base these comments on? Can I ask you what was the last stunt model you have built, when was it flown and when was the last contest that you competed in?
    The event is going through some peaks and valleys like it always has. We have been riding the wave of popularity and participation for the last 25 years or so. Prior to that, people were stating, like you, that C/L was dead. The same has been said about free flight for better than 50 years and there is still activity, new blood, and competition. To sorta quote Mark Twain, "The reports of the death of C/L stunt have greatly been exaggerated!
    To this I can only add, show us the way! Organize, promote and put on the first one, then let us know the results. It's one thing to have what you think is a great idea. To make it reality is a whole 'nother matter.
   Type at you later,
    Dan McEntee
   PS to Add: I agree with the statement that the event has endured because it hasn't changed. I think the attendance at VSC, the NATS, at major regional contests, and the membership of this web site are proof that most of the participants of the event are people who CAME BACK to the event because of what it WAS! And that any new blood coming in is because of what it IS!
 

[TigreST]

Limit fuel capacity so you have to pit half way through the pattern.     Double take-off and landing points  No?

[Mike Scholtes]

Here's my entry.

[Gerald Arana]

OK....it seems that the old, tried and true stunt venue has been around as long as Methuselah and perhaps its time for a wee bit of a shake-up.  Now I know that there will be many out there that will have none of this new fangled change thingy and will be quite vocal in their disapproval, but life must move forward or we would all be doing the old stunt pattern still.

So how about this:  SPEED STUNT.  Its the same pattern, done the same way with one small change....its also heavily scored on quickness of doing it.  The pattern is still judged on completeness, roundness, perfect pull-outs, etc., but then an added attraction of doing it FAST!  Perhaps even dropping down to one lap between maneuvers to speed it up even more.

Now I know that this will change a lot of things, but it may break us out of this mold we have driven ourselves into for the last fifty years.  Discussion?

Try to be gentle with me!  

Well its like this; Phhhhhtttttttttttt! I don't like your idea and I'm not trying to be mean or vindictive, just honest. For an old phart like me who uses a cane to fly with, it's hard enough to fly the current pattern as it is now and trying to increase the speed aspect looses (loses?) me completely.

I'll be flying the current pattern until I can no longer fly anything which probably won't be more that 20-30 years, hopefully!

Jerry

[Brett Buck]

Actually the modern stunt event is NOT lasting and within a few more short years should be almost dead. 

    We have 50-60-70 people show up at the NATs every year, despite the fact that it's 2400 miles away from the most active area. Start a new event, don't break ours.

   This could all change by FAA fiat, of course. I am genuinely concerned that this year's NATs may be the last. Or at least the last that means anything before you are required to buy-and-fly, which is a worthless event not worth doing.

    Brett

[George]

With emphasis being on speed, perhaps to make it easier on the judges an up/down on whether the flyer DID the maneuver rather than how well it was performed.

George

[Dave_Trible]

As speed goes up performance accuracy goes down in a hurry.  I'd bet if anything,  a strictly semi scale stunt event with a scoring premium on fidelity to scale might create a great spectator appeal.  I personally think our main event should remain as is.  The green jacket at the Masters Golf Tournement wouldn't be worth much if the game was changed.  ( or the Super Bowl or World Series).   Did anyone say Walker Cup?

Dave

[Phil Krankowski]

Sounds like a combat exhibition event.  It would be fun to see. 

