Does color make a different in your scores?

[Trostle]

I am so glad that the conversations turned to be a more respectable....I feel it wasn't a silly thing to ask....yes I am a beginner and will be coming up the ranks.  

(Clip)
  
I am striving to get the best points I can.....and if color comes into play.....I will re-think my planes schemes
 
(Clip)  

Now.....I don't care if you are the World Champion or beginner......I treat everyone with respect and I don't let people intimidate me because of their stature in the sport we do.....I don't treat people like that and I will not be treated like that. Yes I need to practice, yes I need good coaching, yes I need to trim, yes I need to work on flying.....I know these things.....when I ask a question I shouldn't be looked or talked down on because I am not an upper class or level like your some are.   I look up to you guys for guidance so I can become an upper classman and to better myself. So all this silly and doesn't matter @#$%....does matter and is not silly to me.

If I start to act like that and tell beginners not to talk till they show me that they deserve to be here and I am part of group that has their clicks....please shoot me in the head with a gun.....we should all be lucky that we even have new people coming .....if we didn't then our C/L stunt would be nothing no more. I am done bitching and hope I made a point.

  I REALLY  APPRECIATE for the guys to help me understand that there is more than, just color that looks cool.....to me it as important as choosing contest Balsa.

 I am thankful and blessed that C/L has found me once again in a point of my life of using skills I have acquired from my absence of Stunt flying.....some say I am addicted.....LOL....have to say YEP on that......

Tom,

I think you need to turn down your sensitivity meter.  I personally know Brett and many of the others here that you feel have somehow belittled you for asking your questions about color schemes affecting your flight scores.  I am sure they will all subscribe to the thought that there is no such thing as a dumb question except for the one that is not asked.  Brett's responses were categorizing the idea that paint schemes affect a flight score into the realm of the inane, not that it was a silly question.  I did not find that his and other responses have put you down in any way.

In your first post, you commented "I feel it is wrong to have a certain color to get higher or lower scores as you are flying your event."  Your question appears to show that you have witnessed that "a certain color [can] get higher or lower scores".  Do you have any information to support that statement?  Or is it just a "theory"?

Then you asked "Do any of you know if a Camo paint scheme has won the Nats?"  Floyd Carter did post a comment that my Focke Wulf won at the Nats.  (It also placed 5th at two previous Nats.)  This model was painted with the German gray and green top and light blue bottom.  I also had a semi scale P-40Q with olive drab top and gray bottom qualify at another Nats.  There have been any number of other pilots flying models with various camouflage paint schemes that have done well at the Nats.  Al Rabe won Open at the Nats twice (including the Walker Cup once) with his Sea Fury using the standard Royal Navy paint scheme.  Dave Hemstrought placed well one year (after placing first in his qualifying circle) with a semiscale model painted in standard British camouflage colors.  Frank McMillan flew his Martin Baker MB 5 with British camouflage colors (dark green and dark gray top with light gray bottom) and placed well at several Nats and at least one Team Trials.  His Martin Baker also won the Super Seventies at the 2016 VSC and 2nd at that 2017 VSC.  There have been any number of good pilots flying their camouflaged painted models that have placed well at the Nats and other major contests for the past 50 years.  

The key phrase in the last sentence above is "good pilots".  Heed the advice of Brett and others that your concerns should be building a good airplane, triming it well, and practice.  You have not been "looked or talked down on because [you are] not an upper class or level like your some are."  Nor should you feel that way.

You commented "if color comes into play.....I will re-think my planes schemes".  You write as if you do not yet comprehend that the main thing to learn from this thread is that color has little effect on flight scores.  Color becomes a matter of your own personal taste.  Having judged at all levels of competition (local, regional, Team Trials, Nats and World Championships) for more than 50 years, unless there is something going on with my understanding of how the pattern is to be flown, I feel certain that color/paint schemes do not affect how a maneuver is scored.  I could go on at length about why some ideas that design, paint and paint schemes affect flight scores are wrong based on my experiences.  But that is beyond the scope of this thread.

Keith

[Brett Buck]

  Now.....I don't care if you are the World Champion or beginner......I treat everyone with respect and I don't let people intimidate me because of their stature in the sport we do.....I don't treat people like that and I will not be treated like that. Yes I need to practice, yes I need good coaching, yes I need to trim, yes I need to work on flying.....I know these things.....when I ask a question I shouldn't be looked or talked down on because I am not an upper class or level like your some are.   I look up to you guys for guidance so I can become an upper classman and to better myself. So all this silly and doesn't matter @#$%....does matter and is not silly to me.

     For goodness sake, what are you talking about? I am not talking down to you, I am providing the information you asked for and suggesting a better way to spend your time. People get caught up in these sorts of strange ideas, and because I have worked through them myself - and you haven't, yet - I was trying help you avoid the same issue. Yes - silly mental traps. Everybody does it to one degree or another. There are far larger issues what you will run across later, that are far more pernicious. If you ignore them and concentrate on what *you* are doing, and don't worry about what other people might do, you will be much further ahead.

