PS. I have a financial stake as i have spent the last 8 years and over 10,000 dollars developing composite models for commercial purposes Bill with this out of the box ruling has ruined my investment in this field>
Molds shown above are for the Impact
Hi Jose,Why thankyou Bill.....I for one would never joke about anything as seemingly serious as this. Nor would I kidnap the thread....just having sympathy pains for Jose and others effected. I hope they feel better to know they are in my thoughts! H^^
Jose, hang in there. I would hate to see you, or anyone, basically, leave the event because of things like this. Pay no attention to the jokesters who would make light of a very serious situation. And trust, in such, that any personal connections do not exist.
Bill Little
If I am understanding the builder of the model rule the way you are stating it.
Models built using the cox foam wings That they used on the me109 stunter thing.
Would never be eligible for a nats event.
Even the models made from wood using the wings .
Am I correct ?
Yes. any flying surface that its part of the finish(interpreted as fiberglass type surface) is exposed to air (all airplane surfaces are flying surfaces) so the entire wetted area of a plane is a flying surface. words have meanings and the words used banned allot more than wings'fuse'stabs'elev.So let him know that you're going to build a clunker plane that he can't object to, that you're going to go to the Nats, and that you're going to challenge each and every plane that has any one of those features. If you can, recruit help for this endeavor. If he says "that's not what I meant" then show him what he wrote above and say "that's what you said".
Look at what else it eliminates
a fiberglass cowlings (Sig chipmunk)
b any model with a smooth bubble canopy (supplied by others)
c carbon fiber Mufflers exposed to view(air)
d all fiberglass and carbon wheel pants
e A stretch but as model must be presented ready for flight carbon fiber props
f carbon fiber landing gear (are judged for app.Pt's.) most are refinished
G you fill in the rest
"Sometimes when we get zealous about a cause blindness can set in and injustice will follow"
any model kit or custom can be illegal with the rule as written just look at items above.
Do i think that the above is the intent NO but this over zealous lets get the Shark has consequences.
Next we will have a re re re interpretation of the rule
Jose Modesto
The "international" stage has NO BOM. H^^That's my point. Just having a BOM means that we don't cultivate superlative pilots who are not also superlative builders. Interpreting the BOM to mean "absolutely nothing higher tech than 1950" means we're shooting ourselves in the foot come the Worlds.
So if I make my own molds and build a carbon fiber plane it's illegal?
Clarification of BOM at 2011 Nats -Not a reinterpertation of the BOM Rule
The BOM rule will be strictly enforced at the 2011 Nats. Kits/airplanes that have the flying surfaces covered when purchased/acquired do not qualify for BOM. Gel Coat or primered - painted airplanes ,or solid hard finished surfaces such as molded fiberglass or Carbon Fiber molded surfaces will not be allowed under BOM. Gel Coat is part of an actual type of finish of the flying surfaces, over the covering.
On many planes it the finish. Airplanes that are pre-painted with primer also represent a type of finsh over the covering of the flying surfaces.
I am having a hard time understanding some of the posts I have seen regarding the enforcement of the AMA BOM rule at the Nats. When a Nats entrant signs the entry form he/she is signing a statement that they are in fact the Builder of the Model. As ED I am charged with enforcing the BOM rule. I am not accusing any of the past EDs of not correctly enforcing BOM.
The BOM rule is very clear, if the model’s flying surfaces are covered in the kit, then these are in fact ARF and not ARC and therefore do not qualify under the current BOM rule. If you have purchased a commercial manufactured plane with pre-covered flying surfaces don’t bring it to the Nats and try to compete in Junior Senior or Open. The very nature of molded construction causes the covering of the flying surfaces to occur.
Examples would be the Yatsenko planes, Sharks, Classics, and others like the Blue Max and Extra 300.
There will be no “Grandfathered Planes,” just because they may have been allowed to compete in prior Nats; they will not be allowed to compete in 2011.
Rather than trying to get around BOM by compromising your integrity, why not build an airplane that meets the BOM requirement and compete on a level field with all the other Nats competitors.
It seems that each year, the line gets pushed further and further as to what is allowed under the rather nebulous "interpretation" that the AMA generated several years ago. The reason for that interpretation was valid at that time. There was a serious threat of multiple protests that could have had the effect of shutting down our whole Nats event that year. Nonetheless, the interpretation was made and was inserted in the rulebook and we have been saddled with that ever since, whether it is good, bad or indifferent.
Basically, I think the AMA BOM requirements for our CLPA event are acceptable.
