BOM change

[RC Storick]

Because the Contest Board Procedures were not followed when the BOM rule was changed for the 2005 rulebook, the AMA has changed the BOM rule to the way it appeared prior to that 2005 rulebook.  The specific references to the interpretation for CL Precision Aerobatics have been removed.

This can be seen on page 10 on the AMA website at

http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/2011-2012General3.pdf

This is not a joke.  It is real.

If you have constructive comments, try sharing them with your District representative on the Aerobatics Contest Board.

Keith Trostle

Chairman
Control Line Aerobatics Contest Board

http://www.livecountdown.com/countdownclock/countdown.aspx?id=29258

Current Rule

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.

My wording

6. Builder of Model: The CD shall make every reasonable effort to assure himself that each flier has completely “constructed‟ the model(s) he or she uses in competition. “Constructed” to be interpreted as the action required to complete a model starting with the construction of the airframe ,covering and finish. Models which are completely prefabricated and require only some assembly and the use of unskilled effort for their completion shall be excluded from competition. Materials and design for the aircraft may be obtained from any source, including kits. In the case of rubber-powered models (excluding Indoor duration models), commercially available balsa, plastic, and hardwood propellers may be used.The builder-of-the-model rule applies to every AMA event unless specifically noted otherwise in the rules governing that event.


There has been may proposals in the past that have failed and I just figured out why. When you write a BOM proposal keep in mind you are not only writing it for CLPA you are writing it for all facet's of this hobby that uses the BOM.

[PerttiMe]

http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/2011-2012General3.pdf

' “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.'

I would have thought that there'd be quite a gap between "average kit" and "prefabricated and require only a few minutes of unskilled effort"

Almost any model aircraft takes more than a few minutes of unskilled effort to put together. I suppose the covering comes on top of the "more than a few minutes"?

[peabody]

Terrific......
Now, let's define the "average kit".

[PerttiMe]

Terrific......
Now, let's define the "average kit".

Something that takes more than a few minutes of unskilled effort to put together, as it says in the next sentence?

[RC Storick]

this is so easy. the first sentence says it all..The CD shall make every reasonable effort to assure himself that each flier has completely constructed the model(s) he uses in competition it doesn't say you have to grow trees make covering  other sort of nonsense that will be dreamed up

[fred krueger]

When the term "average kit" was first used for defining BOM, it was probably a "print-wood" kit.  The "average kit", in the model flying world today, is probably an ARF.  If we are going to keep BOM, then something like Sparky's definition needs to be implemented.  Otherwise, throw it out; make PA a complete flying event and keep BOM for the scale folks.  

[Mark Scarborough]

When the term "average kit" was first used for defining BOM, it was probably a "print-wood" kit.  The "average kit", in the model flying world today, is probably an ARF.  If we are going to keep BOM, then something like Sparky's definition needs to be implemented.  Otherwise, throw it out; make PA a complete flying event and keep BOM for the scale folks.  S?

Fred, and others

that statement is the beauty of how it is written, it is fluid as written to keep up with status quo of todays kits. The big issue with all this is that people dont trust people. WE need to exhibit integrity, and honesty. for craps sake, its a damn hobby, not a lively hood. If you compete against me and cheat, thats YOUR loss, its not like it takes the mustard off my hotdogs or anything. Yeah I like to compete in a fair playing feild, who doesnt. but you cannot legislate morality, its been tried, but it doesnt work. Let consience be your guide. If you think you built it and it meets BOM, then so be it.

[peabody]

Yup....with 4 or 6 outfits manufacturing ARFs or ARCs in fairly substantial quantities, I would wager that the "average kit" is NOT a pile of balsa, or even a pile of laser cut balsa pieces...
That was the flaw in 2005.....and still needs addressing....

[RC Storick]

Yup....with 4 or 6 outfits manufacturing ARFs or ARCs in fairly substantial quantities, I would wager that the "average kit" is NOT a pile of balsa, or even a pile of laser cut balsa pieces...
That was the flaw in 2005.....and still needs addressing....

