Many of you already have received this old guy's "musings".  I'm sure that most of you have not because I don't have access to your email addresses.  The 'Musings" are some thoughts on the demise of Carrier flying in the past few years, a listing  of often voiced complaints and a look at possible interpretations to those complaints.  The thoughts are in no way pointing  a finger of blame at anyone or group and are intended to get some positive dialog going about answers to the perceived problems. please contact me via email for your copy. ukeymanatthe letterqdotcom
Joe Just

well,,
I have some thoughts,, and these are MY thoughts, so I am entitled,, LOL
if you really want carrier to grow, or heal, you need to look at events that have grown, or have failed, and decide why,
I think if you look at stunt, you will see an event that is growing, or at the least maintaining,, then look at racing, and its failing.
carrier is failing,, combat at least in the NW seems to be holding its own or maybe even growing,,

now why?
stunt in my opinion is growing because it has a feeder system. Skill classes allow you to participate on a competitive level. These days some of us have to travel hundreds of miles to go to a contest. I am going to contests to compete, ( and to visit as well) The presence of skill classes allows me to have a means by way to compete with some sense of actually being competitive.
in racing, NW sport race ( fox racing) was intended to be an entry level event, Clown racing was intended to be an entry level event. In stunt you cannot compete in beginner if you are an intermidiate or advanced pilot, in sport race, or clown race, it is open to all pilots, so the teams that have experience will of course dominate. The same holds true with carrier. despite all efforts to maintain a level playing feild with equipment rules, the experience will prevail. In my opinion, If you want to grow the event, you need to make it so that a neophyte, ( like me) who wants to learn the event, has a means to participate on par with my peers, and not with experts. Yes I know that practice is what gets you to that level, and I would practice, but given that I am competing against people with 20 years of experience, how do I hope to get competative with them in any reasonable time frame? That said, why on earth would I want to invest the money and time in an event where I KNOW I will have little of no chance of even being competative? It costs me hundreds of dollars to attend an event, so currently I chose to spend my modeling dollars, and time, in events where I can compete with people I can at least hope to be on  par with. That right now is stunt, and RC pylon racing.
I know that the local FP 40 class of carrier is intended to be geared towards getting people into carrier with minimal investment. I am interested in it as well. In fact I have been working on getting some equipment together. HOwever, I f I see this class become dominated with pilots that have flown for 20 or 30 years, my motivation to participate is greatly reduced.
I really dont have a good suggestion unless you come up with some sort of method to limit participation by using contest history and placing to regulate entry into specific classes.
I dont think that the slider or any other rules are prohibitive to my interest in participating, its more about knowing I cannot hope to be competitive.
These are MY musings and ramblings..

Mr. Scarborough (and others) please realize there is already a Sportsman skill class in profile carrier for the just the reason you describe. The cutoff point is somewhere in the 225 to 250 range, but I don't think anybody has ever been forced to move up, or needed to.

[quote author=Mark Scarborough participate is greatly reduced.
I really dint have a good suggestion unless you come up with some sort of method to limit participation by using contest history and placing to regulate entry into specific classes.
 
Mark When I was the Pres of the NCS I and another fly-er spent considerable time and effort ranking all know Carrier pilots, using their scores from the previous 10 years to rank them in four categories.  For the life of me I can not remember the man who also worked on this and his findings and mine were nearly identical.  I still think it was time and effort well spent and really thought there was going to be some action taken.  The result...Nothing!  Nobody seemed in terested in setting it into action, not even on the often heard.."try it on a local basis for a while to see how it works"  Shortly after that we were involved in a controversy that to this day often comes back to haunt me.  When I left the President position and moved, I somehow lost all my NCS bulletins and copies of NCS related information.  I sure would like to see 'skill classes' replace the poorly attended and sponsored "Sportsman" class.

