Definition of the average kit

[RC Storick]

This is not a rule proposal. It is a change in definition

To level the playing field for the intent of this proposal the average kit is defined as.

The average kits components are defined as no pre glued parts. Kits may include molded parts to be assembled by the builder.Leading and trailing edge materials may be preformed,where foam wings are used they may be sheeted or un sheeted but un assembled. Flat parts may be pre-cut. Kits may include bell cranks and fuel tanks and all hardware necessary to assemble the model.The builder must assemble the airframe in its entirety and must finish the complete model to be eligible for appearance points.
Scratch built airframes may be built in any manner the modeler see fit, be it molded,cast sculpted,carved or assembled as long as the entrant does the required work as per the average kit to include all assembly's and finish.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a list of things you do not need to make

PRE-FORMED CANOPIES
FG/CF COWLS
CONTROL SYSTEMS INCLUDING THE BELL CRANK, CONTROL HORNS, LO WIRE, LO GUIDES, and PUSH RODS
TIP WEIGHT BOXES
LANDING GEAR
WHEEL PANTS
WHEELS
PILOT/PILOTS
INSTRUMENT CLUSTERS and or INTERIOR PARTS FOR A SCALE APPEARING COCKPIT
RC TYPE MOTOR MOUNTS
SPINNERS
PROPELLERS
ENGINES/MOTORS
EXHAUST SYSTEMS
HARDWARE
RUNNING LIGHTS
RETRACTABLE LANDING GEAR
BATTERIES and THE NEEDED HARDWARE FOR ELECTRIC POWERED MODELS
VINYL GRAPHICS
STICKERS
RUB ON LETTERS
you do not need to cut your own foam wings (as they are offered in some kits)

This interpretation is more about common sense than honor
If you can set your non commercially available aircraft down on the line and say you build it we must take it that you did. If a commercially available model is copied proof of construction must be supplied by the builder. Proof to include pictures of the molding of all sub assembly's with you in the photo.

This is a stretch but would suffice. As for example lets say builder A, built a shark and messed the wings up. Because of how its made you could borrow a wing from builder B and affix it to your airframe. Thus constituting team built. This is my interpretation lets see yours. I am in contact with the AMA and they are watching here as well.

[peabody]

Hi Robert....
I kinda think that molded parts (non-flat) should be okay, regardless of what they are mad of....
I do favor a rule that excludes pre-glued components.....that would take care of pre-built wings, pre-sheeted wings, and other pre-made pieces....

No ARFs, ARC's, "component kits", etc......

The average kit, in my opinion, is one offered in the Brodak "kits" section, or the SIG "kits" section or from Randy or Walter Umland or Eric Rule.

[PJ Rowland]

This is what I was trying to go on about before..


" If a commercially available model is copied proof of construction must be supplied by the builder. Proof to include pictures of the molding of all sub parts "

Someone said earlier " Burden of proof isn't with the flier "

So signing your AMA entry form isnt enough? ... that was my single point all along.

[RC Storick]

Hi Robert....
I kinda think that molded parts (non-flat) should be okay, regardless of what they are mad of....
I do favor a rule that excludes pre-glued components.....that would take care of pre-built wings, pre-sheeted wings, and other pre-made pieces....

No ARFs, ARC's, "component kits", etc......

The average kit, in my opinion, is one offered in the Brodak "kits" section, or the SIG "kits" section or from Randy or Walter Umland or Eric Rule.

See I came up with this in 5 min, Its more clear than the well thought out ruling from 05.

[RC Storick]

This is what I was trying to go on about before..


" If a commercially available model is copied proof of construction must be supplied by the builder. Proof to include pictures of the molding of all sub parts "

Someone said earlier " Burden of proof isn't with the flier "

So signing your AMA entry form isnt enough? ... that was my single point all along.

Not in this case Let me ask you this do you not think there would be some kind of copy rite infringment filed if it was a true copy? then sold to all the people saying they built them.

To copy something for personal use is one thing to copy for resale is another. So I say prove it. I Live in Missouri this is the show me state.

[PerttiMe]

Kits may include molded parts to be assembled by the builder.No sub assembly's.

There'll be a fight on what is a molded part and what is a sub assembly. Those terms need definitions if you want to do something like this. Maybe flat components too.

I assume you have a purpose for a definition of the "average kit"?

[RC Storick]

Molded parts as supplied in a TF Nobler kit. We don't need to define every word.

NO PRE GLUED PARTS

[RC Storick]

I assume you have a purpose for a definition of the "average kit"?

Yep! take that to the bank

[Randy Ryan]

To level the playing field for the intent of this rule the average kit is defined as.