The Nats EDs now have a problem with how far this ARF/ARC thing has gone. When a flier first appeared at the Nats with a Shark by Yatsenko, he had done his homework to document that his was a special kit that was especially set up by Yatsenko to qualify as a kit. It had come in pieces and he had assembled it. He had documentation to show the E.D. what he had started with and of his assembly. The E.D. readily admits that he put more emphasis on the time required to assemble the “special kit” and neglected to apply the “covering” of flying surfaces part of the rule. The photos used to document the building clearly showed the surfaces were already covered when purchased. Nevertheless, his model qualified as a BOM. Unfortunately, there are now prebuilt airplanes available (Made in Russia, the Ukraine or elsewhere) that their owners feel are acceptable because a previous model was acceptable, not knowing all the details that went into the decision.
So were do we go from here? The line has been pushed too far. I do not think it is too late to redraw the line and push back to where we have some semblance of a BOM. There are those who argue that our CLPA event is a flying event. That is not entirely correct. I think it is best described as a model airplane event that means that the contestant builds and flies his model in competition. That has essentially been the case since the BOM requirement went into the rulebook in the late 1940s.
It will not be easy to put the “Genie back in the bottle,” but we must do so. To allow planes that are pre-built, covered, primed and/or painted is unfair to the vast majority of competitors that build their own models to qualify for BOM.
It is entirely unacceptable for a few contestants to ignore the rule and compromise their integrity to gain an advantage. The BOM rule depends on the individual’s integrity. It’s certainly difficult to enforce this rule, but it is not difficult to identify the commercially available molded airplanes that obviously don’t qualify for BOM. I personally have flown many of these planes and actually own a Blue Max. I would love to be able to compete with this plane at the Nats but it doesn’t qualify for BOM. If you do not agree with the current BOM rule then you must take the proper steps to either revise or eliminate it.
Don’t try bending the rule to gain an advantage.
Just for clarification
Orestes Hernandez has won the Nat's twice with a shark. Orestes also won (2010) Bronze world champion
Josias Delgado won advance with a shark
Alex Becerril won advance with a Yatzenko Classic
i think this is the list of the Yatzenko championships
Don't recall if Alberto Haber won advance or was just kicked upstairs.
Jose Modesto
I have spent the last 3 years preparing my retirement part time job the dream was to be able to live in the tropics during building season and sell 12 Models a year(800.00 per model) then return to the NYC area in late April just in time for flying season in the north east. i guess the Grinch stole Christmas Now i have wasted 3 years of preparation setting up the shop in the Carribean and making all Molds its pretty tough right now to know that i need to do plan B instead of A
Don't feel bad for me as i have a Home on the beach lest than 30 yds to water with my Sailboat parked less than 200 yds away. the modeling was icing on the cake. retirement will still be sweet BTW you to could own a home for under $200,000 this is not a milionaires life just a workin Man.
Photo ofboat was for distance and general look my boat in marinathis was getaway day
Sorry for my comment on it "possibly" might not be the same in 2012. I had not seen David's postings. But "anything" is basically "possible", right? LOL!! Plus, according to the Mayan calendar, the NATS will take place before all of this will be a moot point, now 2013 might be a whole 'nuther kettle of fish! LOL!!!!!!
Seriously, there are way too many possibilities of future events occurring to write anything in "stone", but I get your drift. Whatever is, "is", and that's fine with me. Especially since the possibility of my actually entering a NATS again in 2012 are more possible than ever. Rules is rules, and we all gotta live by them. ;D
Bill
"This turns the BOM rule into a "no advanced materials at all" rule. That's great for anyone stuck in 1950, but it sure doesn't work for me."
Tim
NO where will you find any of the BOM statement saying this, You or anyone else can use any materials you want exotic-hi tech, or otherwise. You just have to make your own , not buy a pre built plane made of whatever.
Some of your post was accurate and insightful,Lots of what you posted is not correct ,and nowhere does it state those things by any reasonable reading of it.
However trying to twist-litigate rules here and twist them will not change how things get done.
No where does it say anything , for example ,about wheels and canopies etc.., both those items have been parts of a normal kit for decades
... There will be no “Grandfathered Planes,” just because they may have been allowed to compete in prior Nats; they will not be allowed to compete in 2011. ...
If this does anything or nothing maybe the BOM rule will get changed, updated, clarified, or etc...
