BOM At the Golden State Stunt Championships

[Larry Fernandez]

Actually just a system like you are talking about was proposed a few years ago by Marvin Denny and was rejected. A few of us still think it's a viable solution, we have been using it at the Gluedobbers stunt contest for the last three years and the contestants seem to really like it. Can't remember the exact point spread but something like..

20 Max 15 Min if you built it from scratch or a kit.
15 Max 10 Min if you used componet parts
0 if you bought it RTF.

There is another step in the actual rules and as I said can't remember the exact numbers but this will give you the the idea.

I don't care for this system at all.
If I used component parts, I will still put in six to eight months for my finish. My reward for a mirror finish with mega cockpit detail, perfect cowl and flap fairing fits, panel lines and air-brush detail is a max 15 points?

I have stayed out of this thread, but will now voice my thoughts.
Anybody can buy an ARC and get it in the air in a couple of weeks. How much workmanship can you put into a plane in a couple of weeks?
Or you can buy an ARC an spend six months to nail that perfect Jim Tichy finish.
I think that the builder of that flawless appearing plane should be rewarded for his efforts.
Everyone on the west coast knows that I don't buy ARC's. I have not even built a kit plane in fifteen years.
But I truly believe that the workmanship should be noted and rewarded.

My two cents

Larry, Buttafucco Stunt Team

[jose modesto]

Steve it's funny but I would also say no to BOM for the Yak kits as the wings are in one piece.
What if the wing are in separate shells,then we can have a conversation.
These shells can also be purchased with OUT any color applied to exterior surfaces.
Jose Modesto

[Derek Barry]

Steve it's funny but I would also say no to BOM for the Yak kits as the wings are in one piece.
What if the wing are in separate shells,then we can have a conversation.
These shells can also be purchased with OUT any color applied to exterior surfaces.
Jose Modesto

I would say that you could buy just the unfinished raw balsa wing and build the rest of the airplane yourself. That would be like buying just a foam wing and doing the rest yourself. That is about as far as I would go though.

Derek

[Doug Moon]

Someone said define "build." That will NEVER happen.

% of build scale. No way. The counsel who determines that will be ridiculed by the detractors as the new "sekrit kabul." That job wouldn't be worth the pay at 2x the rate.

I used to really get up about this for many years. Then it dawned on me....the BOM is not in place for me to try to figure out if someone else did or did not build their plane. The rule is in place to tell ME to build MY plane if I want to enter 322. That's it.  I dint need someone else to define what building is.  I agree it's a loose rule. But that's is also the part of beauty of it.  

Did I build my model?  I can always answer yes.

[Doug Moon]

I dont buy into the argument it only effects 1 contest a year. 

That is not totally true in my opinion.  It effects the outcome in ALL contests where the BOM is applied wether it be for entry into the event, 322. Or PAMPA where it is used to gain appearance points. 

There is only 1 contest a year where it applies to actually being able to ENTER the contest would be a more correct way of stating it, IMHO.

[Bob Reeves]

I don't care for this system at all.
If I used component parts, I will still put in six to eight months for my finish. My reward for a mirror finish with mega cockpit detail, perfect cowl and flap fairing fits, panel lines and air-brush detail is a max 15 points?
Larry, Buttafucco Stunt Team

Looked up the actual numbers which will make a little more sense than what I posted above.. A Bob Hunt wing would be in the first category. We have a place on the entry form where the entrant checks which category his airplane fits into. It has worked out well for us and the contestants like it.

Kit/Scratch built 10-20 points
ARC 5-15 points
ARF 1-10 points
Bought-Borrowed-Stolen 0 points

[proparc]

Bought-Borrowed-Stolen 0 points

 

[Joseph Lijoi]

Someone said define "build." That will NEVER happen.

% of build scale. No way. The counsel who determines that will be ridiculed by the detractors as the new "sekrit kabul." That job wouldn't be worth the pay at 2x the rate.

I used to really get up about this for many years. Then it dawned on me....the BOM is not in place for me to try to figure out if someone else did or did not build their plane. The rule is in place to tell ME to build MY plane if I want to enter 322. That's it.  I dint need someone else to define what building is.  I agree it's a loose rule. But that's is also the part of beauty of it.  

