Author Topic: Carrier mussings #2 (Read 3722 times)

Joe Just · « **on:** March 16, 2012, 05:55:08 PM »

Attached is a file for your consideration. it contains a synopsis of Mussings #1 etc.
Joe

john vlna · « **Reply #1 on:** March 18, 2012, 02:55:01 PM »

Joe
I think skill classes is a good idea and one which would increase carrier participation. Attached is how I think it could work.
John

Wayne J. Buran · « **Reply #2 on:** March 18, 2012, 07:32:45 PM »

John, good idea but we need to prime the pump. There would be a startup problem because we have so few competitors to begin with. Even based on participation at Brodak how would this layout or do you propose that AMA Profile Carrier be the first event to use this proposed system. Its got to be better than outlawing sliders, motors, fuel, etc. etc. etc that have all been tried.Surely would cause equipment to be obsoleted. I just wonder if participation was extremely low when the stunt skill classes started. Lets hear from more interested participants. I am interseted.
Wayne

john vlna · « **Reply #3 on:** March 18, 2012, 08:46:04 PM »

wayne,
Nothing is obsoleted with this proposal. Current AMA fliers are probably all above the beginner level, therefore thier equipment is unaffected. Sportsman fliers fit mostly into the beginners class. It would be easy to implement at Brodaks. Sportsman becomes beginner, The vast majority of 15 fliers are beginners, true the ama classes would be sparse, but they are anyway. Most of the people flying at brodak in AMA carrier are either intermediate or advanced fliers in my scheme. Of course John would have to be convinced to put up a few more throphies. I plan to bring this idea up at the flyin this year.
john

Wayne J. Buran · « **Reply #4 on:** March 19, 2012, 06:34:13 AM »

Thats good John. If it's economically feasable I am sure John would pony up. It really needs to start someplace. What about support from NCS? Will they go along with this. Maybe Gary Hull would accept a trophy is he was only flying against experts.

Wayne

john vlna · « **Reply #5 on:** March 19, 2012, 12:17:07 PM »

Wayne,

I have sent something to Ted for the Newsletter, and a copy to Perry. I don't know how most people would feel about it, we will see.

One good point about skill classes is that it allows people to fly the way they want. Sliders and hanging see to be a big issue. I like to hang the plane, but someone may not. Assuming everything else is equal, skill classes let the person that hangs the plane fly in a higher class(higher scores for low speed) and the person who wants to fly "old" style can fly in a lower class (lower scores for low speed).

Further down the road I would downsize everything, (lower displacements and lower max allowable weight) This lessens the pull test requirements and high end performance. Say drop weight to 3 lbs, profile and class I max .25, class II max .40.

I would combine glow and electric for all events. Higher performing electrics would naturally fly in higher skill classes. This would eliminate the concern that one is easier to get high performance than the other. The higher performing setup flies against other high performance setups, regardless if glow or electric.

And even more radical maybe it is time to get rid of Class II altogether, just have profile and scale.

I think any of this would be difficult to get a majority opinion since these would obsolete current equipment. Skill classes do not however.

John

Wayne J. Buran · « **Reply #6 on:** March 19, 2012, 02:58:19 PM »

John, you hit it all squarely on the head. BTW I meant to say previously that equipment would not be obsoleted. That said I think eventually some would be. I like your idea about eventually addressing the motor size issue. Lets see what others think. Good talk for Brodaks also maybe to a point of having a group discussion or review over dinner wednesday night maybe. Who knows, we may be on the cusp of a revolutionary change. I think we are due for that or carrier will continue to disappear as it has slowly been doing.
Thanks
Wayne

john vlna · « **Reply #7 on:** March 19, 2012, 05:22:19 PM »

Wayne
Progress requires change
John

bill bischoff · « **Reply #8 on:** March 19, 2012, 08:33:46 PM »

Too much change will hasten the slow disappearance.

john vlna · « **Reply #9 on:** March 19, 2012, 09:10:24 PM »

Nats Registrations   1998   2011
Profile     21     9
Class I     18     8
Class II     18     8

Right direction?

bill bischoff · « **Reply #10 on:** March 20, 2012, 01:44:41 PM »

Point taken, but perhaps a better barometer would be how many different people entered carrier events anywhere during a calendar year, not just the NATS. Do the profile numbers include Sportsman?