At any rate it will serve NO constructive purpose for anyone to try to make this a personal fight, because is isn't
Randy
Rather than trying to get around BOM by compromising your integrity, why not build an airplane that meets the BOM requirement and compete on a level field with all the other Nats competitors.
Nothin like a healthy debate to get things clarified. H^^ We certainly wouldn't want things to get so complicated as to discourage the new people testing the waters[or do we?]. ;)I find not knowing what I can do a heck of a lot more discouraging than having lines clearly drawn.
Randy does this mean that the Shark fuse with the fiberglass outer surface is OK. So the prefinish is only for the flying surfaces wing and tail. Thanks for the clarification.
The objection to the fiberglass surfaces is only for the wings,flaps,stab and Elevator so the objection is not to the fiberglass finish but to were this finish is located.
Doc I spent over 3 years developing Composite models at over 10,000 dollars in equipment and supplies. This was done with the idea that if the models were good and performed well these models could be sold and i could supplement my retirement income.
Doc since the Nat's is the USA premier contest (sorry North West regional) the plan was to fly these models, have them perform well and see if other flyer's would like to purchase. Doc like any competitive sport its the performance of the equipment at the premiere contest that creates a buzz and helps sales. Now This rout is temporarily closed
Since the BOM rules as they stand now allow a person to purchase a model Completely built by others, as long as the pilot does some assembly(1.5Hr) and he applies his own covering the model is BOM compliant
I thought that composite built COMPONENT kits would be legal. BTW they were legal up to 2 days ago as posted in forum.
If it was just for me to compete a have over 14 models to choose that are BOM compliant but for the # year investment of time and money that is a little different.
2 photos #1 1992Nat's #2 2002 Nat's 17 APP bubble on elevator one Hr before App judging it would of been higher. Just for the i build my own comment
Something funny the paint job on the 1992 model was copied and modified from Bill Rich 1990 Nat's ship NOW THAT IS FUNNY
Jose Modesto
First, Bill is the insinuation of cheating for following the rules as practiced is beneath you..
since 2004 after the BOM ruling clarification these models with surfaces that do not require covering were accepted as BOM compliant. BOM further states that a models doesnot require covering is acceptable under BOM. ALL MODELS FLOWN DURING THIS TIME WERE LEGAL AND ACCEPTED BY THE PREVIOUS 2 NAT'S Ed's Is injurist to some to insinuate illegality, it's miss placed and wrong.
The BOM is obviously a living document not one set in concrete just look at all the innovation's and new technology that have been allowed under the antiquated BOM
1) foam wings
2) ARC
3) carbon fiber
a.props
b.mufflers
c.cowlings
d.spinners ETC.
E.Dave midgly fiberglass molded wings and fuse
Bill now has outlawed new manufacturing means just to eliminate one competitor. i never would of thought as an AMERICAN that a mere molded shell would have Me quaking in your boots.
Jose Modesto
PS. I have a financial stake as i have spent the last 8 years and over 10,000 dollars developing composite models for commercial purposes Bill with this out of the box ruling has ruined my investment in this field>
Molds shown above are for the Impact
G/Day guys,
Just reading this post and thought to myself, OK take the people that love to fly and compete but haven't the time to build their our planes.This is only my own opinion ONLY but what advantage is there to a flier if he buys a arf to a guy that builds his own? For example If I went out and brought a shark and didn't trim the plane to suit me and practice my butt off then I'm not going to beat a guy that has built and trimmed his own plane and practiced is butt off .The point I'm trying to make is that at the end of the day it comes down to the guy on the handle and how well he is prepared and flys.Hope this makes sense and don't forget about having FUN that's whats its all about as well ,some people forget that sometimes.Good Luck to all that fly at the Nat's .
I'm a tad confused...The cream rises to the top don't it? Then forgets that it came from a cow like everyone else. The lines get drawn and redrawn to keep the solid ground hard to get ones feet onto. But that's an age old story...nothing new under the sun as they say. There's not much room at the top for innovation I guess. Oh well, all high things eventually are brought low. Get out your sticks and tissue now, and get ready for the March winds. This is just one man's opinion and not worth much. H^^
Maybe the NATS is a place for just the best flyers AND builders.
I do not claim to know but it seems that This is something that covers more than the idea of BOM Vs designer and assembler of the model.
>>Maybe the NATS is a place for just the best flyers AND builders.<<Ah well...you know how it is, like everything else in this country....the tools have almost all been handed out, and all the old factories that made the tools, shut down. There'll come a day when all things will be disposable by design....when all the old mechanics pass away that is. There won't be enough tools to go around, and those few who get them grandfathered will be the only ones with them.....everyone else will just hafta be satisfied to sit in the peanut gallery and watch. H^^
That's what it's always been.