The average kits consists of flat components. No pre glued parts. Kits may include molded parts to be assembled by the builder.No sub assembly's (such as wings,elevators and rudders). Flat parts may be either laser cut or die cut. Kits can include bell cranks and fuel tanks and all hardware necessary to assemble the model.The builder must assemble the airframe in its entirety and must finish the complete model to be eligible for appearance points.
Scratch built airframes may be built in any manner the modeler see fit, be it molded,cast sculpted,carved or assembled as long as the entrant does the required work as per the average kit to include all assembly's and finish.

If a commercially available model is copied proof of construction must be supplied by the builder. Proof to include pictures of the molding of all sub assembly's.

This is my interpretation lets see yours. I am in contact with the AMA and they are watching here as well.

Robert. I'm in agreement with this totally, but make one suggestion:

"Flat parts may be either laser cut or die cut."

Change to simply; "Flat parts may be pre-cut or printed".

Some yo-yo will pick up on your statement and say that saw-cut parts and printed are ineligible.

[RC Storick]

Robert. I'm in agreement with this totally, but make one suggestion:

"Flat parts may be either laser cut or die cut."

Change to simply; "Flat parts may be pre-cut or printed".

Some yo-yo will pick up on your statement and say that saw-cut parts and printed are ineligible.

Fixed! this is what we need. Constructive input to get this right.

[Randy Ryan]

Fixed! this is what we need. Constructive input to get this right.

Something else, but probably not as contentious; "Leading and trailing edge materials may be preformed."

[PerttiMe]

Molded parts as supplied in a TF Nobler kit. We don't need to define every word.

Not everybody has seen a TF Nobler kit. Does it have a molded wing? A wing is a pretty flat component.

[Dick Pacini]

Not everybody has seen a TF Nobler kit. Does it have a molded wing? A wing is a pretty flat component.

The Top Flite Geiseke Nobler kit has molded fuselage decking.

[Terrence Durrill]

Buy it, build it, fly it, have fun and tell no falsehoods to any man...........................!                 

[RC Storick]

The Top Flite Geiseke Nobler kit has molded fuselage decking.

Not everyone has seen a moon rock. ( I have ) It looks like a rock.

[Dick Pacini]

Not everyone has seen a moon rock. ( I have ) It looks like a rock.

Robert, I'm not sure I follow your train of thought.  The Top Flite Nobler was brought up.  As I recall, the '57 green box Nobler didn't have any molded parts.  However, the Gieseke Nobler did have the upper fuselage molded in the desired shape. I bought that kit last year off ebay and it is complete with the molded parts.  That being said, the kit has been out of production for quite a few years, so it really isn't a good example for today's definition.

Cudos to you for beginning sensible dialog on this subject.  I am sure a satisfactory definition of the average kit will result through your efforts.

[RC Storick]

Robert, I'm not sure I follow your train of thought.  The Top Flite Nobler was brought up.  As I recall, the '57 green box Nobler didn't have any molded parts.  However, the Gieseke Nobler did have the upper fuselage molded in the desired shape. I bought that kit last year off ebay and it is complete with the molded parts.  That being said, the kit has been out of production for quite a few years, so it really isn't a good example for today's definition.

Cudos to you for beginning sensible dialog on this subject.  I am sure a satisfactory definition of the average kit will result through your efforts.

Not every scenario will be coverd nor does it need to be. The thing is no assembled parts in the kit.

[Steve Fitton]

Maybe it would be easier to define whats NOT approved, rather than trying to enumerate every single possibility that is legal.

Perhaps just have a picture of a Yatsenko plane with the word "NO" next to it....

[Dennis Toth]

Robert,
Interesting approach. I think that in fairness if one flier is required to bring proof then all fliers should bring the same type of proof. The reason being the BOM applies to all models not just ARF's. A flier could take a set of plans or a kit and have someone completely outside the hobby built it and present it as their own.

The photo's should be of specific activities that are important to the performance and scoring of the model, such as building the flying surfaces, installing the flying surfaces, covering and final finishing. The photo's should be on photographic film not digital (digital can be modified with programs like Photo Shop or Cloud, we've all seen the commercials). They should show the modeler clearly visible doing the work.

Difficult for existing ships, but it would be enforceable.

Best,       DennisT

[RC Storick]

Robert,
Interesting approach. I think that in fairness if one flier is required to bring proof then all fliers should bring the same type of proof. The reason being the BOM applies to all models not just ARF's. A flier could take a set of plans or a kit and have someone completely outside the hobby built it and present it as their own.

The photo's should be of specific activities that are important to the performance and scoring of the model, such as building the flying surfaces, installing the flying surfaces, covering and final finishing. The photo's should be on photographic film not digital (digital can be modified with programs like Photo Shop or Cloud, we've all seen the commercials). They should show the modeler clearly visible doing the work.

