Are they Really killing pattern points next year?

[Louis Rankin]

If you're just now finding out about appearance points, I can't wait till you find out about having to weigh the models on a cold windy morning before the contest.  Also the new line size requirements!  If you can build a 63 oz model with a piped 90 in it, you can fly it on 0.015 cables.  Cheers.

As a CD I do not intend to weigh any models at all.  Under our current system all we do is ask the modeler "Hey, what is your engine size?" before we pull test.  Under the new rule I will just yell out "Hey, how much does your plane weigh?".  If that is not satisfactory, then everyone can just fly with .021 lines.  I will have scales available for the modeler to weigh his plane before the contest.

Even at the NATS, no one has ever visually checked my engine size.  The pit boss always just yells "What is your engine size?".  And, only once in three years at the NATS has anyone ever mic'd my lines.

[frank williams]

The proposal passed.  6-3.  I wrote to all I could.  Keith even voted against it on the final ballot, but it passed.

[Bob Reeves]

I agree with Louis and if I'm CD again next year that is what we will do in Tulsa.. Ask the pilot and if he isn't sure have scales available, end of problem...

[Clayton Smith]

The proposal passed.  6-3.  I wrote to all I could.  Keith even voted against it on the final ballot, but it passed.

This doesn't make sense.  Trostle voted AGAINST his own proposal!  Yet the CLPA Contest Board voted to pass it?  It should have been withdrawn from consideration.

Clayton Smith
AMA 16879
High Point, NC

[phil c]

Brett, you might look into the F2D combat lines from Italy/Russia.  4 strands of brass-plated music wire.  Stuff I got is .42 mm(.0165in.) and pull test easily to 65lb per line, compared to 35 lb or so or .015 stainless or 45-50 lb. for .018's.  They aren't as easy to handle as typical stainless lines- much springier, tend to form loops, the twist in the individual wires isn't very well balanced so the lines tend to develop loopy twists that take more care in reeling up.  the biggest negative is keeping them dry, especially in the terminations so they don't rust.  WD-40 or something similar is a must.

[Howard Rush]

How does one find the record of the rules proposal vote?  What I saw was http://www.modelaircraft.org/events/ruleproposals/finalvoteresults.aspx  and http://www.modelaircraft.org/events/ruleproposals/claerobatics.aspx

Howard (I'm with Scott) Rush

[Bob Reeves]

Looks like the AMA site has a misprint CLA-09-0 is probably CLA-09-9 as I see no CLA-09-0 in the proposals. These are the same likks more or less I posted earlier...

[frank williams]

CLA-09-9 had a cross proposal against it that failed.  I think that probably caused the numbering change somehow.

[Bradley Walker]

The proposal passed.  6-3.  I wrote to all I could.  Keith even voted against it on the final ballot, but it passed.

All I can do is laugh...

[peabody]

You know.....since the evil guy, we have been pounded and pounded that PAMPA runs PA in the USA and that the AMA will abide by whatever PAMPA suggests....
WTF happened here?
I never saw anything in Stunt News about rules proposals....and my District Director was NOT included in any talks about rules changes....
It sure seems to me that things are a bit skewed....

[Bradley Walker]

PAMPA has no official function whatsoever when it comes to AMA rules proposals...

Some people get confused.

[frank williams]

At the PAMPA business meeting at the Nats this year I expressed my concern that there should be much more up front visibility of rules proposals in SN.  The official AMA process has visibility, but you have to know where to look, and when, to find it.  I knew that half of the members at the Nats meeting didn't know the changes for 2009.  I got a late start lobbying against these proposals and wasn't successful.  The late start was that, like I said, you have to look in the right places at the right time.  The internet AMA site is helping though.

At the business meeting, I suggested that the PAMPA competitions committee (has been escenitially inactive) should be activated.  I think Bill Rich said he would look into establishing a place on the PAMPA site for rules proposals discussions.

Although the official process for rules is an AMA procedure, PAMPA as an organization, should (must) be knee deep in the process, in my opinion.  Rules proposals should be discussed at length in SN and receive ample visibility so we have time to contact the AMA district PA rules board members. 

[Randy Ryan]

This will make the anti BOM people very happy.

But every change has a consequence.. Maybe we should perform maneuvers in any order that we want... The judges would just love that!

But I have another question... FAI is going to eliminate K factors.

I have never liked K factors because everyone does the same maneuvers, therefore from take off to landing there is no change in difficulty for any pilot. It is not like diving where you can choose you dives.

But here is the BIG question: Does no K factor mean that each maneuver is worth only 10 points?  Does that mean that scores will be given in 0.1 increments? That makes the USA system of 40 points max look a whole lot better.

It seems that the Pattern that was brilliantly installed by George Aldridge and others is slowly being torn apart by people who want a personal change.

Do a maneuver out of order... that hurt ME... change it.

I forgot a hand signal before I started the pattern... that hurt ME... change it.

(People look at me funny because I still signal as a courtesy to the judge telling them I am starting the pattern on the upcoming lap)

I don't work as hard to finish my airplane and got less appearence points... that hurt ME... change it.

I don't build my airplane and got no appearance points because some judge actually asked me if I built the airplane... that hurt ME... change it.

I am so disgusted about the endless trivial changes, that I almost don't care anymore

I wish I'd have said this Tom, I'm glad you did, the event is being chipped away at by people that don't want to step up to it at it's full height.

[Bradley Walker]

At the PAMPA business meeting at the Nats this year I expressed my concern that there should be much more up front visibility of rules proposals in SN.  The official AMA process has visibility, but you have to know where to look, and when, to find it. 

Again, exactly what I said to Frank...