Did I build my model?  I can always answer yes.

Thats valid but you did not address the rest of my post:

A guy show up to a contest with a plane built (?) from one of your Gieseke Nobler component kits.  The guy had to line it up, assemble it mount the engine and tank.    In addition he has given it a "twenty point" finish by covering the CLC with silkspan and dope.  He tells  this to the CD.

The CD says he does not qualify for appearance points because he is  not the "builder" of the model because the kit came covered in CLC.  Does this seem fair to you?  I get the same number of points as the guy who is borrowing his buddies plane.  The guy is not rewarded for his efforts.

Typically when someone poses such questions on this thread the response doesn't address the question but instead morphs into "this guy is clearly anti BOM and doesn't get it" or something else.

If you create a rule with the word "build" in it then you have to define build.  This was easy in 1957 because your options were to scratch or kit build.  Like it or not, there are more options available today, so the definition of build will have to address the new options.

[RC Storick]

Ever notice how this comes up every year at building time? Here is the clue DIY

Definition of DIY : Do it yourself By yourself with no outside parts. Don't try to play semantics just step away from the keyboard and up to the building table and start WORKING!

Have I bought parts? Yes I buy them and see how they are made. Have I ever used a plane in 322 I have not totally constructed? NO! Would I use a pre-built plane in PAMPA class? Maybe

[Doug Moon]

A guy show up to a contest with a plane built (?) from one of your Gieseke Nobler component kits.  The guy had to line it up, assemble it mount the engine and tank.    In addition he has given it a "twenty point" finish by covering the CLC with silkspan and dope.  He tells  this to the CD.

The CD says he does not qualify for appearance points because he is  not the "builder" of the model because the kit came covered in CLC.  Does this seem fair to you?  I get the same number of points as the guy who is borrowing his buddies plane.  The guy is not rewarded for his efforts.

First off this discussion is not about what seems fair to me.  It is about what the rule states.

The rule is posted below.  It addresses your above situation.  The rule states you must apply the covering where used.

6. Builder of Model: The CD shall make every reasonable effort to assure himself that each flier has completely “constructed’ the model(s) he uses in competition, including the covering where used, with “constructed” to be interpreted as the action required to complete a model starting with no more prefabrication than the amount used in the average kit. Models which are completely prefabricated and require only a few minutes of unskilled effort for their completion shall be excluded from competition. In the case of rubber-powered models (excluding Indoor duration models), commercially available balsa, plastic, and hardwood propellers may be used. Materials and design may be obtained from any source, including kits. The builder-of-the- model rule applies to every AMA event unless specifically noted otherwise in the rules governing that event.

Does this address your question?

[Joseph Lijoi]

First off this discussion is not about what seems fair to me.  It is about what the rule states.

The rule is posted below.  It addresses your above situation.  The rule states you must apply the covering where used.

6. Builder of Model: The CD shall make every reasonable effort to assure himself that each flier has completely “constructed’ the model(s) he uses in competition, including the covering where used, with “constructed” to be interpreted as the action required to complete a model starting with no more prefabrication than the amount used in the average kit. Models which are completely prefabricated and require only a few minutes of unskilled effort for their completion shall be excluded from competition. In the case of rubber-powered models (excluding Indoor duration models), commercially available balsa, plastic, and hardwood propellers may be used. Materials and design may be obtained from any source, including kits. The builder-of-the- model rule applies to every AMA event unless specifically noted otherwise in the rules governing that event.

Does this address your question?

Not really.  This discusion is not about what the rule states.  It is about the interpretation of what the rule states and the application of that interpretation

You did not answer as to whether the outcome of the interpretation of the rule was fair.

While I respect your interpretation of "including the the covering where used" as pretty cut and dried technically the guy is covering the covering.  The nice finish that the guy applied is well beyond the "few minutes of unskilled effort" that that the rule is trying to prevent.