It will be! There is no avarage kit. So we will have to lay it out.

[Brett Buck]

Yup....with 4 or 6 outfits manufacturing ARFs or ARCs in fairly substantial quantities, I would wager that the "average kit" is NOT a pile of balsa, or even a pile of laser cut balsa pieces...
That was the flaw in 2005.....and still needs addressing....

   No, the flaw was the AMA being afraid of a tiny bunch of loudmouths in 2005 and actually paying attention to them. ARFS and ARCS *are not kits* and do not figure into this discussion. 

     ARF and the "loophole" ARCs/uncovered ARFs that a few created and then commercially exploited were handled perfectly well by the rules before 2005 (for the previous 30 YEARS) and there was no need to change anything.  They have NO PLACE flying for national championships. So, finally, someone noticed that the loathsome "interpretation" from 2005 was invalid, as we had claimed from the instant we heard about it.

     I would also note that the continual, endless, bleating about "accessibility" falls apart when you see that it only matters at the Nationals. You guys have been using this bogus populist approach only because you know if you actually said it was all about selling tiny numbers of extremely expensive models to those with the money to do it for use in one contest a year NO ONE WOULD CARE.

    The bottom line - you want to compete with the big boys, *build your own damn airplane*.

     Brett
   

[John Stiles]

http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/2011-2012General3.pdf


Almost any model aircraft takes more than a few minutes of unskilled effort to put together. I suppose the covering comes on top of the "more than a few minutes"?

The covering amounts to the easiest part of building. Not only that, but nearly the coup de gras in my mind! And just when you think the playing field becomes level....they change the rules. Change....gotta love that word in the PC world we live in today. Making rules and changing rules creates more jobs, and keeps out the criminal element. Anybody can fly a C/L plane, but you hafta be a lifer to build a C/L plane that actually flies well without flying apart. At least that's what I told my 10 yr old daughter as we built her stuntin .19 Ringmaster. 

[FLOYD CARTER]

I like what Mark says!  Yes, I build all my own, from the ground up.  If someone comes to a contest with an obviously RTF (or nearly so), and masquerades as BOM, I will sit back and enjoy the sarcasm that the others should (and will) heap upon that person. I might even join in!

Floyd

[John Stiles]

I like what Mark says!  Yes, I build all my own, from the ground up.  If someone comes to a contest with an obviously RTF (or nearly so), and masquerades as BOM, I will sit back and enjoy the sarcasm that the others should (and will) heap upon that person. I might even join in!

Floyd

What if they snatch the factory covering off and put their own on? Or...just cover over it? 

[John Stiles]

Maybe an x-ray requirement is necessary to see inside and check each part for it's carbon signature!

[Randy Powell]

>>WE need to exhibit integrity, and honesty. for craps sake, its a damn hobby, not a lively hood<<

Well, and there's the rub. If I were manufacturing completed planes, ARCs, ARFS or even completed components such as sheeted and finished wings with the purpose of selling them to competitors, I would certainly be arguing vociferously to have them seen as legal in the event. Why not? I have a vested interest in their legality. If they are ruled as illegal, I lose sales. But as Brett says, we are talking about one contest; the National Championships. I can buy an ARF, whether a high end unit or a mass produced one, and go to my local contest and fly it. No problem, I just don't get the appearance points bonus. BFD. But for me to argue endlessly about making such things legal for the Nats, I'd have to have a vested interest.

And I can't see how limiting such things from competition at the Nats is going to have any effect at all in participation at the local level. Does some guy (or kid for that matter) that just wants to check out CL and maybe try a local contest going to give a rip about what's legal at the National Championships?

[John Stiles]

Does some guy (or kid for that matter) that just wants to check out CL and maybe try a local contest going to give a rip about what's legal at the National Championships?

Did Tiger Woods want to be in the PGA?

[Jim Thomerson]

If I were CD concerned about BOM, I would post a legible copy of the rule, and have each flier sign a sheet answering the question "Did you build your model?"  _____Yes   or   ______No.  I would accept the flier's opinion and that would be that.  I think a flier knowingly lying would be very rare.  Is an $8 plaque worth being known among the modeling community as a cheat and liar?

