44" is the max wingspan for Class I & II.

50" for Profile with a 300 square inch minimum.

No limits on 15 size.

Joe,
         That is very interesting and I will definitely post it on my web site and in our kits. The only thing is that I will need more info for the people who want to compete but are not AMA members. I think that if they are allowed to compete it will not only bring more people into carrier but also introduce them to the AMA. These are good things.
Thank You
Larry

Joe,
        I read over the rules and while I am aware that this is not AMA sanctioned contest there several places that refer to the use of AMA rules in the contest. One example is: High speed and low speed  times will use the AMA rules for conversion into a mathematical score. 
        There a few other places that are similar and I will need these explained or copied from the AMA book. We will be advertising in England, Portugal, and Australia. I am sure that I will be addressing many, mu self included, who do not have an AMA rule book to reasurch these points.
         I am exicited about this contest, I do wish that that would be a longer time span to allow the building, test flying and competing.
Thank You
Larry

Larry,

Short of actually getting The Rule Book, here's the quick & dirty of scoring.

Lets assume you go 80 MPH high (7 laps from a standing start), and 20 MPH low (7 laps from when you signal for timing).

Your HIGH points simply equal MPH = 80 points.

Your LOW points are HI/LOW times 10:  80/20 = 4 * 10 = 40 points.

So your HILO score is 120 points. 

You get 100 points for a proper landing and less points for a defective landing.

In Class I & II you get 100 points (all or nothing for scale).

In Profile you get 10 points (all or nothing) for scale.

20 points for multi engine (assuming they keep running).

15's use short lines and 8 laps.

You can find more in five pages of fine print, but not much more.

     Boy do I hear you loud and clear Dale.When I started flying carrier there was a good group of fliers (WAM) that I could watch and ask questions from. Also I got a hold of one of the early Editors of the high/low news letter and he sent me all of the old additions of the news letter that he could dig up. There were a lot of how to articles in those early news letter contrary to what we see now. I make a big effort to help anyone that asks for it but I suppose some people don't know the questions to ask or are to self conscious to ask.
     I have been putting together a "how I build and fly carrier planes" pamphlet that explains what "I" did to get into carrier and all the things I do and think are important to succeed in carrier. As I pretty much fly by myself and build without much contact with other fliers its pretty much how "I" do it and certainly doesn't have every way you could do it. As soon as I get through with it I'm thinking of sending it out to certain clubs and individuals that I think may be interested in furthering carrier competion for them to copy and send out to anyone they think may be interest in this event.
     It will be pointed toward the competion flier but should hep anyone that would like to fly in any of the carrier events that are out there now. It is up to a hundred pages now and I think I have maybe another 30+ pages to go before it will be ready. I hope all the guys that are interested in this great event will keep posting here and ask any questions they want. eric

     You are right, and that is ashame. This is the reason that in a few short years you will only be able to get Ready to Fly electric radio control planes. No more gas powered control line , no more carrier.
Larry

Of course, if you hope to win in either 15 Profile or 36 profile, you'll have to add in a few hundred bucks for a left hand crankshaft conversion, unless you have the tooling make your own.

The left hand crank is a gapping loophole to allow big bucks to dominate the "economy" events.  Of course, you don't need one if you just want to donate your entry fee and lose.

Of course, if you hope to win in either 15 Profile or 36 profile, you'll have to add in a few hundred bucks for a left hand crankshaft conversion, unless you have the tooling make your own.

The left hand crank is a gapping loophole to allow big bucks to dominate the "economy" events.  Of course, you don't need one if you just want to donate your entry fee and lose.

 
You mean I've been flying carrier for 35 years, and all I had to do to guarantee a win was put in a left-hand crank?   Wait a minute - come to think of it, I have seen one or two, but if I remember correctly, when I did lose to them it was because I flew a crappy flight.  WAIT ANOTHER MINUTE - come to think of it, I usually fly crappy flights when I have not flown in some time ... so if I buy a left hand crank (and somehow manage to find some useable left-hand props), I can quit flying carrier except when I'm called to the deck to take my official flights ... think of the fuel savings (probably make up the cost of the crank in one year)  ... think of the reduced repair and build time ... think of the added stunt practice time I'll have ... This is beginning to look like a really good investment ...
 

