News:


Advertise Here

  • June 27, 2022, 10:05:31 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Big list of Classic era legal models.  (Read 643 times)

Offline Ty Marcucci

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 618
Big list of Classic era legal models.
« on: June 20, 2022, 01:27:42 PM »
Thanks to Keith Trostle, I was able to cut and past Dave Day's listing of Classic era models. The Brits allow OTS or Vintage into the classic event. Well we do too.  OTS and Classic models can participate in N30 or super 70's events. You just  can't go backwards. D>K
Ty Marcucci

Offline Jim Hoffman

  • 21 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 484
Re: Big list of Classic era legal models.
« Reply #1 on: June 20, 2022, 01:57:50 PM »
The Link above did not work for me.  I've tried to attach an Excel file which is a copy of the Dave Day Classic Legal list

Online Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 12631
Re: Big list of Classic era legal models.
« Reply #2 on: June 20, 2022, 02:03:02 PM »
Thanks to Keith Trostle, I was able to cut and past Dave Day's listing of Classic era models. The Brits allow OTS or Vintage into the classic event. Well we do too.  OTS and Classic models can participate in N30 or super 70's events. You just  can't go backwards. D>K

   Just as a reminder on these lists - if an airplane is on the list, it is legal for PAMPA or apparently  the UK. If it is *not* on the list, that does not mean it is illegal for PAMPA - it is ambiguous, it may or may not be legal.

    I note this because, every time these lists come up, someone somewhere decides to use it as a "go/no-go list" and I still occasionally hear of people talking about getting DQed for trying to use a model not on the list. That's not how it is formulated - the *vast, vast majority* of legal airplanes are not and will not be on the list.   

     As only an example,  I have 6-7 designs from the 70s, 6-7 from the 80's, and at least one from the 90's that will soon be legal for Nostalgia 30, none of them are on any list and none of them are generally known. The very first "long-tail" Infinity is about a year and a half from being legal, not that I recommend you build one...  Point being, I can show up at a Super 70's contest with my my very first original design (for OS-25S baffle piston), it will not be on the list, but will be legal.   Unfortunately, everyone who ever saw it fly is now dead, but definitely legal, so you will have to take my word for it, I guess. The old grocery bag it is drawn on is not dated.

     Brett
« Last Edit: June 21, 2022, 12:08:50 AM by Brett Buck »

Offline Ty Marcucci

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 618
Re: Big list of Classic era legal models.
« Reply #3 on: June 20, 2022, 11:17:43 PM »
The list is posted in the Classic section.   I will be adding to the list as many in the PAMPA book are not on Dave Day's lists. Brett is right about many not listed any where, BUT the entrant is advised to bring  proof if possible of the models lineage. D>K

From what I have seen at many VSC and local contests, if you said you built or designed or flew it prior to the cut off date, no one  will or is going to argue the point. It's not that important and besides who in heck is going to cheat at a toy airplane contest that decides NOTHING world shaking. It is a fun event.   
« Last Edit: June 23, 2022, 12:54:37 PM by Ty Marcucci »
Ty Marcucci

Online Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 12631
Re: Big list of Classic era legal models.
« Reply #4 on: June 21, 2022, 12:22:01 AM »
The list is posted in the Classic section.   I will be adding to the list as many in the PAMPA book are not on Dave Day's lists. Brett is right about many not listed any where, BUT the entrant is told to bring  proof if possible of the models lineage. D>K

    Encouraged might be a better word. I emphasize again that *no one is going around trying to find excuses to DQ you by looking for "deviations"* at least for PAMPA contests. Unless it really stands out, like a Nobler with a 16" tail moment, you are going to almost certainly going to be OK.

    These are basically goofy fun-fly events for 99.5% of the participants (or, we are reliving the 1992 NATs - which, I will go out on a limb and say will turn out about the way it did the first time!). There's no particular reason or any inclination to cheat, and no one would do it anyway.