[SteveMoon]

Brett: Have you been to a hobby shop in the past 10 years? These
days in the world of model airplanes an ARF/ARC IS the average kit.
An ARF/ARC is a kit. It is different than what was a kit 30+ years ago,
but it is a kit.

I agree with Fred, throw it out. I could care less if the guy next to me,
before me, behind me, whatever built his plane or not. I flat out don't
give a crap. I just want to do my best to try to outfly him/her. I don't
care if he thinks my plane looks great or not. I don't care if his/her
plane looks great or not. I don't care if he/she built, bought, stole, or
abracadabred their plane. Yes, I do enjoy checking out all the great looking
planes at the Nats, VSC, etc. And, BOM or not, there will always be
beautiful planes at these contests.

Those who enjoy building or designing and building their own planes always
will and having BOM or not having a BOM rule will not take that pleasure
away from them. I enjoy building (hate finishing) and probably always will,
so BOM or no BOM I will continue to build.

Later, Steve

[PJ Rowland]

Its hard for this thread NOT to turn into another bom argument.

However : To crown the national Champion; You need to be all things to all men - before and after. John Stiles mentioned  Golf about Tiger woods - Look at all the traditions of Augusta Golf :

Traditional Sunday Pin locations
Butlers Cabin.
Rays creek
Magnolia Lane
What the caddies have to wear
The Green jacket.

These are all traditions - they help keep the integrity of the event - the mystique of that ONE special event - No different to wimbledon tennis having to wear White.

There was no outrage over insisting that everyone do these thins for all tournaments, you dont wear white at every tennis event- you dont have a green jacket for every golf win - it would lessen the importance of that one event.

Why cant people understand the traditions of the National Championship - and whats involved in crowning someone a NATS winner.

To quote Brett : you want to compete with the big boys, *build your own damn airplane*

Its for only one event - one Special event dont try to demean or water it down - keep the tradition alive.

-------

I will sight an example of what can occur when people make stupid choices in regards to Stunt events :
We have a flying contest locally that has/had alot of history behind it - The trophy was 1st presented in 1947 - so for 64 years its been presented as one of the premier stunt events in our calender. Reading down the list of Names is a who's who of Flying locally. Everyone had their name plaque engraved on the base- and the base had grown and grown and grown.  It has always been a Stunt event - you fly the pattern as is the modern interpretation of it as the times dictate, with modern equipment ect.
I have won it a few times in the past and have been proud to have my name engraved along side those greats.
The idiots running the club decided to change the event to a Vintage stunt event only - Changing it from Open to OTS - When I enquired as to why - the reasoning was " Well in the late 40's early 50's we didnt fly the modern pattern with modern planes we flew vintage planes and a Vintage pattern..  
My logic was lost on them - In Early 40's / 50's they flew what was considered MODERN...... The event has always been about what is here and now.
I no longer fly in the event because its lost its meaning - the guys in the 70's who flew and won with modern pattern and modern designs, and the 80's and 90's and 2000's all did so with modern power and modern interpreation of the pattern. So for the last 40 years....... yet we go back in time and fly it as presented when it was 1st conceived and try to recreate that with some flawed logic about - " We so and so in 1948 flew this design to this pattern" Its pointless and has now lessened the event - watered down the history.....

RUINED IT.. I will not fly in that contest now as a result of these actions...


My point is : You dont want to mess with History, dont lessen the acheivements of those before you - dont destroy tradition, and dont let small minded people who dont know what the essence of the event - Control the destiny of the event.

[wwwarbird]

 Brett, Mark and Randy have collectively nailed it all right on the head. Also, as Sparky reminds everyone, "average kit" is no longer a useful or applicable term where BOM is being discussed. This really is such an easy topic to resolve that it is pathetic and embarrassing that it's gone on for so long.

 The "B" in BOM means BUILD. There is a significant difference between building and assembling.
 