The "with no more prefabrication than the amount used in the average kit"  is a problem.  You or I might say this is a Green Box Nobler.  Anybody else walking into a hobby shop today would think something different.

All I was trying to do was present a possible way to address some changing conditions in the hobby and keep the traditions that I respect.  Its not a simple issue but its not as complex as I may have made it sound.

I am checking out of this debate.  You guys will figure it out. 

 




   

[Avaiojet]

6. Builder of Model: The CD shall make every reasonable effort to assure himself that each flier has completely “constructed’ the model(s) he uses in competition, including the covering where used, with “constructed” to be interpreted as the action required to complete a model starting with no more prefabrication than the amount used in the average kit. Models which are completely prefabricated and require only a few minutes of unskilled effort for their completion shall be excluded from competition. In the case of rubber-powered models (excluding Indoor duration models), commercially available balsa, plastic, and hardwood propellers may be used. Materials and design may be obtained from any source, including kits. The builder-of-the- model rule applies to every AMA event unless specifically noted otherwise in the rules governing that event.

Does this address your question?

A few of these Posts got be thinking from a different perspective.

Rule 6. The word "prefabricated" should be duly noted.

As I look above at some of the photos of these so called "kits" I see plenty of prefabrication. How could one not unless you're looking at different photos?

Rule 6. Also, the word "unskilled" is clearly in full view and part of the rule explanation text.

I see photos of various prefabricated parts, where the areas that require skill, are already completed.

Could someone take credit for "building" when these "parts" are actually what someone would/could call "model assembly." Raw wood or not?

Not my question mind you, but a question could be "Why these "assemblers" don't understand the difference?"  Is the difference only based on perception? There is a difference.

Is it just us old timers who really know what a kit is? Or think we know?

Now. There was a time in R/C pattern, where "kits" came with fiberglass fuselages' and sheeted foam wing cores and stabs. In most cases, the firewall was already in place.

If someone produced a CL model with a fiberglass fuselage and sheeted foam wing cores and stab, is it a "kit.?

And built, did the builder build it or assemble the parts?

I built a "Skynight" kit, pre-fab as I mentioned above. And it was a lot more than just assembling parts.

There has to be a road to take that satisfies all these weary travelers.

Charles

[Steve Hines]

I would like to know what the difference is with Joes wing skins and a Bob Hunt wing that I got for Sams 2 planes. There would be a lot more chance of a bad wing with Jose wing. She put glue on the half's and put them back in the cradle's , some tape and a little weight and that's it. You have a little more time in finishing, but that is just up to primer, the easy part. The wing skins would fall under materials, just like carbon fiber landing gear, wheel pants. The rule is a joke.

Steve

[PJ Rowland]

Is this garbage still going on ?

Take a common sense approach : LEARN TO BUILD..

You will get so much more satisfaction out of the sport.

Dont say " I built it " but I purchased Wings, Fuse, Stab, engine, cowl.

Learn to take pride in carving the cowl .. getting it wrong and starting again.


I dont know about anyone else, but Its getting to the stage where Im FED UP with hearing about this BOM rule.. We dont even have it in Australia yet time and time again our Australian Nats champions build their own planes.  

Let me claify - IM PRO BOM.. Im ANTI BOM WHINGING.

[RC Storick]

Here is my interpretation and its shorter. The problem is not the rule its the people trying to get around it.

6. Builder of Model: The CD shall make every reasonable effort to assure himself that each flier has completely "constructed" the model(s) he uses in competition. with “constructed” to be interpreted as the action required to complete a model from start to finish. No parts from commercially available RTF or ARF's may be used. In the case of rubber-powered models (excluding Indoor duration models), commercially available balsa, plastic, and hardwood propellers may be used. Materials and design may be obtained from any source, including kits. The builder-of-the-model rule applies to every AMA event unless specifically noted otherwise in the rules governing that event.

The super short version=Build your own model.

Picture of my next model.

[Doug Moon]

Picture of my next model.

You going with counter rotating props?  And retract gear for the full effect?  Would be slick for sure!!! 

[De Hill]

This looks like the Italian racer that the Tucker Special used for design cues.

I wonder if Bobby Tucker is still alive.