    Brett

Online Dan McEntee

  • 2015
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 5593
Re: Big list of Classic era legal models.
« Reply #5 on: June 21, 2022, 06:26:55 AM »
   I applaud Ty's efforts!! It would a great thing indeed if we had the participation in C/L stunt in general that would make such a large list necessary to find a design no one else has done !! These days most seem to be interested in finding the absolutely newest design that is N-30 legal !! I just saw a photo Chris McMillin posted on FB of a stunt model patterned after the Grumman Prowler that is really cool looking and I'll bet it's not on anyone's list. If you find a design that really interests you, and you manage to find any kind of plan or documentation on it that allows it to be built, you should have enough information to prove it's age at a contest. I still think N-30 ought to be abandoned just because it's redundant and really just another modern stunt class.
  Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee
AMA 28784
EAA  1038824
AMA 480405 (American Motorcyclist Association)

Online Joe Gilbert

  • AMA Member and supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 467
Re: Big list of Classic era legal models.
« Reply #6 on: June 23, 2022, 06:32:04 AM »
Electra by Dick Williams could be added to the list. I did not see it on Dave Day list.
Joe Gilbert

Offline Steve Dwyer

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 533
Re: Big list of Classic era legal models.
« Reply #7 on: June 23, 2022, 07:14:03 AM »
Ty,  If you want to tweak the list, the Baker ME 109 Item # 232 is 48" I built it in 1960 and still have it flying, Baker's Spitfire #365 is 44" span.

Good job,

Steve

Offline Ty Marcucci

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 618
Re: Big list of Classic era legal models.
« Reply #8 on: June 23, 2022, 08:02:12 AM »
Ty,  If you want to tweak the list, the Baker ME 109 Item # 232 is 48" I built it in 1960 and still have it flying, Baker's Spitfire #365 is 44" span.

Good job,

Steve

I was amazed at how little info Dave Day's list had, as most plans show the WS, engine etc. I am not going to tweak his list, just add to it. H^^
Ty Marcucci

Online Ken Culbertson

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 4560
Re: Big list of Classic era legal models.
« Reply #9 on: June 23, 2022, 11:03:46 AM »
The "approved lists" that I have seen so far are pretty much restricted to kits and published plans.  That is probably the tip of the iceberg when it comes to eligible planes.  Remember we are dealing with the pre-computer era and drawing up plans for something that was not getting published was at best sketchy.  My best friend during that era was a draftsman and even he only did plans for his published designs.  Camera's were not in everybody's pocket either.  Another phenomena was the "great minds" problem.  How many times during those years did you come up with an original design only to see one just like it at the next contest?  In many ways the Classic designation is unfair to the average design from that era.  Towards the end of the 60's the larger planes started showing up.  Longer and larger tails, thicker airfoils.  My own designs from that era had thick airfoils, huge tail feathers and long moments.  One of them is nearly a plan overlay of the Vector 40.  It was from 1967.

My point is this.  I really enjoy the classic event.  It takes me back to my youth.  I enjoy both building and flying what I flew then.  I wonder how many other fliers would join in if they could fly their own designs that they never thought to document?   I am lucky locally, everybody knows my Sandpiper design goes way back but how would it be treated at VSC?  I wouldn't even try.  Build me a Shark instead.

Just the nostalgic ramblings of an old man - Ken
AMA 15382
If it is not broke, don't fix it.
USAF 1968-1974 TAC

Offline Dave_Trible

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 5586
Re: Big list of Classic era legal models.
« Reply #10 on: June 23, 2022, 11:30:35 AM »
There also are significant modifications of classic airplanes-during the classic period- that could be available.  An example would be our local 'pro' flyer from the 1960's in the KC area, Ray Reinschmitt had a twin engine Shark 45.  Doc Holliday rememberers it and I helped Ray launch it on test flights a few times.  I would guess as long as there are people who will verify such things the airplane should be allowed.  The only issue in that period was that maximum engine displacement was .60 or .61.  Ray had two Fox 35s on it.  However two .29s would have been legal.  Today it wouldn't matter unless you were wishing to fly by the old existing rules.  If you are allowing electric today etc.,  I can't see how this could be enforced.  If I were to build one I'd opt for the .35s.  How many modified Noblers were there?  I flew a 'doctored' Ruffy made to look like a navy jet in my first Nats as a junior, 1968.  That should be eligible.