 ARC's, ARF's and Composite models are largely assembled by the owner, arriving at your doorstep in varying stages of pre-assembly and sold with the intention of requiring a lot less actual construction from start to finish. Most of them have 50% or more of the construction done when you open the box. That is where the terms for those models comes from.

 A Kit or even a scratchbuilt model are a lot alike. They each require complete construction from the very beginning, including covering and all finishing as necessary. These models require the definition of BUILDING by the owner. Everyone knows these things, those who continue to argue it need to quit being a bunch of babies and playing dumb.

[RC Storick]

Lets use this? This way there is nothing to guess.

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. “constructed” to be interpreted as the action required to complete a model starting with the construction of the airframe ,covering and finish. Models which are completely prefabricated and require only some assembly and the use 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.

[John Stiles]

Its hard for this thread NOT to turn into another bom argument.


To quote Brett : you want to compete with the big boys, *build your own damn airplane*

That's what it boils down to....the "BIG BOYS" and exclusive clique that you can't belong to without you were born there. Anybody else is a newby....a wanna-be....like the evolution of the C/L kits available today. So if you want to be a big boy you hafta cut down your own trees like they did, and only use what they say you can use....or you won't cut the mustard. Well, I don't golf, and I don't race nascars and I don't belong to a clique or a fraternity of greek letters, in order to be a C/L modeler. So you won't see me being laughed down at any "Big Boy" events, thank you very much. But I'm as good as I want to be, and that's what matters to me.....not looking down my nose at wannabes.  

[Clint Ormosen]

That's what it boils down to....the "BIG BOYS" and exclusive clique that you can't belong to without you were born there. Anybody else is a newby....a wanna-be....like the evolution of the C/L kits available today. So if you want to be a big boy you hafta cut down your own trees like they did, and only use what they say you can use....or you won't cut the mustard. Well, I don't golf, and I don't race nascars and I don't belong to a clique or a fraternity of greek letters, in order to be a C/L modeler. So you won't see me being laughed down at any "Big Boy" events, thank you very much. But I'm as good as I want to be, and that's what matters to me.....not looking down my nose at wannabes.  

John, your post makes no sense. None of todays top modelers were "born" into anything. And nobody said you have to cut down your own trees either. Every last one of the top pilots got there the same way. Practice practice practice, and that's it! But YES, to be a "BIG BOY" at the NATS does require that you build your own model, just like they did, and just like the pilots that came before them, ect. It's not an exclusive clique. Anyone that puts in the time and effort is a welcome member. I don't feel like I've ever been looked down upon by any of them. If you don't want to be one of them, fine. No reason to bag their accomplishments though.

[John Stiles]

Someone mentioned Golf about Tiger woods -  :

My name isn't someone.....it's John, or Stiles, or Mr. Stiles.

[W.D. Roland]

Probably some of use would loose interest with out the BOM rule.

I know I would. Next on the list is Speed or Scale.

If you can not meet the requirement of the BOM then learn how to build.

When the hobby/sport was much bigger than today I think all events required BOM. It worked.
We did cheat in combat and if someone ran out of airplanes others would loan them airplanes and
this is a disadvantage for the borrower, flying and airplane for the first time and also in a match.

If it was left up to me ALL events at all contest including R/C would be BOM.

No BOM would elevate us to the level of' playing with toys'.

David
out grew toys at age 6

[John Stiles]

John, your post makes no sense. None of todays top modelers were "born" into anything.

Maybe not, but here's something you can understand: Role models lead by example, not attitudes. When you go around puffing yourself up as a "TOP" anything, it puts everyone watching your example at a somewhat mental dis-advantage. Mentors are what keeps hobbies like this alive, not egos. If you actually want to perpetuate the sport, you do good to have humility, and encourage anything or anyone trying to be a part of the bigger picture. The young folks have a very hard road ahead of them, now.....and as the world evolves, so will C/L...or it will disappear completely. I've noticed attitudes from day one that I joined this site.....and personally, it bothers me, except that I also notice those who encourage....and it is they that keep me coming back. C/L is as much about flying as it is about building....some folks are not able to build their own planes.....is it the presumption that if you are handi-capped, you cannot compete in BOM? I don't think anybody has that opinion. I just believe with all my heart that this hobby got to 2011 because we go out of our way to recruit new people.