I have always felt it was odd that we have an an organization that is supposed to represent the competition stunt pilot and the newsletter of that competition organization appears to have no function whatsoever when it comes to the administration of competition.  The newsletter serves to simply report news and events as an after effect and has no communication tools to engage the people for the actual shaping of the event.

When I say "event" I mean the REAL event, not the politics of PAMPA.

[john e. holliday]

You forget there are people out there that don't belong to PAMPA or don't want to be PAMPA members.  The AMA is the controlling organization and has been since I became a member back in 1956 and have never lapse membership.  I didn't join PAMPA until I started to fly stunt.  Those that frequent this forum as well as others have no excuse as to the outcome of the rules proposals.  Being on the board, does that mean I have to contact every AMA  and PAMPA member individually?  Having fun(I think),  DOC Holliday

[Howard Rush]

The rules process, FAI team selection process, and Nats operation are AMA functions.  PAMPA has no official function, and you don't need to be a PAMPA member to participate.  Any surprise I got from the rules changes is my fault.  At any time during the process I could have looked at the AMA Web site or merely asked my district representative, whom I see at the flying field often.  Furthermore, he actively sought my opinion.  I received this message from him last November:

"This is the time for the control line rules proposals to get their first vote. Please spend a few minutes and review the CLA proposals on the AMA web site, and let me know what you think of them. I have until Dec 15th to vote.

This is being sent to all Dist 11 stunt fliers that I have e-mail addresses for. If you know of others, please forward this to them."

[frank williams]

Yes, but …… PAMPA should be active in, and participate in, the  vetting, communicating, and refining of PA rules.  My opinion at least.  Who better to provide  advice and council to AMA than the Special Interest Group?  True, the only voting occurs with the “AMA” PA contest board, but ….. “they is us”.

Back in ‘90 something, when the safety thong rule got re-instated, I lobbied against it to no avail.  What I found out was that most of the PAMPA membership didn’t know how the AMA rules change process worked.  At that time, I made a terrible mistake in fairly publicly blaming the controlline contest board chairman of acting without any feedback from PAMPA.  I was wrong.  PAMPA was involved.

The interesting thing I found was that PAMPA was ask by the controlline contest board for input into this rules change.  As it turned out all district reps were queried for input on the safety thong rule.  Out of all districts I think there were 8 votes.  7 for and 1 against.  Unfortunately, I don’t think these reps carried the words about the rules out well enough to the members.  There wasn’t discussion or communication in SN about the proposal.  And poof, there it was. We got the safety thong back.  (I not here to argue the need or not for the thong ….  that horse is out of the barn) 

The un-intended consequences of this proposal was the need for emergency rules changes to eliminate the “starting and takeoff in one minute” bonus points. No biggie points-wise,  but people were rushing to get the engine started and cutting themselves on running engines trying to get to the handle to get the safety thong attached in time. (Actually a couple of quite visible prop accidents that really probably wern't that related to the thong prompted the emergency action)

So, add a column to the spreadsheet for plane weight, unique pulltest required, and line size.  Also, start building new pulltest machines.

[Howard Rush]

"Who better to provide  advice and council to AMA than the Special Interest Group? "

For stunt rules, people who fly stunt.  For Nats operation, people who go to the Nats.  For team selection, people who go to the team trials. 

At one time, there was a general AMA control line contest board.  Its members were not familiar with all events, so PAMPA may have helped distill stunt advice for them.  Now the AMA has a separate stunt contest board.  Its needs no input from an intermediary, and I hope it doesn't accept any.       

[frank williams]

Article 1 ....... The purpose of the corporation shall be to promote, preserve, and improve the Control Line Precision Aerobatics events.
Article 2 ... PAMPA is recognized by the Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) as the Special Intrest Group (SIG) representing Control Line Precision Aerobatics (CLPA) enthusiasts on a national and international basis.

 .... they is us ... us is them ...

One way to look at this is that AMA thought these new rules would be best for our event ....
Thankyou AMA

[Howard Rush]

That's what PAMPA claims to be and pretends to be, but having put a lot of volunteer effort into PAMPA, I am very disillusioned. 

[Trostle]

I do not intend to speak for Bill Rich.  However, he and I have talked about one of the issues being discussed here as well as what has been discused here and other forums.  Starting with the next issue of Stunt News, there will be a monthly column that outlines the rules change process, the possible need for rules change proposals, announce proposals as they are received by the Control Line Aerobatics Contest Board (CLACB), same with cross proposals, announce the results of the initial vote, the interim vote and final vote of the CLACB, and hopefully promote dialog throughout the rules change process cycle among CLPA enthusiasts and with their representatives on the CLACB as well as the PAMPA Competition Committee.  Work is underway to include similar information on the PAMPA website which will be more current than what can appear in the bimonthly PAMPA newsletter.  When appropriate, the column will include material from other PAMPA members.

Keith Trostle

[peabody]

Keith....this is pretty much closing the door after the horse has left.....

[Rudy Taube]

Thank you Keith.

This is an excellent idea and will be a big help to all of us in the next rules cycle.

It will make it very difficult for anyone to say: "When did THAT happen? I never heard of THAT RULE! .... etc." 

Regards, 

[Trostle]

Keith....this is pretty much closing the door after the horse has left.....

Rich,

Interesting comment.  Does that mean that we should not try do do something different and better for future change cycles?

The rules change cycle, proposals, and the vote of the Contest Boards have always been available by the AMA.  In the past, there have been notices in Stunt News and on the PAMPA website about various change proposals.  Starting with the next issue of Stunt News, there will be a regular Rules column that will make current rules change information more readily available to those interested.  There will also be similar information in a rules section (in work) on the PAMPA website.

Keith