Wayne J. Buran · « **Reply #11 on:** March 20, 2012, 02:08:22 PM »

I think NCS should show best scores for all entrants instead of just the top twenty. On e of the gripes with stunt skill classes is people dont move up. There arent may of us carrier flyers so we should be able to publich a comprehensive list of top scores by person by by position of finish at each contest including NATS.
Wayne

eric david conley · « **Reply #12 on:** March 20, 2012, 02:33:51 PM »

I think we already do what your talking about Wayne. The scores are taken at each contest and a write up on the contest and scores are sent into the Hi-Low news letter and posted there for every one to see. The scores from these articles are then posted on the top 20 page. Its the top 20 scores in the event and the person who flew the score. Only in AMA Profile do we ever run out of room to show all scores. Is this what you meant or is it something else? Eric

bill bischoff · « **Reply #13 on:** March 20, 2012, 03:33:50 PM »

Not to put more work on Burt or Ted, but listing everybody's best score for the year seems like a reasonable idea, especially when we can't even fill up all of the top twenty standings. Wayne may be suggesting that we list everybody's personal records, not their best scores from a specific year. This would require more research. Contest placing is not much of an indicator. Is it better to place first with a 250 or come in third with a 300?

Regardless, I don't think that people are outlasting their welcome in Sportsman.

john vlna · « **Reply #14 on:** March 20, 2012, 05:51:53 PM »

Bill,
The NATS numbers I posted are entries in the AMA events. In the time I have been flying carrier at the NATS (since 1990 I have attended almost all) there is a most 2-3 Sportsman. At Brodaks we get about 30-35 entries , 15 profile and Sportsman are about 20 of the entries, 10 in the AMA classes.
John

eric david conley · « **Reply #15 on:** March 20, 2012, 05:55:43 PM »

Well that brings up the question of where are these carrier fliers when the nationals are going on? Eric

john vlna · « **Reply #16 on:** March 20, 2012, 06:00:00 PM »

Wayne,
I don't see much of a issue of having people 'sandbag' in carrier. Our scores are very explicit, based on time. From what I have seen, over the period of say a year or two, it would be pretty obvious where someone would place. The NCS top twenty captures nearly all the scoring currently. If participation got really big (unlikely) it might not be adequate, but I think it is currently.
John

john vlna · « **Reply #17 on:** March 20, 2012, 06:03:44 PM »

Eric,
Most of the entries at Brodaks would fit into my beginners class. Most do not fly carrier as a main event. I think if we did have skill classes some of them might enter at the NATS. Why no one flies sportsman at muncie remains a mystery.
John

eric david conley · « **Reply #18 on:** March 20, 2012, 06:48:27 PM »

That is a big problem the way I see it at the contests I fly at. The stunt fliers that show interest in flying carrier come over to the carrier circle at the end of the last day of the contest after flying numerous stunt events (these are all very serious stunt fiers) and show up at the worst time of the day for flying anything (windy). Some will struggle through a couple of flights and others crash there planes trying, its pretty brutal to watch and a shame for these guys. I don't know what the good ansewer is for this? Eric

Wayne J. Buran · « **Reply #19 on:** March 20, 2012, 08:07:00 PM »

Quote from: bill bischoff on March 20, 2012, 03:33:50 PM

Not to put more work on Burt or Ted, but listing everybody's best score for the year seems like a reasonable idea, especially when we can't even fill up all of the top twenty standings. Wayne may be suggesting that we list everybody's personal records, not their best scores from a specific year. This would require more research. Contest placing is not much of an indicator. Is it better to place first with a 250 or come in third with a 300?

Regardless, I don't think that people are outlasting their welcome in Sportsman.

Maybe I wasnt clear enough. Not personal records but top scores so you are correct, top twenty needs to be top one hundred whatever, so that its clear when its time to move up for the next year. I dont want to hear any whinnining about sandbaggers or trophy hunting like some of the stunt people complain about. My goodness this is the computor age isnt it.
Thanks
Wayne

john vlna · « **Reply #20 on:** March 20, 2012, 08:29:50 PM »

Wayne,
It points to the problem, what is published in the NCS is about 90-95% of all the scores.
John

Author Topic: Carrier mussings #2 (Read 3722 times)

Joe Just