Randy as you have it a ARC could still get 5 points more than the guy who spends months building a model but has a poor finish. The finish is where all the points come from. I am not griping or complaining about your idea just pointing out a discrepancy that has come up before.My great flying 10 year old scratch built get 10 points and the new shinny ARC gets 15 points. It is easy to say well that won't happen but most judging gives the highest points to the clean shiny plane. Just something for you to think about.
Ed
I am in the process of applying for CD status and thought when I first started reading and thinking from a CD's point of view.. Man this is going to complicate the whole process..
Just drop the whole issue, NO BOM RULE, NO APPEARANCE POINTS, period!
R/C pattern did it many years ago and still today, pattern planes are some of the most beautiful airplanes at any flying field. Pattern flyer's still take great pride in their planes, however, today, almost 3/4 of all Pattern planes at a contest are ARF's or purchased used airplanes.
Every time some one asks me what I think about BOM they are surprised with the answer. “It’s a rule that’s past its time and prime intent”. Let everybody who can fly, fly and be judged on the flight performance alone.
Now I will go into my Studio/shop and obsess on every little detail of the new plane. Immediately after it is finished (2 weeks) I will carefully cut a bunch of parts for a bold venture into electric flight and carefully fit each piece. Followed by sanding, filling, sanding, masking, painting, sanding, rubbing, polishing and then finally flying. No plans to change how thing get done around here.
Would it not be a shame to let these things slip by our youth? The dumbing down of America is already in affect. Just look at the tests kids take today. Most graduate with substandard knowledge.
Robert - well said!!! Best response yet. #^ #^
Bob Z.
Just drop the whole issue, NO BOM RULE, NO APPEARANCE POINTS, period!
R/C pattern did it many years ago and still today, pattern planes are some of the most beautiful airplanes at any flying field. Pattern flyer's still take great pride in their planes, however, today, almost 3/4 of all Pattern planes at a contest are ARF's or purchased used airplanes.
This is a new age in the hobby. Those that continue to yearn for the "Good Old Days" of balsa, tissue, and dope are going to be continually disappointed. GET OVER IT! You can't change it so don't try. You are loosing the struggle. n1 If you keep the outdated BOM rule, you will hurt the future growth of C/L Sport and Stunt.
As for me, I like to build my airplanes (R/C and C/L), but that is my personal preference and I don't believe that I have the right to shove it down someone else's throat. S?P
Tom Weedon
Do you believe that the entire rest of the world flying under FAI are "dumbed down"?
Would it not be a shame to let these things slip by our youth? The dumbing down of America is already in affect. Just look at the tests kids take today. Most graduate with substandard knowledge.
EDIT:
An This event was conceived as a test of the skill and ability of a person in building, finishing and flying a plane. Many argue that it should be narrowed to just a test of the flyer.
I dont know where I am going with this but the kids are less educated now idea is just simply not true.
I have one question, did it get in before the deaqd line? Last time I checked there were no CL proposals or our elustrious tech person didn't have them in the computor yet. Have fun, DOC Holliday
Steve and Brad are right to an extent. The event is moving to a buy and fly thing. I don't much care what "the rest of the world" is doing. I'm told that the rest of the world in toto is less flyers than those flying CL in the U.S. But, whatever.
This is off tract on the BOM but,
I dont know where you live but the bigger US citys graduate kids from high schoool who can't even read.
If you dont think so read here-->http://www.nifl.gov/nifl/facts/reading_facts.html
Yes, it is.
Now you are going to have the element of proof, which is messy. This is where the current BOM started going off the tracks. No one wants to see half the field get protested (and it possibly stick). That's just no fun.
Not to mention that you are saying that half of the Top 20 at the Nats are going to be willing to start the contest 5-10 point down? There are many in that group that have not built a wing in decades.
I would rather the current BOM stay in place and everyone just try to get as many points as they can by applying paint jobs.
Also, this proposal is darn near exactly the same as Keith Trostle's from like, 4 years ago.
I let this speak for itself. Other subjects are similar.
Would it not be a shame to let these things slip by our youth? The dumbing down of America is already in affect. Just look at the tests kids take today. Most graduate with substandard knowledge.
Just drop the whole issue, NO BOM RULE, NO APPEARANCE POINTS, period!
R/C pattern did it many years ago and still today, pattern planes are some of the most beautiful airplanes at any flying field. Pattern flyer's still take great pride in their planes, however, today, almost 3/4 of all Pattern planes at a contest are ARF's or purchased used airplanes.
This is a new age in the hobby. Those that continue to yearn for the "Good Old Days" of balsa, tissue, and dope are going to be continually disappointed. GET OVER IT! You can't change it so don't try. You are loosing the struggle. n1 If you keep the outdated BOM rule, you will hurt the future growth of C/L Sport and Stunt.