I wasn't goin g to comment on any of the results of my "Musings" here buit just couldn't resist jumping in with your great idea Mark.
Joe

     I got into carrier in the early 90s after I saw my first carrier competition at a WAM contest. At the time I was flying Beginner Stunt and doing a terrible jod of it, also some speed but found out that I couldn't keep up with the planes while in the pylon so if I couldn't fly my planes I didn't want to stay in the event. After watching the carrier flying for awhile I knew this was the event for me. I could do 7 or 8 laps of high speed and then the same amount of laps in low speed plus a landing, what a cake walk. I went home and got a Golden State Models Profile MO-1 (Dick Perry design) built it to the plans, powered it with a Webra 32 and went out and started flying it. I had to put it back together several times while learning the hang but learn it I did and then entered my first contest a couple months latter and took last. Seems that while flying around in the gang and after 7 laps I ran into the arresting line with the hook of my plane and landed on the deck (no landing signal). After that contest I went home and called Michael Pugh and asked him if he could send me as many back copies of the Hi-Low Landings as he could find and he did. I went through all that stuff and came away with all kinds of new ideas for my MO-1. I also found that Bill Bischoff was writting a lot of articles that were so clear and easy to understand and were new and better ways for all of the whistles and bells that made your plane more managable and a better flier.
     So after that first contest I started placing in all of the contest that I entered. Each time Bill B. wrote an article about something new it was a part of my plane a week later and my flying improved at each contest "because I practiced 2 or 3 times a week to make sure all the new things worked". This carrier flying was so much fun I built a CL-1 and CL-2 to compete in those events also.  Eric

I was merely making an observation,,
I was not suggesting MORE classes, perhaps distilling the classes available into a select few would be more effective,, say profile, then a built up class, and having two divisions of each a sportsman and an expert?
My intent on even answering this thread was to give an OUTSIDERS perspective as to one of the reasons I have looked at my equipment,, ( I have accumulated the stuff to make a stab at this) and then shook my head deciding instead to spend my time on stunt.
the other is that each time I have asked a question to learn about it, I seem to get embroiled in some form of controversy and bickering,, ( the last time was asking about what constitutes a model which qualifies for nostalgia points since the rules are ambiguous)
I think I would enjoy carrier, but like I said, I am the ONE person that flies control line within a 100 mile radius of me,, the closest is now Paul walker,, and Joe dill in deer park,,,,, they dont do carrier. so to fly with anyone, it means going to contests, besides, the reason i participate in this hobby is #1 I love airplanes and building them, and #2 I love to compete,,

Let me start by saying I have no answers just issues I see with the present rules. I think the idea above of everyone posting ideas for the next rules cycle is a great one. maybe we can come up with some answers to the following..

The speed limit in 15 is a joke, maybe this wasn't meant to be an entry level event (which it isn't). In order to really be competitive you need a $300.00 motor so you can trim for low speed and still have the power to get to the high speed limit. As I said above I don't have the answer but know one can't take the 15FP engine he happens to have laying around and compete in this class.

Yes we have Sportsman but it is only for one airplane design, profile.. What if a beginner wants to fly a class 1 or 2 airplane somebody gave him or he bought. In Stunt you can buy a Bobby Hunt built airplane and enter any class you feel big enough to compete in from beginner to expert.

10 minute slow flights are boring especially for spectators. They want to see controlled crashes with the anticipation that it might actually crash. Combat is one of the greatest spectator events in this hobby, why.. because the chances of seeing a crash are really good. What would you rather watch a prop hanging airplane that takes 10 minutes to make 7 laps and gently floats onto the deck or a 3 minute slow flight with what looks like a real carrier landing. Want to make Carrier more of a spectator event, just speed up the slow flight and it will happen. Spectators are where the new guys will come from.

So the rules changed to emphasize slow flight because the airplanes were getting too fast, this I can sure understand sorta.. Especially from a safety standpoint.. Somehow I think we need to find a happy medium, again I don't know how to get there but would sure be nice if we can figure out a way.. Although the speed limit in 15 doesn't really do what I believe the originator of the rule intended it might work if we had Sportsman and expert in all classes.

Sportsman and expert in all classes.. Now we open up a can of worms for participation and trophy expense.. This might be like the chicken or the egg.. if we had true beginner events would we get enough participants to justify buying the trophies, if we don't we will never know.

Well here is the old man's thoughts.   No matter what people come up with for beginners/new people, it will still be the ones who get out and practice, just like any other event.    If you are the only one flying carrier in your area, fly any way.   I remember there was only one person flying the event when I first saw him practice at the field one weekend.    I just had to have one.  Sterling had just came out with the Gaurdian.   What a mess I made of my first one using one of Fox's first throttle control engines.   Had the verticle sliding exhaust valve.  Yes it flew and I needed practice.   Carrier is fun and takes practice.