Difficult for existing ships, but it would be enforceable.

Best,       DennisT

The only proof needed if its a commercially available plane for obvious reasons

[Tim Wescott]

The only proof needed if its a commercially available plane for obvious reasons

Obvious to you, perhaps, but not obvious to me.  I think Dennis is spot-on with his comment.  Requiring proof only if it's a commercially available plane is just an assist to the really sneaky people, because of the exact scenario that Dennis cited.

Howard Rush had a thread on this a couple of months ago: I thought he did a good job of drawing boundaries.  I don't really agree with where he put the boundaries, but I thought that what he delineated was pretty clear.

Personally, I'm all for a rule that reduces argument.  I think the AMA's position on this does just that, and splendidly. 

Frankly, unless you make the airplane construction part of the event, either right there on site or with proctors that follow the construction of the plane all the way, you're always going to have a BOM that's unenforceable by any means other than the honor system.  You don't have a choice about that -- it's just the way the world is.  Your choice is whether you want to divert energy that could be better spent on constructive pursuits to arguing about it, or whether you want to get on with life.

[Randy Powell]

One of the problems with definitions is you will always get someone arguing the definition of "is" or whatever. Rule lawyering is a national sport. I understand the desire to try to give something specific and I agree, but understand that there will be those that will argue minutiae for there own reasons and try to cloud the waters no matter how clear the definition.

[RC Storick]

Frankly, unless you make the airplane construction part of the event.

It already is, you can get up to 20 points if you have followed the rules.

[Derek Barry]

NOT LEGAL

[Derek Barry]

NOT LEGAL!!!!

[Derek Barry]

NOT LEGAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Derek Barry]

NOT LEGAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

NO

[Derek Barry]

Now see if you can find the not legal planes in this picture!

[jim gilmore]

So, NO foam wing or foam elevators ?

[RC Storick]

Fine as long as you built it. Meaning you sheeted it and covered it. You do not need to cut it, as it is found in a SIG mustang or a Magnum kit un covered.

Pretty simple

[PerttiMe]

Fine as long as you built it. Meaning you sheeted it and covered it. You do not need to cut it, as it is found in a SIG mustang or a Magnum kit un covered.

Pretty simple

Now go and add that and all the other exceptions to "flat parts" in your rule. Better also make a list of kit parts, or sizes of parts, that can be molded. Who knows, your reference kit (TF Nobler) might not be available for checking in a few years.

[Derek Barry]

I don't really have a problem with sheeted foam wings but if getting rid of them means no more ARF's I am ok with that.

[RC Storick]

I don't really have a problem with sheeted foam wings but if getting rid of them means no more ARF's I am ok with that.

I think any person with any grasp on the English language can understand the most important sentence in the interpretation "The builder must assemble the airframe in its entirety and must finish the complete model to be eligible for appearance points."

[Steve Fitton]

Now go and add that and all the other exceptions to "flat parts" in your rule. Better also make a list of kit parts, or sizes of parts, that can be molded. Who knows, your reference kit (TF Nobler) might not be available for checking in a few years.

This is why I think its easier to list what is not legal vs what is legal.  See Derek's pictures above, all planes from the Worlds, all planes with molded prefinished parts and thus not Nats compliant per the rules.  Its very simple, and even PC for todays world where using pictures in place of words is encouraged lest the reading-challenged be left out...just show a picture of the non legal model or component with "No" next to it.

[builditright]

Pictured below are my definitions of an average kit
hope this is acceptable...  

Blocks and pants...
the wheel pants and blocks are cut to profile or top view shape but they are not sanded to their final shapes

Foam wings...
because the wing has gear clips in them, the foam would be in three pieces per panel so the
gear clips and spars were installed only to assure a correct airfoil to the customer.

If I may add my "opinion" that I would also allow for sheeted foam wings with the hope that most, if not all will agree that because an improperly sheeted foam wing can cause a safety issue if the foam wing was to fail or come apart due to delamination of its sheeting. Remember that's just my opinion but I would allow them.

[SteveMoon]

Personally, I don't care, because I don't care if the guy I'm competing
against built his plane or not. I simply don't give a s**t. ARC/ARF/Kit built/
Scratch built/Pre-built components/whatever It just doesn't matter to me.

Later, Steve

[Terry Bernard]

I think you would be more successful if you addressed the issues that actually make a prebuilt model have a perceived or actual advantage over one built from scratch.
 

" As purchased, neither the flying surfaces nor the components that compose the flying surfaces may be pre-aligned as components or to each other as completed structures.