   .... sorry, sometimes I get lost in my own whining ... I wonder if we can justify line sliders in some similar manner ...   


Now I'm really ashamed of myself.

@

... so if I buy a left hand crank (and somehow manage to find some useable left-hand props), I can quit flying carrier except when I'm called to the deck to take my official flights ...
@

While a left-hand crank does not "guarantee a win", it must give enough of an advantage that guys who crave the advantage spend a lot of money to get one.

As I see it, Classes I & II are "wide open" to all the technology and money you care throw at them.  It would be nice Profile had stuck to it's original rules as flown by many people up until 1975, rather open the floodgates to unlimited engines in 1976 and cut the entry level to single digits nationwide.

ps: The original rule was a stock plain-bearing RC engine with the throttle it came with.  The current rule is simply "any 36".  Under the old rule you could actually buy a $50 engine and have a fair chance to win.

Similarly, 15 was sold as an event where you could just buy a used engine for $50, but left open to the custom crankshaft, this giving it to the same few hard core winners.

".15 was never an event where you could "just buy a used engine for $50" - the very first .15 models I ever saw (Jerry DeNeau and Dave Rolley - the inventors of the event) had old Rossi Goodyear engines - modified by George Aldrich, if memory serves.  Jerry told me that he thought the 70 mph speed limit was a sufficient "levelling" mechanism.  In fact, at that time we (locally) started allowing cross-flow .19's as a way to keep people interested in the event - because a Veco .19 can be made to run pretty hard.  The left-hand cranks (at the time, you could get Duke Fox to cut a left-hand crank for a Schneurle .15) were more a limiting factor due to the lack of props than anything else - the only thing they do is make it (ever so slightly) easier to trim for very slow flight .. nothing more.  Like I said, the money spent on Nelson's in the "limited" events is just as much a head-turner and much more wide spread than left hand cranks."

I have to make a correction - I don't remember if it was Jerry and Dave running the Rossi's or not - it was at the very first .15 carrier event that I ever attended (which I think would have been the very first .15 event outside the Denver area - probably Topeka).  Jerry and Dave were there (and so were the Rossi's), but I don't remember who all was running what engines at that time.  The point remains the same -- the names of the contestants are subject to 'better memory cells' than I have anymore.

Hi Dave-

I remember the OPS now - I remember that it ran real well when you got it down on the plains - I never made the Denver contest, so I don't know how it did there.

I hope I didn't put words in your (and Jerry's) mouth, but I was trying to make the point that Left-Hand cranks are not the evil -- what was the word -- loophole that some will never tire of trying to point out.  And that even Jerry wasn't exactly flying a 15 year old Enya.

I'm afraid that we've dragged this thread too far off topic to save it, but in the spirit of trying, I'll not comment further - in this thread - except to postings regarding the Blackhawk Models kits, which I look forward to seeing.

If Larry sees this, I hope that the carping (my own included) has not put him off the project altogether.  I may want to try one of his kits WITH AN ELECTRIC MOTOR for .15   

sorry

Mike A

Just a thought Larry:  Include a version with the correct Brodak 3 line Bellcrank and very specific instructions as to the throttle and tail hook rigging.  This is the part that trips up most beginners. Perhaps you could get Brodak on board and include a coupon for a discount on a throttle handle and a set of  3 60' lines with each kit.   

     We are currently working on 3 models, for carrier, and of those three none would be tops on a list of models to take to the nationals. I am not sure of how many will make it out of testing for futher evaluation. One is now depending on us getting a good deal on an engine that will be included with the model, the other two are still in drafting; one is awaiting a set ribs fron the laser cutter. I had hoped that this would be a quick and easy project but it is more compeex that I had hoped. My goal has never been to compete, only to offer a taste of carrier to those who want to try it for the first time.
Larry
Black Hawk Models

I'm not looking for something to take to the Nats -- I'm looking for something to take to the field, roll out the lines and fly.  Or better yet, roll out the lines, give the handle to someone else and let him/her fly.  It should be stable, easy to trim and take a wide variety of engines (and yes, electric motors).  Something to get some new faces to record a score and send it to Joe for the Postal Contest.  Something to let a bystander kid (and his dad) fly.  Something that, when that kid says "Where can I get one of those", I can give him a source of the kit, the engine (or motor), and that is pretty much all he'll need.  Especially if he can build it pretty much on his own, in a few nights and with one bottle of glue.  I think that I can get a couple of brand new faces out flying at our field if something like that could be "bottled".