15 Carrier started as a local event, boy were some people upset when we showed up to beat them at their own game.   The NW is now flying with .40 size engines in profile.   I think the engines have to be stock with a muffler.  Keep it local.

Shrinking supply of 36s? That was true maybe 20 year ago when Fox and ST quit making the high performance .35 and .36 R/C engines. With all the light and powerful .32-.36 engines out there this is no longer the case (but that's been debated to death in previous posts). That being said, I support the NW Sport Carrier event and hope it catches on. Picture: NW Sport Carrier Sorta Wildhellcat. 

I can agree with that Mark. I am trying to talk some more into giving it a try. NW Carrier plane #2  

Mark: What kits are you considering? These type of planes goes together fast, just keep 'em simple. No need to put a front row finish on them as they are going to get beat up. Wildhellcat's been around for years, my son flew it with a 35FP as a junior. collected a lot of trophies. The Devastator doesn't have much time on it but flies well.

Pete, I have a mustang that I might use for nostalgia ( profile ) I have a couple motor options for that one,,

but for NW 40 I am thinking about using a RM +P winged bf 109 kit that Pat cut for me.. simple design, but it should be cool,,,

also eying a couple other options, but the 109 is probably the fastest option right now,, 

I'll bet you could count all the 36s available on one hand and have a finger left (not that finger  ) You would run out of fingers and toes counting 40s. Point is there are a lot more 40s than 36s in the world!                  Mike

If you want to make a change, 25 would be better.  Plenty of 25's on the market, too.  40's have so much power, it would be more over the top than 65's in the past.  Today's 25 is the 40 of the 60's.

Douglas, actually the specify the .40 FP or .35 FP,, to prevent someone from coming in with a K+B .40 or Nelson .40, its about defining the equipment to level theplaying field,,

Here's another. No strings, no cost, no responsibility as to it's crashing. No kiding!
Joe

I've been reading this thread on a mobile device with a small screen and an even smaller keyboard.  Finally on my computer at home.

I started flying Carrier in Denver with Gerry Deneau, Greg Settle and others in the mid 70's.  So I got to fly under the "old" scoring rules as well as the current scoring system.  I got so interested that for a while I was on the Control line Contest Board's Navy Carrier Advisory Committee.  So I got to see some of the rules being made.  Gerry Deneau and I came up with the first set of 15 Carrier rules.  Gerry actively promoted the event and created a number of designs for the event. 

15 Carrier was intended as a beginners event.  But you have to remember the time period (early to mid 1980s) the event was created in.  The flying style used today (hanging) had not yet evolved.  A 90 second low speed for a profile model was good.  A 120 second low speed was real good.  The speed limit for high speed was set to keep the event from becoming a horsepower event by folks using former Goodyear engines.  With the prohibition on line sliders folks pushed the leadouts forward to get the high speed and then tried to fly the best low speed they could.  A Cox Conquest 15 (relatively inexpensive compared to a Rossi) could hit the high speed limit.  Gerry's first 15 Carrier model was a Wildcat with an HB 15.  Mine was an MO-Bipe without the upper wing using an OPS 15.  Gerry's Dauntless (published in Model Aviation in 1984) had a Cox Conquest and would hit the speed limit with the leadout position shown on the plans.  What happened to 15 Carrier?  A new flying style that was not envisioned by the rules authors.

Someone asked about the 60 degree rule for low speed.  Prior to the 60 degree rule the limit for hanging flight was simple, maintain forward motion.  As long as the model continued to move counterclockwise around the circle the nose could be pointed straight up (or backwards).  The 60 degree rule was an attempt to bring some sanity to hanging flight.  One of the points of discussion was 45 or 60.  As I remember it, 60 was chosen because folks it was felt that no one could maintain maintain a 60 degree nose up attitude for long periods.  With the old fixed leadouts set for high speed, that assumption was probably pretty valid.  Hanging flight with this configuration model allowed folks to approach 150 seconds low speed.