    And in fact, the color of the airplane *does not matter* to getting flight judging or scoring, at least not to the judges. What do you want me to say, that it does? Lie to you?  

     Worry about flying patterns accurately, don't worry about side issues. That still seems like pretty good advice, to me. I have told A LOT of other people the same thing and they didn't become incensed about it. Ted Fancher has told me the same thing many times, as have numerous others, it certainly helped me and I figured it would help you. You aren't compelled to do anything anyone says, it's entirely in your hands.

      Brett

[Brett Buck]

Still to this day, the most incredible patterns I have ever seen flown. It's the level of perfection that I have been striving for most of my life. I feel like I get close every once in a while but I just can't make myself paint a hot pink airplane....again.

Derek

       In this case, you could argue it was "in spite of" instead of "because of" the color. It looks a lot better in context- next to that trophy:

[Derek Barry]

       In this case, you could argue it was "in spite of" instead of "because of" the color. It looks a lot better in context- next to that trophy:

Well, that was the very early 90's...

Derek

[peabody]

Derek....I'm old, but believe that it was '99 or 2000?
Judging Paul flying that plane......the first outside square had me convinced that we were going to soon be picking up pieces of florescent stuff....

[Trostle]

As an expert level flier and experienced judge I can tell you with conviction that the color or even size or shape of the airplane has little or no effect on scores.  The size shape and placement of the maneuvers is what counts.

Any who don't believe that need to go watch Joe Gilbert fly a pattern with his Ringmaster that is not particularly pretty, outstanding in color, or even easy to fly!

He scored at the recent VSC in Classic in the high 560's to 570's with patterns that were simply very well flown with an unimpressive airplane that became very impressive because of the way HE flew it!

Randy Cuberly

Particular attention should be paid to Randy's post above.  To state that Joe Gilbert's Ringmaster at this 2017 VSC is "not particularly pretty" is a monumental understatement.  Flying that Ringmaster, Joe won the VSC OTS event.  (And he beat me by two points - 618 to 616.  I then judged the Classic event at this same VSC and Joe had the privilege of flying in front of me with that same not-so-pretty Ringmaster in Classic.)  That not-so-pretty Ringmaster placed third in Classic, only to Nats caliber flying and models with concours winning appearances.  I do not know how my score compared to the other judge for the one flight he flew in front of me or compared to the other two sets of judges for his other two flights.  I do remember he got good scores from me compared to the flights I judged during those three days of competition on all of his maneuvers from take off to the landing.  I was not the least bit surprised to see him in 3rd place against some really good competition.  I feel confident that all I saw when he was flying was an object executing the maneuvers very well regardless of the fact I told Joe after the OTS event that his Ringmaster was "butt ugly" which he agreed with and anyone who saw it would concur.

Not only did Joe win 1st in OTS and 3rd in Classic, he was awarded the overall "Eagle Award" given at VSC for the best combined performance in the OTS and Classic/Super Seventies events, all with that same Ringmaster.

(And I have not let that second place in OTS that he put me in this year bother me the least bit.  I have totally discarded that experience and have not thought of it since.)

Keith

[Dennis Moritz]

Orange an unfair advantage. White anywhere on your plane should be penalized.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mike Haverly]

Derek....I'm old, but believe that it was '99 or 2000?
Judging Paul flying that plane......the first outside square had me convinced that we were going to soon be picking up pieces of florescent stuff....

Rich, I'm old too, but I think Paul was pretty busy with a B-17 at the time you mention.  That picture is at the '92 NATS.  I wasn't flying in 1992 but I have seen the model and it was pretty long in the tooth.

[Brett Buck]

Rich, I'm old too, but I think Paul was pretty busy with a B-17 at the time you mention.  That picture is at the '92 NATS.  I wasn't flying in 1992 but I have seen the model and it was pretty long in the tooth.

   The tipoff is where it says "1992" in the file name!

    Brett

[Mike Haverly]

OH! Really?   

[Trostle]

deleted  --  duplicate post

[Mike Griffin]

Tom, it was not a silly question at all.  When a person thinks they know all the answers, they just haven't asked all the questions. 

Mike

[Larrys4227]

Tom is long gone from this thread ....

[tom creasey]

Tom is long gone from this thread ....

           Nope not gone..... I stay where I am when I start something right or wrong.........just reading comments.....soak it all in and trying to learn something.

I do like the pic of the 1992 Impact . The color concept was a good choice for a visual. Thank you

I thought of etched anodize metal, (that looks like florescent black lite colors)  with a chrome clear appearance with checker board on the tips and complete elevator

[Brett Buck]

           Nope not gone..... I stay where I am when I start something right or wrong.........just reading comments.....soak it all in and trying to learn something.