As for me, I like to build my airplanes (R/C and C/L), but that is my personal preference and I don't believe that I have the right to shove it down someone else's throat. S?P
Tom Weedon
Tough stand you have there...As for me? I'm almost ready to boycott contests that don't have BOM. It's as simple as the nose on your face...you didn't build it; no points...no problem. Let your flying expertise put you in the winner's circle...again no problem with me. Another approach??? Start your own ARF/ARC competition. BTW I own two of them and enjoy flying them...it was expected from the date of purchase...NO APPEARENCE POINTS!!!
Norm
I like everything I have read here......DO IT! All the discussion and points/ counterpoints certainly are valid....and I really like the idea that a guy who buys a prebuilt wings suffers the same fate as the ARC guys..... totally fair in my opinion.
While I agree with this sentiment, I do not think that making more rules to "punish" contestants is productive.
Where is the punishment? There is a rule in place. As long as the rule has been in place, everyone has known about it. So how does it punish a contestnt to inforce the rule?
From strictly a RULES aspect. let me compare the argument with the PGA tour. Let's say all the guys going to "Q" School want to have a NEW RULE which allows a player to carry as many clubs as his caddy can bear. Forget everything except an argument over rules. Going in, everyone knows the rules. Will the PGA allow it? Changing the long established rules needs to have a verifiable REASON for doing so.
Well, we can always count on some to crab, I guess.
But ultimately, the event will be fragmented and destroyed if some compromise isn't reached.
I'm all for keeping a BOM as long as it's NOT included in the flight scores. Keep theI'll second that motion Eric. The reason being that not everyone can do a 20 point paint job but the compatition starts from scratch. I do not think that this will matter as far as the beauty and the pride of building your own plane tihs will not change. Also there is alway the fact that judges do take notice of super good aurplanes.I do think this should be two differnt event. A beauty contest an a competition contest.
Hey, you asked for opinions...
EricV
Thanks Eric that is what I am looking for--- people's opinions. Your's is appreciated just as much as the others.
Bigiron aka Marvin Denny
Brad, Randy may have a good point, we sure saw fragmentation when John B tried to do a few things and all the arguing over BOM just makes the fuse burn faster...
In my opinion, if we keep BOM this proposal is a good compromise.. I would vote in a heartbeat to go the same route Canada did.. This would take BOM off the table and better prepair future flyers for world competition.
Bob the fragmentation was within PAMPA. PAMPA is not CLPA. CLPA contests all around and the nats still had the same entry levels as usual.
I let this speak for itself. Other subjects are similar.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v421/Keithhs/Misc%20Pics/2003-intl-math-15yr-old.gif)
Source http://mwhodges.home.att.net/new_96_report.htm#pictures (http://mwhodges.home.att.net/new_96_report.htm#pictures)
...this is a discussion is for how the current BOM rule can be clarified and made to serve the most people...
I know that some want to radically change the event.
Actually, the period to submit a rule change has passed.
There are four regarding the BOM:
One to eliminate it entirely.
One to fly FAI (which eliminates it)
and two that further convolute the event and make it impossible to score.
OK.
The original equipment rules for golf only allowed the use of hickory shafts.
Then the steel shaft came out. Someone decided that golfers should be allowed to use steel shafts. Many of the "hickory shaft" players of the day complained that it gave a competitive advantage BUT it was decided STEEL was the future of equipment for the sport.
The same arguments have ensued ever since for graphite shafts, steel woods, titanium woods, two piece balls, etc etc etc
Clearly the future for modeling is in the pre-fabricated kit (ARF/ARC).
Using your argument, Tiger Woods should still be playing with hickory shafts, after all it was good enough for Old Tom Morris.
Doc: You stated that you would like people from Dist. IX to let you know
how they feel about this issue. This makes perfect sense. At the same
time, though, you are their representative on the CB (as all the others
are as well) and you have been selected to make these tough decisions
as you see fit. Take into consideration what your members feel, what
other CB members feel, and certainly your own feelings on this matter when
you vote.
I checked out the link Peabody posted, and if I had a say on the CB I would
throw all my weight behind Warren's proposal. I feel it is high time we went
to FAI and got in line with the rest of the world. I sent my proposal in as
a steppingstone to that goal. I was unaware that Warren would be sending
in his proposal to go to FAI.
Thanks for all your hard work Doc, Steve
Robert....although it's not ascertainable, I would wager that some District Reps have taken the "PAMPA" line, and NOT followed the wishes of those in their District. Several of the District Reps. do not even fly control line.....maybe they used to, but they should look forward, NOT backward....it used to be that we rode flatheads.....and used Fox 35's .... things move forward....which is what the thread is about....are we going to continue to ride flatheads?
so you think that if everyone in his district says no he should vote yes? Get real
If they dont vote for the people they wont be there long!!
The wishes of the few out way the wishes of the many?