I have to make one note here. This event has thrived for more than 50 years because it's not just one thing. It's not just buy a toy and learn to operate it. It's a combination of skill in building (and sometimes designing) a plane, finishing and detailing that plane, learning to operate a drive train effectively through varying conditions, skill in trimming the plane to fly in various and sometime challenging conditions and skill in flying the pattern. A complete test of the modeler. It's largely unique in the modeling world (though it didn't used to be). This is what the current form of the BOM is designed to encourage; skill in all phases of the event. The National Championships is supposed to be a test of all phases of modeling. Building and finishing skills, operating skills and flying skills.
I find it interesting that there is so much heat over this one contest. I've now read the whole thread and it seems to include a lot of rule lawyering with a few like Randy Smith trying to keep a lid on it and put out factual information.
""Randy does this mean that the Shark fuse with the fiberglass outer surface is OK. So the prefinish is only for the flying surfaces wing and tail. Thanks for the clarification.
The objection to the fiberglass surfaces is only for the wings,flaps,stab and Elevator so the objection is not to the fiberglass finish but to were this finish is located. """
Hi Jose
What I said was wing, stab, flaps, elevators, vertical stab and rudder
Those are the flying surfaces that most people think of as "flying surfaces" However again They are NOT my rules and I am not AMA or any official capacity to decide
My opinion is if you bought out a plane like a Classic for example that you molded out of fiberglass, someone could take the plane, put it together in short order and fly it without adding any paint or finish, because it is already covered, and that would make it a RTF, not a kit.
I am sure anyone that writes and Asked Bill any questions about what is and what is not ,he will be happy to answer.
It is really none of my business as I live in the UK. So from a perspective a few thousand miles from this conflagration er.......discussion. It seems simple, without getting bogged down in nitty gritty.The problem is that there is an option in between purchasing a fully finished and working airplane, and building from scratch. You can buy a kit. As soon as you put that in the rule, some joker (me, if I have the time), will make a complete plane that just needs one screw installed and call it a 'kit'. So the rules address this (go read it, I'm tired of quoting it). But two things have happened (as far as I can see -- I can't afford to make it out to the Nats): one, the rule is ambiguous as to composites (it specifically mentions "covering material", not "outer covering"), and two, in prior years the rule has been interpreted with more and more laxity.
If there is a BOM rule, then it is pretty obvious that purchased planes, such as Yatsenko's etc, DO NOT qualify! If everyone is getting upset about a BOM ruling, then they should be petitioning the AMA to drop the ruling and not explode over the forums!
The degree of nit picking going on here, is about as useful as discussing how many angels you can get on a pinhead. I appreciate that some people may be financially penalised and that is not good. Surely the question that SHOULD be debated is if there is a BOM rule, why have such planes been allowed in the past? Seems to me that Bill is just doing his job.
Remember when model airplane competition was FUN???? :'( :'(
We built our own airplanes. We had fun. We were proud of what we brought to the field and flew.
Some were magnificent (Dave Gierke's), some looked like crap (mine LL~). But they were ours. We cut out ribs, glued the parts together with Ambroid, sanded down the big lumps, covered with silk or silkspan, brushed on the dope.
Bolted on a Fox 35 and had a ball wiith our own handiwork.
Look how far we've come. Name calling, politics, multi-thousand dollar investments (to make a wing?), exotic and expensive materials, accusations of cheating and rule bending, threats, out-and out lying, cheating.
When we were kids we turned out some pretty nice airplanes. We're adults now, smarter (?) and with more skill.
Why do some of you have such a big problem with building your own plane. It's not exactly rocket science.
I'd rather enter an average looking plane that I built than some spectacular showpiece that I bought from someone else.
Bill is in charge. The rules are in place. Why not just obey them?
G/Day Brett,REALLY? How do you get that interpretation out of what Brett said,, If anything, he has proven to take the path that is best for the event, as opposed to personal gain,,
Sorry but no i didn't mean to open old wounds and do know about how things work over there, but i sit here and read these forums all the time but don't normal say anything and i know why now.Because people like myself not a know flier like youself cant have an opinion of thought.All you do is shoot people down and not once praise anybody its Brett's opinions that count.
Sorry but I'm not into people that think that they are better then everyone else because they won a Nat's.Shame winning goes to some peoples head.