Phil

[Glenn (Gravitywell) Reach]

1.  I never really meant to change the existing precision stunt program, but rather to create a new, more fun event for those that wish to do it and hopefully gain a younger crowd that always think faster is better!
2.  I would have the speed part of the curriculum to be scored the same as the stunt portion.  The "speed" should be thought of as simply another maneuver.
3.  I have never built a high zoot precision stunt machine simply because I could never hope to be able to afford it.  I can't even afford to finish my planes with dope because of the cost, so buying premium balsa wood and a $300 dollar motors is not only a pipe dream, but not even allowed in my dreams!  As a matter of fact I couldn't even afford a used St. 51, and I've coveted one of them for many, many years.   And no I don't compete for a few reasons. 
a.  I can't afford it as mentioned earlier
b.  I live in northern Alberta which means ne available forums other than Prairie Fire once a year.
c.  And I am not competitive by nature, but I do enjoy very much helping at the contest with whatever is needed.
4.  "50-60-70 people show up at the Nats every year"  What happened to the hundreds of years past?  How many people do we have involved in our sport that are under fifty?  We are loosing our members and our brothers-of-the-circle faster than we are replacing them.  In ten to fifteen years how many will be flying?

I hope this has answered some of your questions.  Some of you have made some really good suggestions and others some really good advice.  This hasn't been a fast and furious posting, but it is interesting.  Thank you all for your input, I do hope there is some more discussion.

[Scott Richlen]

Besides speed stunt (which seems to me a lot of people already fly -  ) if we really want to be with the times instead of a bunch of old fuddy-duddies we need something even more modern.  How about FAA approved ARF stunt on a string using FPV?  Extra points for using a quadcopter and extra-extra points if you bought it at "Toys-R-Us".  Extra-extra-extra points if you can reel the lines out past 400' elevation!  Okay, what else can we add....?

[FLOYD CARTER]

Reply #30 shows me that I was correct in staying away from this whole subject.  And I'm still not going to post an opinion.

Floyd

[Glenn (Gravitywell) Reach]

Hi Floyd.  I am assuming you mean post 20 which is my post.  I was only trying to answer some questions that were raised.  I am sorry if I offended you or anyone else, that certainly was not intended.

[Greg McCoy]

As a mediocre combat duffer, a slow flying plane would make me nervous.

[Randy Cuberly]

Speed Stunt?

Why....The same guys will still win and a lot more guys will crash!

Why is that fun.  Wanna fly fast and do stunts...there is already several events for that...It's called Combat!

 

Get a good FAI Combat plane and a Fora 15 on 52 ft lines, the average "Sport Flier" will crash within 2 to 3 laps!

Randy Cuberly

[Sean McEntee]

1.  I never really meant to change the existing precision stunt program, but rather to create a new, more fun event for those that wish to do it and hopefully gain a younger crowd that always think faster is better!
2.  I would have the speed part of the curriculum to be scored the same as the stunt portion.  The "speed" should be thought of as simply another maneuver.
3.  I have never built a high zoot precision stunt machine simply because I could never hope to be able to afford it.  I can't even afford to finish my planes with dope because of the cost, so buying premium balsa wood and a $300 dollar motors is not only a pipe dream, but not even allowed in my dreams!  As a matter of fact I couldn't even afford a used St. 51, and I've coveted one of them for many, many years.   And no I don't compete for a few reasons. 
a.  I can't afford it as mentioned earlier
b.  I live in northern Alberta which means ne available forums other than Prairie Fire once a year.
c.  And I am not competitive by nature, but I do enjoy very much helping at the contest with whatever is needed.
4.  "50-60-70 people show up at the Nats every year"  What happened to the hundreds of years past?  How many people do we have involved in our sport that are under fifty?  We are loosing our members and our brothers-of-the-circle faster than we are replacing them.  In ten to fifteen years how many will be flying?

I hope this has answered some of your questions.  Some of you have made some really good suggestions and others some really good advice.  This hasn't been a fast and furious posting, but it is interesting.  Thank you all for your input, I do hope there is some more discussion.

There are a few reasons you don't really see a lot of new events popping up.  The first is that it takes ALOT of popular demand to field a new event on a more widespread scale, and are usually created in an attempt to celebrate a particular genre e.g. Profile stunt, Nos 30, Super 70s, ect.