[W.D. Roland]

Well I am willing to help anyone learn to build and fly and hopfully do a good enough job as a teacher that they do
better than I.

John
Your not very far North of me if you need some help holler. The work bench will be empty and available soon.

David

[John Stiles]

Well I am willing to help anyone learn to build and fly and hopfully do a good enough job as a teacher that they do
better than I.

John
Your not very far North of me if you need some help holler. The work bench will be empty and available soon.

David

Don't sweat me, WD....I can scrape by....my handicap is more prohibitive of my ability to fly. I have a gizmo that helps me build fairly straight planes, but I know a bunch of vets who never will be able to build a plane. They are hyper sensitive about their condition, and need a whale of a lot of encouragement. I guess I'm super-sensitive. P/S I'd never say to one of them: You can't compete in this event because you didn't build your own plane.

[Clint Ormosen]

Maybe not, but here's something you can understand: Role models lead by example, not attitudes. When you go around puffing yourself up as a "TOP" anything, it puts everyone watching your example at a somewhat mental dis-advantage. Mentors are what keeps hobbies like this alive, not egos. If you actually want to perpetuate the sport, you do good to have humility, and encourage anything or anyone trying to be a part of the bigger picture. The young folks have a very hard road ahead of them, now.....and as the world evolves, so will C/L...or it will disappear completely. I've noticed attitudes from day one that I joined this site.....and personally, it bothers me, except that I also notice those who encourage....and it is they that keep me coming back. C/L is as much about flying as it is about building....some folks are not able to build their own planes.....is it the presumption that if you are handi-capped, you cannot compete in BOM? I don't think anybody has that opinion. I just believe with all my heart that this hobby got to 2011 because we go out of our way to recruit new people.

OK, I agree with some of that. I just don't see anyone puffing themselves up. I do see serious frustration going on with some pilots and it's perfectly understandable with all this hubbub about the BOM. Some of the best modelers in the world show up to the same contests I do. In fact, I'm gong to name drop here, David Fitzgerald is at most of them. You will never meet a more humble champion in you life. He is the epitome of helpful and friendly to ALL modelers. If he's not a role model, I don't know who would be. And he's just one of several I could name. There might be a couple of folks here that rub you the wrong way, but those types are the exception, not the rule.
Also, I'm not sure about your handicapped comment. Do mean physically disabled or just not in-the-know? Because if it's the latter, that can be remedied by instruction and yes, I would expect someone to learn it before entering the NATS. Sorry if that seems exclusive but I'm just not from the "we must all be equal" school of thought.

[John Stiles]

Don't sweat me, WD....I can scrape by....my handicap is more prohibitive of my ability to fly. I have a gizmo that helps me build fairly straight planes, but I know a bunch of vets who never will be able to build a plane. They are hyper sensitive about their condition, and need a whale of a lot of encouragement. I guess I'm super-sensitive. P/S I'd never say to one of them: You can't compete in this event because you didn't build your own plane.

In fact, here's the Ringmaster Flashback, the first one of it's kind ever built....I posted a picture here and had 113 views and not a single comment. I built this plane from scratch with nothing except a plan sent to me by Larry Marx.

[PJ Rowland]

Sorry John - time to get real and not tote around phrases....


" When you go around puffing yourself up as a "TOP" anything, it puts everyone watching your example at a somewhat mental dis-advantage "....................................

"not looking down my nose at wannabes"

"I've noticed attitudes from day one that I joined this site.....and personally, it bothers me"

"exclusive clique that you can't belong to"


I'm not going to put myself in the Catagory of "top anything" but I do fly open and I do plan to make (or try make) Top20 : I don't do any of the above, and I don't know or nor can I site any "top 20" flier to have done the above, its a pitty you feel that way. I've come from the bottom and gotten further up the ladder with hard work, determination and practice.