What about sliders?  I had sliders in my 1978 NATS model and I wasn't the first by a long shot.  However, before we talk about sliders lets look at the rear position rule for the leadouts.  Must emerge from the model within the root rib range.  And the third line must be between or within 1 inch of the elevation lines.  That came in response to a WAM approach to low speed of attaching the third line to the aft of the model and pulling the tail in to yaw the model out for low speed.  Excessive thrust vectors didn't come from sliders. Sliders are an attempt to exploit a proven way to fly slower,  point the nose out!

At this point the stage is set for the evolution of low speed flying to the current style.  Point the nose out. Gives good line tension, plus uses lots of power to keep the model in the air. Point the nose up at 60 degrees.  Made possible by the nose out and uses even more power to keep the model in the air.  Now play with the CG a little.  Voila!  Precise modern hanging flight is now possible.

Guess what.  No rule change enabled this new form of low speed flying.  This was legitimate under the old rules and would have been richly rewarded under that scoring system.  So why did it evolve?  My belief is the current low speed flying approach came about because there wasn't any more to be had on the top end.  With unlimited nitro fuel Class 2 models were in the 120s, Class 1 models in the 110+ range, and Profiles with OS 36s and K&B 5.8s were in the low to mid 90s.  With a scoring system that is based on the high speed and low speed differential with the high speed where does one go for more points?  Low Speed.

We would have ended up with hanging low speed flight under the old rules.  We had a glimpse of that in Profile Carrier at the 1976 Nats in Dayton OH. As I remember it, the pilot (Dick Davies?) didn't get a complete flight.  But we all got a demonstration of what was possible in low speed.

So, what was beginner in 1982 might not be beginner in 2012.  But could it be?  I believe the success with Stunt is that there is basically one event and it is divided into skill classes with recommended progression thresholds between classes.  Progression seems to be managed by peer pressure and a desire to compete with the big boys.  It doesn't require a centralized record system.  Would anyone be willing to pull back to a single Carrier event with skill classes?  How much of the dilution of the Navy Carrier events should we remove to get back to a small core and then apply skill classes to provide competition for all participants?

Later,

Dave

I think it may have been pointed out already, but just to make sure, .15 Carrier does have skill levels. Billy B, I think, came up with the idea. If you break 200, you're in Expert. Below 200 puts you in Sportsman.

I believe that if hanging were ruled out, there would be even less Carrier flying. What is the success rate in completed flights in , say, Nostalgia ClassII? Compare that to the success rate in AMA Class II. I've seen some really sharp scale Corsairs, Hellcats, etc, but many of them are never flown, and if they are, they are crashed in low speed or in attempted landings.

I flew Nostalgia Class II with a Guardian and frankly, it wasn't fun at all. Getting off the deck was ok, High-speed was ok, low speed was very problematic, landing was a disaster. More practise would surely help, but the main missing ingredient was engine set-up/control knowledge. It takes a lot of dedication, learning, perseverance and skill to get to the top with planes geared for high speed scoring. The present system is difficult enough, the "old" technology was/is exponentially tougher, and will cause a decrease in participation....at least that is what I think...could be wrong, of course,   dale g

On using 40's in Profile Carrier.  In a conversation with Ron Duly a long time ago he told me that before Profile was an official event the folks in California used 40's. Apparently it was the AMA's rule process and a desire to have Slo Rat, Slow Combat, & Profile Carrier share a common engine displacement that resulted in Profile Carrier being a 35 displacement event.

If the Carrier community were to codify a skill system, shifting Profile to 40's shouldn't be a problem.  But then I don't have a good idea on how to deal with muffler pressure. One of the limits on high speed performance in Profile is getting off the deck without sagging.  A pressurized fuel system changes that. I think muffler pressure could get out of hand unless there was some careful rule development.   

Dave

Pressure:

The modern RC engine/crab/muffler system is designed to work together.  If the event is intended to be expanded to survive, the rules should require that this  system be kept together.  The muffler nullifies any suspected power boost.  An unmuffled 40 with a huge throat, crankcase pressure, and left hand crank is  whole different animal.

While comparing carrier to combat and racing it would be honest to notice that these categories have recognized the excessive power of modern 35's and 40's and downsized most events to 15 or 25. 

I don’t see a big difference between combat and carrier

Combat allows up to .36 with restrictions (suction) for Slow; unlimited (pressure OK) for Fast combat.

Carrier is the same except we allow bigger motors in Class I and II.