Even wth the events that are already out there, you will almost never see every event at a given contest.  Multiple events take time, effort, club resources and manpower.  It's also ALOT of work to fly multiple events in one day.  I can tell you that, even at the tender age of 32 (!), and going to a contest that typically holds classic, OT, and profile in one day, it is ALOT of work and VERY tiring!  The other option would be to limit entry.  An example of this would be to hold classic, super 70s and N30 on one circle, in front of one set of judges, but only allow contestants to enter one of the three events.  The problem that this causes is it delutes the events.  Some folks--like me for example--enjoy the competition aspect of it and only having 3 people in an event takes a little but of the fun out of it.

What I would suggest for anyone who comes up with a new event is to try it at either a fun-fly event or a local contest.  If it gains traction, it could be the next old time stunt!

[john e. holliday]

I can remember back years ago at the old Beech field a gentleman flying the then new Skylark with Johnson Stunt Supreme.  He was actually clocked at 90+ mph with what was supposed to be a stunt engine.   His pattern looked perfect to me, but I was not a judge.   He lost points because the judges could not get the score written down fast enough.  A club member I used to ask to fly my rat racers until the Navy got him used to do patterns with VooDoos, his plane of choice.   His take off, needless to say was from hand launch.  Flat and level with no loss of altitude on launch.   Landing was one of the smoothest that would stop at his pit man.   But as someone has stated,  "Set a date with rules and try it and see how it works".  My self I'm doing good to keep up with my best stunt plane.

Now as far as declining participants.  I've heard this since day one when I started reading Model magazines back in the early 50's.   Look at all the choices a modeler has now.  To me there are too many duplicate events now.  Remember when there was only one event nationally for the following:  combat,  navy carrier, scale,  team race and stunt.   Speed has different classes depending on engine size.   Hopefully when the AMA and FAA get their brain back where it belongs, control line will be exempt from their little games even if we are using new radio for throttle and other functions.   I wonder how many free flighters has bought into the scare tactics.   Once they clamp down on radio control, we may see some coming over to control line.   

[Trostle]

4.  "50-60-70 people show up at the Nats every year"  What happened to the hundreds of years past?

 

What reports have you read over the years regarding "the hundreds of years past"?  The CLPA event at our Nats has hardly ever been more than 60 plus or minus.  And I have been looking at Nats reports since the event was started in the late 40's.  As Brett tried to explain, CLPA has remained one of the most persistent events in the control line.  One of the reasons is that our rules have remained essentially stable for the past 50 or 60 years.

Look at what has happened to racing with the multitude of "official" racing events that have come and gone over the years.

Look at what has happened to combat with the multitude of "official" combat events that have come and gone over the years.

Like has been mentioned in this thread already and like has been explained a multitude of times before, if someone has a great idea to stimulate interest or to try a new idea, work up a set of rules and run some contests to see how it works.  Who knows, there might be a spark out there that might kindle some interest.  Gee, just like some guy who used to live in the LA area thought it would be a good idea to run a vintage stunt contest.  Who would have ever thought that it would continue for 28 years and draw people from all over the world and be one of the largest all stunt contests in the country?  And it has been done with unofficial events.

Keith

[Bob Whitely]

Glen, Just one question. If, as you say, you are not competitive by nature then I don't understand your post.
Also you seem to have facts and numbers that are patently false. Your credibility is at great risk as right now
there is none.  RJ

[Glenn (Gravitywell) Reach]

Well it appears the usual dickheads have risen from the backrooms.....so this thread can now be shutdown.  Sorry it came to this.  I won't be back to the thread so no sense in leaving more vitriol here.  Thanks to those that had some fun from this, though.

[billbyles]

Well, Glen, somehow it does not surprise me that you would get mad, call those who don't agree with you "dickheads", and pick up your marbles and go home.  Buh bye.

[Brett Buck]

4.  "50-60-70 people show up at the Nats every year"  What happened to the hundreds of years past?  How many people do we have involved in our sport that are under fifty?  We are loosing our members and our brothers-of-the-circle faster than we are replacing them.  In ten to fifteen years how many will be flying?