I can tell you for a FACT : I emailed Dave Fitzgerald about some advice just after the worlds and I got a very detailed reply, very prompt. I'm certainly not in the mix of top10 Worlds ( Did place inside top 50 )

Clint Ormosen Said " I'm gong to name drop here, David Fitzgerald is at most of them. You will never meet a more humble champion in you life. He is the epitome of helpful and friendly to ALL modelers. If he's not a role model, I don't know who would be. "

I can give you countless examples of Conversations with other top american fliers I've had where I have requested information and have NEVER felt that I was being laughed nor looked down upon. Heck when I was in the initial phase of trying to replicate the enormous feat of Paul walker and the B17 project, I asked several questions of Paul, Howard Rush, Brett buck, all whom were involved in the project. Never ONCE did any of them say " Kid you dont work for Boeing, your not a Rocket scientist, your not 10 times Nats Champion - dont bite off more than you can chew... dont bother. " I did however get great advice, lots of pointers and most of all ENCOURAGEMENT. Without any of their input would the project have been a success.



I do however think that saying things like "When you go around puffing yourself up" implies something that is not true.

People whom have won, have also won the right to walk and talk proud.

[John Stiles]

Sorry John - time to get real and not tote around phrases....


" When you go around puffing yourself up as a "TOP" anything, it puts everyone watching your example at a somewhat mental dis-advantage "....................................

"not looking down my nose at wannabes"

"I've noticed attitudes from day one that I joined this site.....and personally, it bothers me"

"exclusive clique that you can't belong to"
Can I have your autograph?

I'm not going to put myself in the Catagory of "top anything" but I do fly open and I do plan to make (or try make) Top20 : I don't do any of the above, and I don't know or nor can I site any "top 20" flier to have done the above, its a pitty you feel that way. I've come from the bottom and gotten further up the ladder with hard work, determination and practice.

I can tell you for a FACT : I emailed Dave Fitzgerald about some advice just after the worlds and I got a very detailed reply, very prompt. I'm certainly not in the mix of top10 Worlds ( Did place inside top 50 )

Clint Ormosen Said " I'm gong to name drop here, David Fitzgerald is at most of them. You will never meet a more humble champion in you life. He is the epitome of helpful and friendly to ALL modelers. If he's not a role model, I don't know who would be. "

I can give you countless examples of Conversations with other top american fliers I've had where I have requested information and have NEVER felt that I was being laughed nor looked down upon. Heck when I was in the initial phase of trying to replicate the enormous feat of Paul walker and the B17 project, I asked several questions of Paul, Howard Rush, Brett buck, all whom were involved in the project. Never ONCE did any of them say " Kid you dont work for Boeing, your not a Rocket scientist, your not 10 times Nats Champion - dont bite off more than you can chew... dont bother. " I did however get great advice, lots of pointers and most of all ENCOURAGEMENT. Without any of their input would the project have been a success.



I do however think that saying things like "When you go around puffing yourself up" implies something that is not true.

People whom have won, have also won the right to walk and talk proud.

Can I have your autograph?

[PJ Rowland]

Quote John Stiles "Can I have your Autograph "

Pointless post mate..

Your comment reminds me of something :

In the story, a fox sees some high-hanging grapes and wishes to eat them. When the fox is unable to think of a way to reach them, he surmises that the grapes are probably not worth eating, as they must not be ripe or that they are sour. This example follows a pattern: one desires something, finds it unattainable, and reduces one's dissonance by criticizing it. Jon Elster calls this pattern "adaptive preference formation"

or

Sour Grapes...

[Randy Powell]

Man, some people wouldn't be happy if you ran them over with a solid gold Ferrari. Mr. Stiles, lighten up.

[W.D. Roland]

In fact, here's the Ringmaster Flashback, the first one of it's kind ever built....I posted a picture here and had 113 views and not a single comment. I built this plane from scratch with nothing except a plan sent to me by Larry Marx.