Combat also has some unofficial speed limit events, which we also have. And at least at Brodak’s there are Sportsman/ Expert classes. We have Sportsman in profile, 15 sometimes is separated into sportsman/expert classes like at the NATS, A lot of local contests like Brodak’s are Sportsman oriented.

Racing has dropped engines to 15 and 25 sizes in some events. I don’t know much about the unofficial racing events, maybe they have too..

I don’t think engine restrictions, flying at 60 degrees or not, or any rules changes fix anything.

I have a Nelson 15 Goodyear motor on a 15 profile that I choke down and run on 10%.
I’ll guarantee it can hit 70, but I fly it at about 60MPH. So should my motor be illegal?  If it was would anyone fly carrierthat isn’t because we all had OS15’s, or better yet old Fox 15x’s. Be careful with the Fox and OS, some people know how to make them go fast. So they have to be stock , untouched blah blah.  Where is the fun in that? If you want to compete don’t you want to win against the best?

Don’t sit on the sidelines and just complain, enter a contest and compete with as much effort as you want to put it. Flying slow-slow is OK, I have done it by entering a biplane, or go fast-slow or something in between. But fly you’ll have fun.

     Can someone tell me how I can make my messages on this forum longer than this little box lets me now? Or am I asking the wrong question at the wrong time.  Eric

I will resist the urge to dumb down my question for you Mr Conley,, but if you just continue typing, the box will magically scroll to allow you to write a book if you so desire,,

now on the subject at hand,,I have never suggested dumbing down the event,, I have however asked for some clarifications of the rules, and have been told that what the rules say aren't what they mean,, ( with regards to nostalgia) that said, My suggestion was in fact from a stunt guy,, ME,, and yeah, I would like to try carrier, but I am not going to invest hundreds of hours in an even where first off I have to catch the right guy at the right time to get help,, and second, why would I want to drive 400 miles to a contest to COMPETE, knowing I am not competative,, aside from the fact that there arent any carrier only contests. So, I am looking at an event that I can start off casually,, minimal investment FINANCIALLY and then if I like it I can assure you I will practice my little heart out. I apologize for getting my panties in a wad, but I hear this crap all the time, not just from carrier, but also in RC where I fly Pylon,, the people who Know how, just want to know how, they are not interested in making the event ATTRACTIVE to new comers,,
attitudes and comments like yours are what make me loose motivation to even experiement with carrier,, I am a passionate and avid competitor,, Ask Joe Just, ask anyone who knows me, If I decide to pursue the event, I will make the investment,, but I would like to be able to do an entry level, and have SOME chance of competing against my peers,, Have you forgotten that the goal is to GROW the event,, if you want it to grow take a lesson from the classes that are in fact growing,, like, hmmm STUNT,, then figure out why it is growing,, ( skill classes, consistant rules) then maybe you can figure out a way to help grow the event you are apparantly passionate about,,
the one thing I can promise you is, that if you continue to whitewash people like me that have a casual interest in the event,, by saying we are not willing to practice so why whine,, well you wont have to worry about it,, I wont be there.
I love the concept of this event,, but holy trap wire batman,, how about some POSITIVE dialog about it and perhaps soem fresh ideas on improving attendance instead of trashing people who are interested,,,
 

Mark,

I started flying carrier 22 years ago. One of the reasons I stayed is that carrier fliers are the most helpful of any group I have been associated with. (The event is really a lot of fun too) At probably any contest other than the Nats, if you can get a complete flight and 100 pt landing you have a shot at one of the top 3 places. Any other event I have tried I can't say that.

Just try it you'll like it.

John

Pete,
Pretty hard to get much simpler than 7 fast laps, 7 slow laps and land. What seems to buffalo folks are the sliders and 60 degree flight. Most people that enter Sportsman, and this probably goes for NW sportsman, don't have sliders or attempt high flight. There is nothng that says you have to have a slider.

Some people will fly at higher angles, but they usually have very low high speed times, and in any event high scoring Sportsman would be encourage to fly the AMA class. Problem is a high scoring Sportsman doe not exist, at least in 22 yrs I have not seen one.
John

I'm generally not one to rant, but I can't hold it any longer. Let me preface my comments by saying that I support everyone's right to have and express an opinion, and that no one's opinion is wrong; if that's how you feel about something, how can it be wrong? However, there may be some factual inaccuracies or misconceptions that could do with some clarification. Most of my comments are at least loosely directed at other things that have been said here, but I have no issues or grievances with any particular person. So, in no particular order, here goes...