I do realize that your timetable probably won't mesh with Joe's postal contest this year, but it will next year.

An easily built kit that addressed some of the mechanical headaches of Carrier,ie, motor, linkages, bellcrank, arresting hook, tank, etc, would go a long way toward creating a rewarding experience for those just beginning. Toss in someone experienced to help and a happy camper would be guaranteed.
FWIW,
dale gleason

All of the above, plus a NEW carrier event with just ONE standard STOCK engine, such as the LA 25 is what's needed. 
While the above-listed items are hurdles, the need for an unobtainable engine is a Chinese wall.

I agree with hanging an airplane is not scale but I also enjoy the challenge of flying like that.  I think that it takes some different skills to do that and is definitely alot more complicated.  That could be part of the problem as to why carrier isnt as popular as it once was. When I fly my profile spearfish I usually get quite an audience, even some of the rc guys will come over to the circles to watch and find out what was making all that racket.  Everybody wants to look at it and see how everything works and they tell me how cool it is, but they all say the same thing when I ask them if they would want to try it "Thats way to complicated for me." I try to explain to them about .15 and skyray carrier but they have already seen the "more complicated" plane and are convinced they wouldnt be able to fly carrier.  I think that if there was a good source for an actual carrier specific kit or possibly even an arf for a 15 size plane that is just basic, just throttle and hook, then we could possibly attract some more people.  Well Im done good luk and I hope to see something soon.
David

Well, JOe old buddy, remember sometimes we agreed to disagree right?
DISCLAIMER  THIS RANT IS NOT POINTED AT ANY ONE PERSON DO NOT TAKE OFFENSE BECAUSE YOU THINK I AM POINTING AT YOU (whoever you may be,, I have talked to several people about carrier so dont assume its you I am talking about please!)
for ME, I have NO interest in a .15 sized carrier plane, not to any degree, I suppose If someone gave me a chance to fly one I would do it, but you would not find me building something for .15 carrier as an entry level plane. I could be wrong, but the thought of a plane that small trying to fight the wind  in slow speed, and maintain line tension,, NOPE I want something with a 35 on it,, say profile,, or nostalgia, I just dont want to fly that small of a plane, I could be a rare commodity, but most of the stunt guys I talked to feel the same, nobody has a 15 in their arsenal, let alone a .15 with a carb! however, most of the guys have 35 or 40 sized motors,, LOTS of FP 40s around. If you want to get people to fly carrier, give them something they can build and fly simply,, like a profile with a .40 on it,, oh wait, cant do that  the motors to big! Yeah there are hurdles,, Joe can attest that I have talked about carrier since I started flying again two years ago. I get discouraged every time I look at doing carrier. It seems that when I ask questions about BUILDING, and what to BUILD, how to set it up I keep getting these political rants about some mysterious rule change that ruined Carrier!!!  LIKE I CARE I wasn't there, am not there and want to move ahead. if you want people to fly carrier, SUPPORT like the stunt guys do,, make a source that gives clear definitive answers to serious questions like which of the dozen bellcranks does a guy need,, how do you set it up, how do you set the tailhook up,, whats a GOOD multipurpose airframe.
Again this spring I was set to build a carrier plane, even went so far as to by a NIB Kand B 5.8 based upon the recommendations of someone who flew and held records in the events. then i have two people tell me nope thats not good, THen I ask about a bellcrank, and get a rant about some rule,, and then no answer on the bellcrank deal, I don't have time nor inclination to build my own bellcrank, I want SIMPLE and straightforward.It is very frustrating!! So, looks like I will AGAIN put off building a carrier airplane this year out of frustration and a lack of meaningfull assistance. 
NOW please keep in mind, there may be valid help and info around, but for someone who wants to try it, it sure is hard to get a a straight answer.