BYE
Remember when model airplane competition was FUN???? :'( :'(Hello, Robert....I never used a wing or fuse jig in my whole life....when jigs came along everybody jumped for joy because now their "builds" would be perfectly straight...and fly better than those ill-built caveman planes that did a few extra cartwheels while performing the stunt patterns.....oops lost some points on that loop....oops, outboard wing dragging the ground....oops does not look quite right for the beauty contest. So...should wing jigs be illegal too? What it looks like to me, is a sorta elitist attitude prevails today that wasn't apparent in my younger days. That's just an observation from a simple minded C/L wannabe.
We built our own airplanes. We had fun. We were proud of what we brought to the field and flew.
Some were magnificent (Dave Gierke's), some looked like crap (mine LL~). But they were ours. We cut out ribs, glued the parts together with Ambroid, sanded down the big lumps, covered with silk or silkspan, brushed on the dope.
Bolted on a Fox 35 and had a ball wiith our own handiwork.
Look how far we've come. Name calling, politics, multi-thousand dollar investments (to make a wing?), exotic and expensive materials, accusations of cheating and rule bending, threats, out-and out lying, cheating.
When we were kids we turned out some pretty nice airplanes. We're adults now, smarter (?) and with more skill.
Why do some of you have such a big problem with building your own plane. It's not exactly rocket science.
I'd rather enter an average looking plane that I built than some spectacular showpiece that I bought from someone else.
Bill is in charge. The rules are in place. Why not just obey them?
Bob Z.
Jigs for construction, John? Those have been around in some form or another since man began building model airplanes for sport and competition. I didn't "know" what they were for a long timeShame on you brother Bill....you know I used that simply as an example[to illustrate the evolution of the sport]....how long a time?????? ROFLMBO LL~
Bill Little
Shame on you brother Bill....you know I used that simply as an example....how long a time?????? ROFLMBO LL~
Brother John......... my apologizes.You're too fast for me bro.....I'm talking about where it relates to the historical lifespan of the sport...not your age or mine. ROFL :##
"How Long"??................since I posted the picture of my "super zoot", indestructible, multi mega dollar jig on our other site!
LL~ LL~ LL ~
This is why I gave up arguing BOM. It's just a mindset. You get it or you don't. No amount of argument will convert anyone. People believe what they believe. They will argue for what they want (lawyering tricks, extreme argument, ridiculous scenarios, whatever) and someone else's opinion is immaterial.
Jose,Great idea! H^^
I would suggest that you document the complete plane you are making. Pictures of all the parts. Then send it to Bill Rich so he can point to the area he might think doesn't meet the rules.
Paul W
Gentlemen,
Randy is the Event Director for the CLPA Championship. That competition is run under AMA Event #322, which includes the BOM requirement as he states it.
The Skill Class Events (#323, Beginner; #324, Intermediate; #325, Advanced) specifically permit non-BOM models to enter, even though they are ineligible for Appearance Points. I believe Nats Skill CLass events will be flown by the Skill Class Rules.
Expert Skill Class, #326, is not flown at the Nats. Instead, AMA Event #322 - basic CLPA Rules - is the Expert-level competition. The championship, and competition for the Walker Cup relate to the AMA #322 Event.
I hope this softens some of the agitation. Top Nats fliers I've met take pride in their own construction and finishing ability, as well as their flying talent.
G/Day Brett,
Sorry but no i didn't mean to open old wounds and do know about how things work over there, but i sit here and read these forums all the time but don't normal say anything and i know why now.Because people like myself not a know flier like youself cant have an opinion of thought.All you do is shoot people down and not once praise anybody its Brett's opinions that count.
Sorry but I'm not into people that think that they are better then everyone else because they won a Nat's.Shame winning goes to some peoples head.
BYE
Gentlemen,
Randy is the Event Director for the CLPA Championship. That competition is run under AMA Event #322, which includes the BOM requirement as he states it.
The Skill Class Events (#323, Beginner; #324, Intermediate; #325, Advanced) specifically permit non-BOM models to enter, even though they are ineligible for Appearance Points. I believe Nats Skill CLass events will be flown by the Skill Class Rules.
Expert Skill Class, #326, is not flown at the Nats. Instead, AMA Event #322 - basic CLPA Rules - is the Expert-level competition. The championship, and competition for the Walker Cup relate to the AMA #322 Event.
I hope this softens some of the agitation. Top Nats fliers I've met take pride in their own construction and finishing ability, as well as their flying talent.