   Hundreds?  I don't think so. The only thing different from the good old days (50s before Sputnik relegated airplanes to the category of buses) is the number of kids. That's because kids, virtually none of them and almost always second- or more generation children of fliers. Kids *do not have construction hobbies anymore* nor will they in the future. The few that do will not fly CL.

   Excluding them, the makeup and average age is about how it always has been, and in recent years the average ages of NATs competitors has held steady or decreased. Most of what passed for information about the golden years is a delusion from the passage of time.

    People have been concerned about the "junior problem" since the 30's, when the false notion that model aviation contests were about kids instead of adults (as it was then and is now) was started.

     Stunt has been *growing* over the last 20-30 years. *No* other competition category can say that, aside from the loathsome drones.

   I have no objection to "speed stunt" and the idea has been proposed dozens of times over the years, back to at least the 70's. If you want to pursue it, go right ahead, but expect to take a lot of effort and time to work it out. Don't expect everyone else to do it, and certainly don't do anything to break the current successful event.

    Brett

[Brett Buck]

Well it appears the usual dickheads have risen from the backrooms.....so this thread can now be shutdown.  Sorry it came to this.  I won't be back to the thread so no sense in leaving more vitriol here.  Thanks to those that had some fun from this, though.

    OH, I hadn't seen this. Glen, aside from your inexplicable support of the village-idiot-whose-name-shall-not-be-spoken, you haven't seemed to be "that guy". But really, this is the best you can do? 

     You think it's such a great idea, go right ahead and pursue it. You seem to think all that is needed is the idea, let the little people do the work for you. Well, sorry sport, your arm isn't broken, get out and follow through with it. I suggest you start with your fellow countrymen's Jim Walker event, which is very similar to what you propose and *already exists*.

     Brett

[Scott Richlen]

Brett: I think that you identified a concern that reaches well beyond our hobby.  It is that when kids "do not have construction hobbies anymore", they also do not learn to solve problems for themselves anymore.  The result is pretty obvious for us: those same people who do not realize that they have a capability to solve their own problems seek others to solve their problems.  Too often, they want the government, in some form, to solve their problems.  Thus, we now live in the "nanny state" with politicians competing with each other as to who can give out the most goodies.

There are people who are genuinely incapable.  However, their numbers seem to be far exceeded by those who are synthetically incapable.  The product of learning environments that nurture passivity.  Of  course, most of the folks on this web-site are those that have realized (through this very much a constructionist hobby) their own self-initiative and can solve their own problems.  And we are not all that sympathetic to those who should be solving their own problems and quite resistant to the "hey, I got a great new idea, you guys oughta make it happen."  Poor Glenn!  No wonder he didn't receive a lot of "no problem, we'll get right on that!" responses.   

[Trostle]

 Poor Glenn!  No wonder he didn't receive a lot of "no problem, we'll get right on that!" responses.   

Well, part of the problem is all of us "dickheads" (term used by Glenn Miss Manners Reach, similar to terms he has used before) could not see the light, vision, insight, and vast intuitive wisdom based on his years of experience at the highest levels of Control Line Precision Aerobatics competition, design and organization that he is so generously sharing with us.

Keith

[Warren Walker]

Boy you nailed it, as Dennis Miller has said "HELP THE HELPLESS AND F$#@ THE CLUELESS.






Brett: I think that you identified a concern that reaches well beyond our hobby.  It is that when kids "do not have construction hobbies anymore", they also do not learn to solve problems for themselves anymore.  The result is pretty obvious for us: those same people who do not realize that they have a capability to solve their own problems seek others to solve their problems.  Too often, they want the government, in some form, to solve their problems.  Thus, we now live in the "nanny state" with politicians competing with each other as to who can give out the most goodies.