As for 15 carrier, a $300 engine is definitely NOT required. My personal engine of choice is the Conquest 15. I feel it has the right balance of good performance and good manners. I got mine 20 years ago for $40.00, and am still using it today. By the way, as Dave Rolley mentioned, this was the engine Gerry Deneau was using on the first published 15 carrier design in 1984, so I dare say it fit in with the originally intended parameters of the event. I know that some people have used Nelson 15's, but I doubt anyone ever bought one specifically to use in 15 carrier! And it's hard to argue with the "if you've got it, use it" philosophy. I COULD use a Nelson, but there is no reason. I can go 70 with the Conquest, and I don't really think I'd go any slower if my line guide was back farther. Make no mistake, if there was no maximum speed limit, I'd use one, so the speed limit is doing what it was intended to do.

If you want to use a 15FP, you shouldn't expect to go the speed limit, because let's face it, they're kinda wimpy. I would suspect that the typical 15FP user would probably be a novice, and my advice to a novice in 15 (besides fly Sportsman instead because it's really easier) would be to trim the airplane to maximize high speed. High speed points are more of a sure thing than low speed points. And shoot for successful, complete flights before trying for high scoring flights. True in all classes, really.....

On the subject of the sportsman skill class in profile, I think it's great. Sportsman was the most entered class at our last contest. I think the rules should remain the same as "expert" profile, to make it easier to move up IF THAT IS YOUR DESIRE. Most sportsman entries don't hang much if at all, so non-hangers can have a home. But, if somebody intends to learn to hang, they can start in sportsman and aren't immediately thrown in with the experts.
Class I and II typically don't get many entries, so a novice still has a chance to bring home some hardware without the need for multiple skill classes.

Somebody said that events need skill classes and consistent rules. We've got the skill class, and we would love consistent rules. Trouble is, we are constantly faced with people who want to change the rules to suit them. Most of the time, the current rules already allow them to do what they want. What people seem to want is to prohibit US from doing what WE like. So yes, we can get kind of defensive and testy when the subject comes up.

As for being instantly competitive, I can understand the desire, but would like to try to redirect it slightly. Instead of thinking in terms of being competitive (besting the other guy), think of it in terms of being successful (besting yourself). There is no reason you can't be successful right away. Regardless of how fast or slow you go, if your equipment works properly and you get a complete flight, you're successful. If you score higher this time than you did last time, you're a winner! It doesn't matter what anybody else did. There is a much bigger sense of accomplishment in losing with a new personal best score than there is in winning with a mediocre performance.

As others have mentioned, carrier guys are a really helpful bunch. We know it is up to us to bring more people into the fold. But we also want to defend and hang onto what we already have. There's plenty of room for everybody. If you want join us, great! If not, well that's OK too.  

Respectfully submitted,    Bill Bischoff

     I think the NW Sport carrier event is great. At the last NWR there were 4 or 5 entry's and everyone got at least 1 real good flight in. As far as I can remember everyone got their landing points also which sometimes is hard to do but these planes seemed to have no trouble. The event moved along much quicker than the AMA stuff and I think everyone went away happy. The nearest thing that the current carrier contests can offer is Sportsman Carrier which is a little different. I hope that there is a good turnout in NW Sport Carrier this year along with write ups and perhaps the event will spread out through the rest of the country.  Eric

If my wife's health improves I hope to at least go to the contest in April in Portland.  That may be the only contest I can make in 2012.  In any case I will be promoting the NW .40 Sport Profile event in future reports in my colum in CLW.  I really believe that Mike Potter has really come up with a great event that could easily replace "Sportsman" profile on a National level. I mean look what happend to two racin g events that started in the NW..Clown Racing and .35 Sport Race.  Both events are popular coast to coast with minor rule changes here and there. My only hope is that entry in NW .40 can not be entered by anyone flying AMA Profile.  Let's consider leaving the NW .40 event for beginners, re-treads and the rest of us that only fly Carrier for the fun of it and not to push the envelope in Profile competition.

Joe