Hey, I just had a thought. I think that guys that consistently score above 550 should have to fly with a handicap. I mean, the fact that they have worked and practiced for years to develop their skills shouldn't give them an advantage. We need to level the playing field.
OK, that's petty (of course). But in some ways I think it relates to a lot of positions I've heard here. It's not fair that some guy that has spend years learning to build and puts out fine aircraft should have an advantage in points over a guy that hasn't. Lets get rid of the BOM to level the playing field. But this of course again relates to one's vision of what this event is. If you believe that it should be changed to a flying only event because that's what "everyone else does", then it's a spurious argument. If you believe that it's a test of the builder and the flier, then it makes perfect sense.
Yup....
I believe that Warren's proposal is what I am going to urge my CLCB guy to vote for....look at the experience that he brings to the event at the top level. When he remarks that the BOM is unenforceable, you can take it to the bank.
. Several of the District Reps. do not even fly control line.....
Ok, here goes.
Some people may laugh but this is it.
BOM, Builder of the model. If you completely BUILT and FINISHED your model from a plan or kit or scratch, not assembled from pre-existing or pre-built or bought sub assemblies, excluding hardware, including but not limited to, controls systems, bellcranks, control horns, landing gear, motor mounting pads, and or RC motor mounts, engines, exhaust systems, propellers, canopies then you may claim appearance points. The appearance points will be added to your flight score.
If you used an ARF, ARC, RTF, or Bought plane or borrwed plane, or bought wings, tails, fuses, and you did not completely apply the finish you can not claim appearance points.
You must comply with the BOM to be able to enter events Jr Sr Open. Adv and PAMPA classes may be entered with a non BOM plane and appearance points will not be awarded and or added to the flight score.
(Doug Moon) I say again people moving to no BOM is not to level the playing field. It is to remove a rule that is not enforceable. I know you say you know who builds what in your area. But are people going to readily disclose they buy their wings from Hunt or Planes from Morris and Berry or other parts from Little or a whole host of other builders for hire. Yet those guys have long lists of people waiting for parts and or planes to be built. As it stands now you can kind of rationalize that you built enough of it to qualify and no one has to know. The way I wrote the rule you will flat out know if you are in violation.(/quote)
Hi Doug,
As we have discussed before, you know I am 100% FOR the BOM (as is Bradley if I understand what he's always said) but I am 100% for DROPPING it because of the very fact that it is UNENFORCABLE. I know you do not argue that, nor does Warren Tiahart!!
Now for the others who always are in the *discussions* we often have on the BOM, I do not even believe it is a factor of anyone *cheating*. The rule was relaxed YEARS AGO! Many years ago I heard the 51% *rule* which was universally accepted where I heard it (the NATS!).
There is *testimony* on this board as to people getting their planes painted by others *years ago*. It was accepted. So, just where was the line drawn? Nowhere....... some built the plane and painted it, some did various levels, and even some *bought* their planes. It's all irrelevant now.
Yes, I know of people who fly bought wings (as does Bob, Doug, Dale, Tom M., Tom D., Randy S., and anyone else who has "built for hire"), and I know certain people would NEVER believe who some of these people are! And it all reality, it doesn't matter anyway.
The BOM is no longer an enforceable rule, no matter how much we would like to *believe* it is. It has just been so transparent for too many years. Any rule will not bother me, since I will build my planes anyway as will MANY others. And there will STILL be guys buying what they can afford to.
Please guys, do not be SO NAIVE that you do not realize what has happened over the last 30+ years.
IMHO, as much as I really hate to admit it, we need to let the BOM, *R.I.P.*
Bill,
Well, if everyone is a cheater and most have others build their planes anyway, then I suppose your right. Dump the BOM. I stopped expecting integrity from people a long time ago. If you get it, it's always refreshing.
Hell of a world we've created.
BigironNo Andy, I don't think that it is all about money. I just pointed out that some DO have a vested interest that they are concerned about . Youldn't you be concerned if you had spent considerable amounts of time, effort, and money to get a product out and then find that someone was trying to get a rule change that might kill all your efforts?? I would think you would be highly concerned. That is why I put in THREE stages of points allocations so that such efforts would NOT be adversly affected.
Do you really believe that this all about money. Sorry my fellow modeler but that just ain't the case. Andy
Might I point out that many of those opposed to the BOm rule have a monetary reason for getting it thrown out. They either are, or are planning to, produce ARFs, ARCs, or prebuilt components such as wings and Fuselages, and they are afraid that ANY BOM restrictions might hurt their business.
I sure remember the 76 NATS, a bunch of Hunt wings including me and none of us thought for a second it was cheating.
I am sorry Marvin, I expect better of you.Bradly, Did I name you?? I have been contacted with the concern I mentioned so I merely brought it to the attention of everyone so that they might consider that also--- Or did I step on your toes---- somehow???
I expected to hear this kind of spin from the stunt politicians, and I figure it will be inevitable, but that is all it will be is *spin*.