There are people who are genuinely incapable.  However, their numbers seem to be far exceeded by those who are synthetically incapable.  The product of learning environments that nurture passivity.  Of  course, most of the folks on this web-site are those that have realized (through this very much a constructionist hobby) their own self-initiative and can solve their own problems.  And we are not all that sympathetic to those who should be solving their own problems and quite resistant to the "hey, I got a great new idea, you guys oughta make it happen."  Poor Glenn!  No wonder he didn't receive a lot of "no problem, we'll get right on that!" responses.   
[/quote]

[Sean McEntee]

Well, part of the problem is all of us "dickheads" (term used by Glenn Miss Manners Reach, similar to terms he has used before) could not see the light, vision, insight, and vast intuitive wisdom based on his years of experience at the highest levels of Control Line Precision Aerobatics competition, design and organization that he is so generously sharing with us.

Keith

    And in this case, someone who has admitted that they do not compete would like to see another event.

Aeromodeling is not a spectator sport. If that is what you are looking for, I believe the NASCAR race is on tomorrow...

[Mark Scarborough]

   And in this case, someone who has admitted that they do not compete would like to see another event.

Aeromodeling is not a spectator sport. If that is what you are looking for, I believe the NASCAR race is on tomorrow...

Lest anyone be mislead, the NASCAR race is on today, its a night race,, just sayin,,

 

[Brett Buck]

Brett: I think that you identified a concern that reaches well beyond our hobby.  It is that when kids "do not have construction hobbies anymore", they also do not learn to solve problems for themselves anymore. 

    I think that it's more a symptom than a cause, but yes, overall, the fact that you can get to adulthood without having done *anything* independently on your own is a serious issue.

     Brett

[Sean McEntee]

Lest anyone be mislead, the NASCAR race is on today, its a night race,, just sayin,,

 

WHAT?!?!?

**fumbles for the remote**. 

[dale gleason]

I've got no business getting in here, but, what the hey....one of the few events that has come about recently, at least in this area, District VIII, is Profile Stunt. It was once P-40, but, it languished because forty-sized engines, a restriction, didn't fit the bill.

Someone, not an individual necessarily, got the idea of removing the .40 restriction and just called it "Profile Stunt". It took off on its own merits.

Still, someone did do the groundwork, someone(s) did run contests with it. Those contests, having so many entries, flew into the dark of night. It just fit a nitch: there are lots of profiles, all sizes, arf or not don't matter, engine size, it don't matter, nothing matters, other than lots of people have them and want to fly them. Just like fly fishin' you "match the hatch".....

I think these things just happen, like the "Ringmaster Renaissance".  But, you must give it a try, which means a helluva lot of work, ala' Mike and Joanne K. You know what I'm talkin' 'bout....

dg
dg

[Mark Scarborough]

WHAT?!?!?

**fumbles for the remote**. 

yeah it started at 430 pacific time,, watching it now, well between my puppy and the 8 month old grandson giggling together,, and trying to watch the race,,
its only Kansas anyway, not like Bristol, or Martinsville,,

[Mike Keville]

" . . . a helluva lot of work, ala' Mike and JoAnn K. You know what I'm talkin' 'bout....

dg
dg

=============================================

Yuh'd better believe it, Pilgrim! 

[Brett Buck]

Brett is correct on once Sputnik went over, every one pushed for more engineers. I remember half the guys in my high school class went that route with only one becoming an engineer and a Civil Engineer at that. Only two ever got pilots licences.

      Sputnik was pretty much the end of the age of aviation overall, and  It damn near killed model aviation, which was sustained largely by CL - since RC did not become practical for the masses until the 70s.

   The best book on the general topic of model aviation is Dave Thornburg's book "Do You Speak Model Airplane", which while a bit uneven, contains the only objective and complete history of modeling I have ever seen. He makes this point in a compelling manner.

   One of the points he makes, well, is after the initial rush after Lindberg and into the age of gas models (mid-30's), model aviation *has never been about children* and the focus on "youth development" is for the most part, a scam/marketing scheme to get people to care about it (and sponsor it). Because no one gives a damn about middle-aged men flying little toy airplanes. As an example, that's why the Plymouth Internats petered out after a few years - they precluded adults because it was marketed to Plymouth as an airplane version of the Soapbox Derby. Nobody would care about a soapbox derby for grownups.  I think this has finally been torpedoed by drones, yet the AMA is sticking to it like glue.