WOW!
Getting 113 people to look at a Ring Master would seem to me darn good John.  Doubt I would have had 50 veiws.

Takes time to type responses and that can = building or flying time and that's what the majority of us are ate up with. Then add circular arguments like the BOM rule.....
Guess what I am trying to say is this online stuff causes strange social ahhh... predicaments.
Sometime feel ignored, sometimes harassed, so forth. As in life some do it intentionally, some due to lack of communication skills( Guilty here)
All part of life, run with it as the B.S. don't matter. It don't mean nuthin.

Build, fly, Help who you can when you can and hope for the best from others.

So thats a good looking airplane with a different look to it.
 Hows it fly?

These Vet's you speak of, Nam?

David

[W.D. Roland]

Wow Randy!
A solid Gold Ferrari would be HEAVY!
I'd be pissed if you ran me over with one.

David

[john e. holliday]

Well the NATS is going to be interesting this year.  Too bad I won't be there.   Clint did some name dropping and the name he dropped pointed out a broken spar to me one year.  Another one came up to me at VSC this year on the Monday practice day and gave me a big hug.  It was none other than Bobby Hunt.   I guess I have never thought of how well know I am, even tho the demented poodle gets all the attention.  Even at the NATS one year when I was getting ready for a Classic flight a young lad came up to me with a copy of Model Aviation.  He was wanting my autograph.  Me an older farm boy trying to have fun.   Yes I made his day and signed the book/magazine.  When the book about the history of model planes was being sold at VSC that year.  I was a kid again running around getting autographs of some of the modelers.   Another thrill was the year I tried to get each and every competitor and their plane in the digital camera. 

Now that I am off track.  The BOM is the lock on your house.  It is only good for the honest people.   

[Steve Hines]

Has anyone see a cored wing in a avevage kit. How about lost foam wing. Like it says no more Prefabrication than the amount used in a average kit. Cored I think would be prefab if you did not do it your self. I think you should be able to use these cores, but I can see now if you like something or use something that will be ok. Don't know if any body remember's that sig made a clam shell mustang, and kits with fiberglass fuse, I have on in the box. The rule did not say control line kits, just average kit. I would think than if you can show a kit of 20 years ago had something in it the would be average.

[PJ Rowland]

Re; Cored wings :

"and require only a few minutes of unskilled effort for their completion shall be excluded"

Even Bob Hunt couldn't do this..

[Clint Ormosen]

Has anyone see a cored wing in a avevage kit. How about lost foam wing. Like it says no more Prefabrication than the amount used in a average kit. Cored I think would be prefab if you did not do it your self. I think you should be able to use these cores, but I can see now if you like something or use something that will be ok. Don't know if any body remember's that sig made a clam shell mustang, and kits with fiberglass fuse, I have on in the box. The rule did not say control line kits, just average kit. I would think than if you can show a kit of 20 years ago had something in it the would be average.

Cored wings? Sure, all the time. But not lost foam wings.
What Sig Mustang used a clamshell fuse? The KwikBuilt R/C version?

[Steve Hines]

"conststructed" The model ( He) uses in competion, including the covering where uses. See nothing in here about females. Look like to me Jose Modesto wings would be ok takes more than min to put together, and they dont need covering. So covering is not used so thats ok. I think we need to know what Prefabrication meen, Is laser cut ok, there were no laser cutting when this rule was wrote. Like I said there were fiberglass fuse's many years and it took a lot of work to put in bulk head  plywood stiffners and it took a lot of work getting it ready for paint. Just Trying to pick this a part. Like I said I think bob's should be able to be used, But can anyone tell me what average kit something like them were in. Average, just useing the words in the rules.

[Steve Hines]

Good job Clint. Thats the one. Has anyone seen the Kit that Bob Smith, the glue guy, It did not have any balsa in it at all. Clam shell fiberglass over foam.

[Steve Hines]

Just went and got the box top kit price 129.00, and it's says that it was the most popular airplane in the finals at the 1974 nats. Nothing new in this hobby just better.