As purchased, all external surfaces must not be finished other than that required to achieve the basic shape of the component."


Protest or no, the AMA is not going to allow anyone to enforce the BOM against anyone who has signed that they are in fact the builder. To think other wise is just wishful thinking. That train has left the station.


Terry.

[RC Storick]

Protest or no, the AMA is not going to allow anyone to enforce the BOM against anyone who has signed that they are in fact the builder. To think other wise is just wishful thinking. That train has left the station.
Terry.

Don't bet on it

[Tim Wescott]

It already is, you can get up to 20 points if you have followed the rules.

No.  Saying that you built the airplane is part of the event.  Actually building the airplane happens before the event.

Unless you tell people "show up with balsa, glue and paint, and spend Sunday flying what you build right here on Saturday" then the build isn't part of the event.  It's just what someone does -- or said they did -- before hand.  And confirming that will be a huge issue that's impossible to do in any reasonable way, unless you depend on the honor system, which was my point.

[RC Storick]

And confirming that will be a huge issue that's impossible to do in any reasonable way, unless you depend on the honor system, which was my point.

Well I guess times change. I will supply pictures and documentation on any aeroplane I present for appearance judging. Why because I can and because I built it.

[Wynn Robins]

Now see if you can find the not legal planes in this picture!

[dale gleason]

I think we should take a look at the term, "average kit". In discussions I've had re this subject, "average kit" soon includes RC planes, boats, cars, even static display plastic kits, not to mention all the ARFs, ARCs, hand chucks, AJ Hornet type "kits"...The term "average kit" is too broad for our rules. Change "average kit" to "average control line precision aerobatic kit". Maybe throw in some examples to add clarity, ie,  Brodak full kits, RSM, Blueridge, etc.  Do this and the subject is narrowed down to what we do, control line precison aerobatics. Control line precison aerobatics' first scoring feature is to have built your plane, and if it came in a little box, you have to have built it!

dg

[Bill Gruby]

I think any person with any grasp on the English language can understand the most important sentence in the interpretation "The builder must assemble the airframe in its entirety and must finish the complete model to be eligible for appearance points."

 Just use this one sentence, it explains it all. Nice call Bob.  

  "Billy G"

[Randy Powell]

>>I think any person with any grasp on the English language can understand the most important sentence in the interpretation "The builder must assemble the airframe in its entirety and must finish the complete model to be eligible for appearance points."<<

And to me, this is enough. But as I said, there are those that will try to pick it apart. What do you mean, "in it's entirety"? Does that mean I have to build my own control system? What about my own tank? Can I use a foam wing? if so, how much can be "pre" constructed?

I'm with Tim on it being an honor system. If you say you built it, you built it. Now, there are certainly those that will lie their backsides off about this. Oh yea, I built it (wink, wink, nudge, nudge). But we generally know who those guys are (though not always). But that has always been part of the event.

For some, this event is about flying. Period. For others it's a modeling event that includes flying. Just depends on your viewpoint.

[john e. holliday]

Well that lets me out of contention.   In other words I have several kits in which some of the component are assembled,  like the spar for the i-beam,  laser cut ribs,  and the engine plate ready for the fuselage.   Another one I have is already covered in SLC.  But, I give up the appearance points just to be able to fly.   At VSC the appearance points would not have helped one bit.  Still, the appearance points apply to those that build their planes.   As far as competition the BOM only applies to JR, Sr and Open.   When the rules state that you have to build your own in the PAMPA classes that will be the death of stunt.

[Steve Fitton]

Hey Wynn, you missed two in that pic there! 

[Dennis Moritz]

Kit: a box of flat stuff and plans.

[Wynn Robins]

Hey Wynn, you missed two in that pic there! 

wasnt sure about the one closer to camera - and totally overlooked the "classic" in the second row...

[Steve Hines]

Can Bob Hunt Wing core's be used they do not come in a kit, unless you were to make a flying wing. How about carbon fiber wheel pants, you could make them yourself. Or is it ok to buy a kit and then buy any after market piece you would like. My 10 year old is working her butt off trying to build a kit to fly at the nat's. She has done all the work, but I put in the bellcrank that I got from Tom Morrris I wanted to make sure that this was right, I did not trust her to do this. So I guess her plane will not be able fly at the nat's. I can tell you this she has more than 4 hours in to it. What could you build that would take you less than 4 hours build, I want to build one these. I hope someone soon comes up with rules that every can understand and the inturpation wount be changed every week. I dont get paid vacation, so a weeks pay and all the other exspenses is not worth getting there and finding out she cant fly. I dont care what the rules are make it clear right them in stone and dont change them.

[RC Storick]

This is what I mean




AIRFRAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!