     I highly recommend the book, although it is expensive and hard to find.

     Brett

[Dan McEntee]

      Sputnik was pretty much the end of the age of aviation overall, and  It damn near killed model aviation, which was sustained largely by CL - since RC did not become practical for the masses until the 70s.

   The best book on the general topic of model aviation is Dave Thornburg's book "Do You Speak Model Airplane", which while a bit uneven, contains the only objective and complete history of modeling I have ever seen. He makes this point in a compelling manner.

   One of the points he makes, well, is after the initial rush after Lindberg and into the age of gas models (mid-30's), model aviation *has never been about children* and the focus on "youth development" is for the most part, a scam/marketing scheme to get people to care about it (and sponsor it). Because no one gives a damn about middle-aged men flying little toy airplanes. As an example, that's why the Plymouth Internats petered out after a few years - they precluded adults because it was marketed to Plymouth as an airplane version of the Soapbox Derby. Nobody would care about a soapbox derby for grownups.  I think this has finally been torpedoed by drones, yet the AMA is sticking to it like glue.

     I highly recommend the book, although it is expensive and hard to find.

     Brett

    I echo Brett's comments on "Do You Speak Model Airplane."  I am the proud owner of THE last copy Dave Thornburg had, and it is author autographed  by him as such. Something like, "The last copy of "Speak" for one of the last of the old time modelers." It is a must read if you like the history of our hobby in any way, and give a great understanding of how things progressed. Dave states that the hobby may have died altogether in the early 50's and that control line save the hobby industry. If you don't believe that, just spend a few hours going through the magazines of the time, reading the adds and the editorials. I started to re-read it when on jury duty last year, but was only there a day and didn't get very far back into it, and I need to finish it again. That book and Charles Mackey's book should be on everyone's book shelves.
     And to keep it on topic, we don't need any more new events. We just need to promote and stream line the ones we have to attract more new blood. And I have said to any one who will listen, we need to focus on the Dad's, who have the mini-van or SUV and the bank account. If we get them interested and participating, the kids will follow by default. We have to re-introduce aviation to people again at it basic form.
   Type at you later,
  Dan McEntee

[Sean McEntee]

     I think this has finally been torpedoed by drones, yet the AMA is sticking to it like glue.

       Ugh....

       Whilst out shopping at Toys R' Us for my daughter, I picked up one of those nano quad-copters (30 bucks is about as much as I'm willing to invest in such things).  Charged it up, trimmed it out, and flew a couple charges around the back yard one night when the wind was calm.  Kinda cool...

      Now I'm gonna rip the battery out of it and put it in the DT receiver for my discus HLG so that it will be easier to charge and replace then the one that is currently in it.

[john e. holliday]

Cleaning out my corner of the bed room I found both books.  I got Charley's book at VSC when he introduced it and had him autograph it.   Drove people nuts asking them to autograph it also.   Both are great reads.

[Mark Knoepfle]

What is the title of Charles Mackey's book? I just searched AbeBooks and found Do you speak.... It seems to run about $100.

Thank you,
Mark

[Mark Knoepfle]

Oh, I found it. Pioneers of Control Line Flying. Holy crow. It is almost $100 on AbeBooks and $12 on PAMPA. Hummm. Think I'll get it from PAMPA.

[Brett Buck]

Oh, I found it. Pioneers of Control Line Flying. Holy crow. It is almost $100 on AbeBooks and $12 on PAMPA. Hummm. Think I'll get it from PAMPA.

  Please do!  Last I knew anything about it, we had *plenty* of the second printing left.

   Brett

[john e. holliday]

Well I was going to ask for $200.00 plus postage, insurance and handling for my copy.   So don't even ask guys.