[W.D. Roland]

SIG Mustang control line Stunt KIT

Built one of these in 1973 or so.
Foam wing with balsa sheeting. I think the sheeting was already done in the rough.
The top of the fuselage was molded ABS that cracked, sagged from paint or something went wrong.Long time ago...

Currently hanging in the shop is another SIG Mustang built by someone else and some refinishing done by me.
The fuselage top on this one is molded Nylon. Same foam wing. ABS cowl.


Now back to being run over by cars.....By my own car and I wasn't even driving  that day!
Didn't hurt at all.

[PerttiMe]

Current Rule

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.

I see people going into another emotional argument on what they feel is a legal starting point in the classes where the rule is applied. There is no need for that because the rule clearly states what is not allowed (my bolding in the quote).

- IF covering is used, it must be done by the contestant. So, if covering is not needed...
- Putting the aircraft together must take more than a few minutes. It does not say more than a few hours, days, weeks or months.

[Doug Moon]

Because the Contest Board Procedures were not followed when the BOM rule was changed for the 2005 rulebook, the AMA has changed the BOM rule to the way it appeared prior to that 2005 rulebook.  The specific references to the interpretation for CL Precision Aerobatics have been removed.

This can be seen on page 10 on the AMA website at

http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/2011-2012General3.pdf

This is not a joke.  It is real.

If you have constructive comments, try sharing them with your District representative on the Aerobatics Contest Board.

Keith Trostle

Chairman
Control Line Aerobatics Contest Board

Whoa,,, stop right there.

I have read this whole thread and I have failed to see anyone point out the fact that out rulebook was just changed right under our noses with absolutely no publication, no explanation prior to, no voting procedure, nothing....and this is all just A OK?  Are you kidding me?

Maybe the proper rule procedure wasnt followed in 2005 but once that language was put in the rule book and publicized it became the rule.  Now it is just changed out of cycle.  This is not a safety issue what so ever and should not need to be changed out of cycle.  So what if there is a big flap on the net about it, well, there always has been.

Are you are saying the rule in place was illegally put in place and is now null and void and never should have been in there in the first place s lets just take it out?  That is how it reads.  Then that would lead one to believe that the contests under those rules should be null and void as well, is that what this is saying?

And if this was so easy to get done then why on earth did it take nearly 6 years to get it done?

Who is able to make sweeping changes to the rulebook with the lift of a finger without any notice to the modeling community?

I would like the details in the changes, why who when and where.  I would think the rest of you would want them too.  

[RC Storick]

There are no average kits anymore. Anything,any material,any method Can be used as long as its done by the entrant. This is not a team effort.

It can be carved,molded,machined,pressed,stamped,Glued,bolted,slot locked,paper machete as long as the flier did it. What is so hard to understand?

Here is my suggestion. Next rule cycle vote in a BOM (or not) that fits. If your elected officials don't vote the constituents voice vote them out! Too many cooks in the kitchen make bad soup.

Just remember it has worked under the BOM rule very well and we are the biggest control line event at the NATS as is.

[PerttiMe]

It can be carved,molded,machined,pressed,stamped,Glued,bolted,slot locked,paper machete as long as the flier did it. What is so hard to understand?

I am not quite sure how the rule that you and I have quoted should be interpreted.

What you say now is not included in the text of that rule. I think I've quoted enough times the part about "a few minutes".

As you say, there are no average kits. A typical ARF "kit" is excluded, because it already has the final covering applied. A typical ARC would certainly be enough work to satisfy what the TEXT of the rule asks for. "TEXT", not an idea that I have in my head about what it should say.

I certainly agree that you need a better definition for BOM, if you want to keep BOM. This one is open to too many interpretations.

[RC Storick]

Am I the only one who can understand this part?


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,

You do NOT completely construct a ARC or a ARF or a RTF

Why is this so hard to get? Its kind of like the insertion of only a few minits to construct. Takes me twice as long to use the restroom. Also if you dont fly at the NATS it has ZERO effect on you.

[peabody]

There are those that hold that glueing is what makes a "kit".....