Dave
AMA 20934
FAA Certificate FA3ATY4T94

Offline john e. holliday

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 22200
Re: Big list of Classic era legal models.
« Reply #11 on: June 23, 2022, 11:46:14 AM »
Hey, I remember Ray Reinsmidtte and that Shark.   Also his nemesis Ken Kriebel flying his version of the Thunderbird.  Also this is the period of time when planes were left on the ground for appearance judging. H^^
John E. "DOC" Holliday
10421 West 56th Terrace
Shawnee, KANSAS  66203
AMA 23530  Have fun as I have and I am still breaking a record.

Online Trostle

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3187
Re: Big list of Classic era legal models.
« Reply #12 on: June 23, 2022, 12:03:18 PM »

I wonder how many other fliers would join in if they could fly their own designs that they never thought to document?   I am lucky locally, everybody knows my Sandpiper design goes way back but how would it be treated at VSC?  I wouldn't even try.

Just the nostalgic ramblings of an old man - Ken


You stated that you would not even try to enter your design at VSC.  Why not?  You obviously do not know the people that run VSC or have any experience whatsoever about how VSC has been run for 30 plus years.  I can almost guarantee that if you show up at the annual VSC with a design that you claim that you designed before January 1, 1970, you would be allowed to fly that airplane in the Classic event.

In the past when PAMPA officials have been asked to qualify an otherwise little known design, all that has been needed is a written statement from the design that attests that the airplane in question was designed prior to January 1, 1970.

A really cheat shot against the VSC orgainizers.  Cheap Shot against PAMPA.

Keith
« Last Edit: June 23, 2022, 01:19:58 PM by Trostle »

Offline Ty Marcucci

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 618
Re: Big list of Classic era legal models.
« Reply #13 on: June 23, 2022, 12:31:58 PM »
Electra by Dick Williams could be added to the list. I did not see it on Dave Day list.

Hi Joe. Thanks for the input. It is now on the list. I cannot  find anything on this model other than the RSM kit I built and seeing it at VSC many years ago.. That is the reason I started to build it as electric, only it is too small in the nose for this. Still have the wing and stab.... H^^
Ty Marcucci

Online Ken Culbertson

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 4560
Re: Big list of Classic era legal models.
« Reply #14 on: June 23, 2022, 02:13:10 PM »

In the past when PAMPA officials have been asked to qualify an otherwise little known design, all that has been needed is a written statement from the design that attests that the airplane in question was designed prior to January 1, 1970.

This is good news but I am curious why you would think that not asking the officials to take my word that an unknown  design from an unknown author that looks "modern" was actually designed in the early 60's is a cheap shot?

Keith
AMA 15382
If it is not broke, don't fix it.
USAF 1968-1974 TAC

Online Trostle

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3187
Re: Big list of Classic era legal models.
« Reply #15 on: June 23, 2022, 03:35:12 PM »

"In the past when PAMPA officials have been asked to qualify an otherwise little known design, all that has been needed is a written statement from the design that attests that the airplane in question was designed prior to January 1, 1970.

"This is good news but I am curious why you would think that not asking the officials to take my word that an unknown  design from an unknown author that looks "modern" was actually designed in the early 60's is a cheap shot?"


Ken,

First off, you need to fix the manner you set your quotes.

I quoted your earlier statement:

(from Ken)  "everybody knows my Sandpiper design goes way back but how would it be treated at VSC?  I wouldn't even try."

By your own words, you were suggesting that the people who run VSC might not treat you nice, so because you might get your feelings hurt, you "wouldn't even try". That sir, was a cheap shot against those who run the VSC because you have no idea what the officials at VSC would do.  If there was doubt in your mind, before you make a commitment to go to VSC, you could at least contact the VSC Contest Director and ask.  That would be the polite and professional thing to do.  However, if you do not even plan to attend the VSC, then why even bring the subject up.   Instead, you cast aspersions on how the VSC is run.  I think many will attest that VSC is managed as well and professionally as any contest.

In your original post, you did not even suggest that you might ask the officials about accepting your word about the providence of your design.  Instead, you stated that you would not even try.

I repeat:  Your original post was a cheap shot.

Keith





« Last Edit: June 23, 2022, 03:59:18 PM by Trostle »


Advertise Here
Tags:
 


Advertise Here