[Dave_Trible]

Here is my interpretation and its shorter. The problem is not the rule its the people trying to get around it.

6. Builder of Model: The CD shall make every reasonable effort to assure himself that each flier has completely "constructed" the model(s) he uses in competition. with “constructed” to be interpreted as the action required to complete a model from start to finish. No parts from commercially available RTF or ARF's may be used. In the case of rubber-powered models (excluding Indoor duration models), commercially available balsa, plastic, and hardwood propellers may be used. Materials and design may be obtained from any source, including kits. The builder-of-the-model rule applies to every AMA event unless specifically noted otherwise in the rules governing that event.

The super short version=Build your own model.

Picture of my next model.

One COULD read that to mean you better make your own control system hardware, fuel tanks, canopies and wheels....just sayin........congrats to those who try to be more specific.
Dave

[Tom Niebuhr]

Robert,

That airplane will be awesome with retracts.

I am repeating and expanding on what I said earlier.

I am including some pictures of my new project. It will be electric semi-scale Korean era jet with retracts. I can use a laser but this is a one of a kind  project so I am hand cutting everything using my computer layouts.

In the past when applicable I have cut my own wing cores, but I have lost the local supplier of foam, and Bob Hunt will cut the wing core for me. He also does a much better job. I will skin the wings myself. I dare anyone to say that I did not build this airplane.
The airplane started with making a mold buck that has 2 contour breaks. It will also have some cockpit detail.

If anyone wants to carry this to extremes about tanks, props, engines, spinners, landing gear, etc. they do not understand the event and will contribute to its demise.

I love the challenge of designing and building an airplane that is unlike any one else's. This design will have absolutely no components from other airplanes.

[Brett Buck]

If anyone wants to carry this to extremes about tanks, props, engines, spinners, landing gear, etc. they do not understand the event and will contribute to its demise.

   Tom, thats just the point - *thats exactly what they want*. They want to damage the current event as much as possible with all this nonsensical complaining, sophistry, delusional scenarios about ARF stunt planes at Wal-Mart, strawman arguments,  etc. Try to make everyone who enjoys it into a liar, cheat, fraud, stupid, etc. or just wear them out with the endless arguing. Then, they can get their way, turn this into another buy-and-fly event, or FAI Jr., while they are ready to supply this new market. A few people will end up flying super-expensive ARFs and exchanging the NATs trophy amongst themselves while the current event dies. In a few years it will all be over (just like all the other events that died after the same thing happened), but they will have their cash by then.

    This is the tactic, and the end goal is to destroy the event and replace it with something they can make money off of. This only works if the rest of us GIVE UP and let them do it.

     Brett
         

[RC Storick]

This looks like the Italian racer that the Tucker Special used for design cues.

I wonder if Bobby Tucker is still alive.

The last I talked to him was around 94-95. I don't think he is but don't quote me on it. There will be no retracts on my next plane. Too heavy. I am shooting for 50-52 ounces 650 squares

[Tom Niebuhr]

Robert,

It will still be an awesome stunter.  The size should be comfortable to fly. What is your planned engine?

[Mike Scholtes]

If no retracts, that means floats! That would be unique, all right. Either way a beautiful project. There was a Macchi stunter built a few years back and featured in Stunt News, amazing project. With electric it could actually have contra-rotating props.

[RC Storick]

Peter built one however it was not a scale profile of that plane. I will start a new thread as to not hijack this one.

[john e. holliday]

Please high jack the thread as I'm getting fed up with the BOM.   It has been abused ever since I started competition.

[Brian Massey]

Please high jack the thread as I'm getting fed up with the BOM.   It has been abused ever since I started competition.

I'm with you John; how's the weather in Kansas?

Brian

[john e. holliday]

Right now cold and cloudy.   Was going out to watch Dave fly but have a limit on what I can do after treatments.

[Brian Massey]

Right now cold and cloudy.   Was going out to watch Dave fly but have a limit on what I can do after treatments.

I'm waiting for the dew to get off the grass so I can go mow and edge. Should be in the low/mid 80's today.

Brian