     Thank you David for being a guy thats not afraid of the hang. It might not look so scale but it is a heck of lot more scale than watching someone flying around the circle at 40mph and then trying to hook up on their dive at the deck maneuver. Now if the deck were moving forward (like into the wind) at 25mph then that would be more like scale but for some reason no one has figured out how to do that (and those decks are hard enough to set up and take down) and I for one hope they don't.
     Now if you want to talk about how scale it feels to the carrier flier, the hang is not the big villain that the no-hangers want us to believe it is. As far as the use of the handle (angle of attach) and the throttle (whether the plane holding altitude or is going up or down) the control inputs are much closer to flying a real plane and make that portion of the flight much more fun.
     Your right about the comments of "oh that looks too complicated" when we show some of the curious the control systems on the carrier planes. I always kind of wonder how these people drove themselves to the flying field in their 4000 pound cars? Our planes deal with a little geometry, and some leverage, something most people should have learned in grammer school.
     Mark has a good point too about asking a question of a carrier flier and someone else will jump in and tell them that if the event were still flow the way it use to be flown they wouldn't even be asking their question??? All the while not ansewering the question at all because they don't have a clue what the ansewer is in the first place. Carrier has more nay-sayers than any AMA CL event and the people that do don't fly the event or haven't sense the hang came along around 40 years ago (40 frigging years ago)
     And then there are the well meaning people that think if they dumb the event down enough people will come. I know they mean well and I hope they are right just a little bit but I have my doubts that they will generate interest in carrier or not (more power to them if they can pull it off). In my experience the planes I build just for carrier fly so much better than anything else out there that I think its a shame that we try to get these people to start flying carrier with planes we know will not fly well in the carrier maneuvers. No wonder a lot of would be carrier fliers get discouraged after their first try at this event.
     I would hope that any wont to be carrier flier that has questions about about this event would come on this forum and ask the question that is bothering them and I'm sure there will be someone that will ansewer it for them. And if done on the forum everyone will benefit form the questions and ansewers. eric

     Hi Mark, I will start another topic called "three questions or more" and we wont morph this topic anymore than it has been. eric

The Navy Carrier Society encourages the Sportsman Profile Carrier event and even sponsors it at the Nationals. Same rules as AMA profile but limited to people who won't be entering AMA profile at the same event. This turns out to be the combination of a beginners skill class with people who prefer not to take the event seriously and may not have the most competitive equipment or flying style. A good place to enter a Bearcat, for example. In the Midwest, most of the Carrier contests include Sportsman, whether or not turnout is strong. Trophies are cheap and we don't mind having a few left over every year if we get any entries at all. It would be great if you could get the local contest management to include Sportsman in their contests. It's no extra work and, as I said, trophies are cheap.
By the way, the serious, experienced competitors with the latest stuff do not enter Sportsman. We have never needed to tell anyone he should move up. The more usual problem is that people who probably should enter Sportsman tend to enter AMA Profile instead. Sometimes we hand a Stunt Grunt or Racer or Combat guy a handle and enter them in Sportsman with a Skyray or something like that set up for Carrier. We all have a blast.
Pete

Mark I think i have an answer for you. Why not buy a profile carier plane.  Todd may even be willing to part with the first MO-1 he had, the one with my old 5.8 on board. Perhaps even Mike or Eric would be willing to part with an older "hanger Queen" and then you could enter it at the regionals or in Portland in April. There is no BOM  rule in carrier. Once you had a plane that someone had setup you would be able to reproduce anything your heart deired if you find out you reaally like carrier.  If you do like it then your consideable building skills can be put into play for 2010.  If you end up "hooked" your cpmpetitive spirt would be a welcom addition to the NW carier scene, and in a year or so you could be right up there with the best. If you decided that carrier wasn't your cup of tea then you wouldn't be out time,energy and building time that would get into the way of developing better and more competitive stunt ships.

I would offer you a chance to borrow one of my planes  , but I dont want you to be laughed at.

Joe Just