Why are there any bonus points for scale at all? When this event began the intent was a scale model of a carrier based aircraft with arresting gear capable for an arrested landing in model form. Cal Smith's Skyraider is a fine example of this intent -  Paul Pleacan's Tigercat is another - there is a great Bearcat from Air Trails ( know not who the designer/builder is ). I went to the NATS in the early 60s with my Dad and the models for carrier where scale models - Dad had for the 63 NATS a scratch built 3/4 in scale Wildcat with an electric control for the engine from the handle - there were Berkeley kits - all sorts of models from other kits converted for the event - some based on Cleveland plans - I saw myfirst Sterling F4U-1 at this NATS - couldn't figure way the fuselage was so sucked in at places ( later in 75 I bought a kit and saw way - 1/16 th planking on the fuselage then with dope warp city)but they were all Scale Models. At the 64 NATS Dad had a scratch built 3/4 in scale SBD with a fiberglass fuselage - he had two SBD's at the NATS that year one in carrier the other entered in scale - both with electric engine control the one for scale had electric retracts as well. 65 came and in an Aero Modeler was a double bell crank set up for a three line system( still have that Aero Modeler) Dad scratched a no nose Skyrocket with two green head K&B .15s ( I think? they were K&B's) for class I. And some where during the mid 60's the scale quality began it's slow and ugly decline - some say it was due to the event judges  not wanting to take the time to evaluate the scale aspect - the models fidelity to scale - so began the giving of the 100 points as a blanket / a given regardless of the models quality / fidelity to scale -- these "bonus" points were 0-100 not simple 100. So the models were no longer being built as a scale model -- many at this time left the event - back to just stunt or just scale itself or racing or into R/C. Then came the MO-1 -- a rat racer - there was a lot of displeasure ( to put it mildly) when this showed up and the talk over it still goes on -- There are so many REAL carrier aircraft to model --- in ALL seriousness I've yet to see any model of an MO-1 look like the aircraft being modeled - thought about one for scale but just can't bring myself todo it. But back to this 100 bonus points for appearance -- this 100 points should be EARNED - 0 to 100 points for scale fidelity or eliminated all together. If you can't build a model in order to earn these points why have the points at all? The INTENT of this event was and should remain tobe a SCALE model of a carrier based aircraft -- one designed for actual carrier use -not "shipboard" battle ship launched stuff but carrier based and operated from carriers -- and 0-100 bonus points for the models scale fidelity --- this would but back into this event a REAL challenge as was intended from the start but somehow went the way of the dodo --not going to take up this flying angle of attack at low speed 60 degree or more - flying a plane like a helo - on it's engine not the aeroplane itself --- AEROPLANE -it's harder to fly an aeroplane at slow speed than flying an engine. for what it's worth no one really cares any more

"The INTENT of this event was and should remain to be a SCALE model of a carrier based aircraft -- one designed for actual carrier use -not "shipboard" battle ship launched stuff but carrier based and operated from carriers"

Sorry, I disagree -- if the INTENT was that, then the scale bonus would NOT be a bonus, it would be a requirement.  Clearly the INTENT was to allow non-scale planes to compete, though at a handicap.

If we jump forward from the 1953 rules to the 1961 rules we get:

"20.10 BONUS POINTS. Any scale model of a U.S. Navy carrier aircraft, whether operational
or experimental, will he awarded 100 bonus points. Scale 3-view drawings of the full-scale
aircraft must be submitted to be eligible for bonus points. (See CLFSRegulations 17.S
for type. of plans acceptable.)"

So now, we have the 'Carrier Aircraft' requirement spelled out, but it is still clearly open to planes other
than actual Combat deployed designs.

It is easy to 'put words in the mouth' of the original designers of the event, but if we give them credit
for the ability to capture their intent with their written word, then we have to allow that they said
what they meant, and not that they meant what we wish they had said.

As for the eligibility of the MO-1, it clearly couldn't have been DESIGNED as a carrier plane, since it was designed before the Navy even had a Carrier.  But there is ample documentation as to the use and testing
and deployment of the design ON BOARD the carrier Langley.  Dick Perry published photos of one landing,
I can document that one was cat-shot off the Langley to test a black-powder catapult.  Perry also found
that two different BuNo's MO-1 were assigned to Langley for a period of over 6 months.

This discussion ran its course many years ago.

Rule 8.1.1. Requires that a 3-view be submitted in order to qualify for the Scale Bonus.

I think Navy Carrier and this discussion might benefit from a historical perspective.

At the 1949 Nationals the Navy announced that a special Navy Carrier Aircraft Model Contest would be held at the 1950 Nats. Remember, the U.S. had only very recently defeated the Empire of Japan in WWII and the images of Naval Aviation during the war were still very vivid in people's minds.

William Winter wrote the following in his August 1949 Scrap Box column in M.A.N.:

"Even more unusual is their (the Navy) jet model event for scale or semi-scale types resembling Navy planes. Flown U-control, these ships will operate from a segment of the circle scaled-off to represent a carrier deck. Take-off will be by catapult and landing will be on the touch down area at rear of the deck, arresting devices being used. The deck is 1/20 scale to a real carrier, as is the catapult and its placement. The ship must fit within scale dimensions of the ship's airplane and hangar, (this probably requiring folding wings that can be operated on the ground). Points will be awarded for slow speed flight (slow-speed high-lift devices, flaps, etc. may be used but must be part of model), high speed flight, and general efficiency on take-off, landings, and operation from the carrier. The latter includes control after arresting, plus control of the arresting gear, catapult, and so on. Though we give but sketchy detail here, full information presumably will have appeared in the AMA's Model Aviation by the time you read this."

Air Trails wrote a similar announcement in the January 1950 issue.

The event didn't quite turn out that way but the basics were there. The point is there was a clear understanding of what constituted Naval Aviation. In fact, just look at the NCS logo. That is Naval Aviation and that is how I have approached my involvement in carrier.

I guess the point is, build what suits you. The MO-1 isn't the end-all of Naval Aviation. It doesn't fly itself. As you say there are plenty of other planes worth modeling, then practice and enjoy.

The current rules, in effect since the mid 70's, make carrier primarily a flying event. Fidelity to Scale is not judged as it is in the scale event, but more like fun scale, also a flying event. It may have drifted from its roots, but the what hasn't changed in 60 years. It is challenging to fly, equivalent to combat  or stunt. And like all events to get good you have to put in a lot of time.

I like it.