I do like the pic of the 1992 Impact . The color concept was a good choice for a visual. Thank you

I thought of etched anodize metal, (that looks like florescent black lite colors)  with a chrome clear appearance with checker board on the tips and complete elevator

   That's an interesting idea, how would you do that with normal materials?   I have use actual foil in several cases but it's impractical for this application in more than the tiniest amounts.

    Brett

[Avaiojet]

   That's an interesting idea, how would you do that with normal materials?   I have use actual foil in several cases but it's impractical for this application in more than the tiniest amounts.

    Brett

Brett,

Years ago, and I mean years ago, there was this R/C modeler who used the etched sheets that printers use to skin his Warbird.

I never paid that much attention to it, but there was an article. I don't do a great deal of reading, not then and not now, so I'm really not informed as to what this modeler actually did?

I'll be looking for "thin" aluminum sheets soon. I'm thinking of "skinning" just the LE and the control surfaces on a model and using anodizing to match a Tru-Turn spinner.

See what results I get when I do some research for thin aluminum stock, or for the printers sheets.

Also, Someone, sorry I forgot who, but I was told Dupli-Color has a foax anodize look in an aerosol can.

I'll look into that also when the time comes.

Anyone ahead of me on this, I would like to hear from you.

CB

[George Truett]

You don't have to look very hard: http://www.scaleaero.com/flitemetal.htm

I've seen some amazing jets done with this stuff, no idea on the weight.

[Tim Wescott]

Speaking as a judge:

First, choosing a truly ugly color, or a really unappealing color scheme, will affect your appearance score if you compete somewhere that does appearance judging.  You asked about camo: personally, I'd probably give lower appearance scores to a nice realistic flat camo scheme, because flat colors hide imperfections.  Others would argue, but appearance is left to the judges.  If you want to score high with me with camo, make it super-shiny camo.  If you want to score high with flat camo, compete in scale.

Second, to a judge, when you're flying, your plane appears as a little fast-moving streak in the sky -- judges are not admiring your paint scheme when you're flying, they're watching the shapes you're carving in the sky.

Second-and-a-half: About the only way that you can impact your flight scores with the finish is to paint your plane light gray and compete in the Pacific Northwest, or paint it sky blue and compete anywhere else.  Then, we won't be able to see your plane against the sky, and you'll probably get lower scores.  You don't have to be super high visibility, but I have to see it.

[Avaiojet]

You don't have to look very hard: http://www.scaleaero.com/flitemetal.htm

I've seen some amazing jets done with this stuff, no idea on the weight.

George,

I've used Flite-Metal. It's flexible and is adhesive backed. Conforms to the surface it's burnished on. Great stuff.

However, it cannot be anodized.

There are thin aluminum sheets used for many applications, like flashing as one example. For my LE, it would be a wrap, so the aluminum sheet would have to hold the shape.

If I can pull this off, the look would be great. IMHO.

CB

[Brett Buck]

Brett,

Years ago, and I mean years ago, there was this R/C modeler who used the etched sheets that printers use to skin his Warbird.

I never paid that much attention to it, but there was an article. I don't do a great deal of reading, not then and not now, so I'm really not informed as to what this modeler actually did?

   There are a number of methods that use actual foil or litho plate (formerly available at newspaper printers but not any more). They work well but they are prohibitively heavy for our application.

     I have a few projects that I have been wanting to do (scale) for 40+ years. Every few years, I hear about another method to simulate a bare metal surface and I try it, but so far i haven't found one that I could get good results with that wasn't also absurdly heavy.

     Brett

[Avaiojet]

   There are a number of methods that use actual foil or litho plate (formerly available at newspaper printers but not any more). They work well but they are prohibitively heavy for our application.

     I have a few projects that I have been wanting to do (scale) for 40+ years. Every few years, I hear about another method to simulate a bare metal surface and I try it, but so far i haven't found one that I could get good results with that wasn't also absurdly heavy.

     Brett

Brett,

There are materials available that could work. As an artist and sign painter, I used "Silver" leaf many times for a variety of looks and applications. Has to be applied with "size" but an hr. or so of practice nails it. No real build up in weight. You can mask edges and pull to create panels AND this stuff can be burnished over vinyl materials like rivets.

I also used it for background areas of paintings. No photos with art and silver leaf, but I do have this photo where I used gold leaf as a background. I did the same kind of art with the silver leaf, just about the same thing.

A search will probably bring up plenty of retailers for it. Most art shops would carry it. The stuff is inexpensive.

CB

[Ted Fancher]

 SNIP.

   I would also note that the premise (red airplanes score better) is demonstrably false, as most National Championship airplanes over the last 30 have been predominately white base colors, with a few yellow and one purple.

   Brett

Might also be worth pointing out that the purple Nats winner also won the national championships a few years earlier when it was white with red and blue trim.  Trust me, Brett isn't trying to be argumentative just for the heck of it.  He's demonstrably correct.

FWIW, I've judged a lot over the years and pretty much consciously defocus my eyes (i.e. I don't stare at the airplane no matter what it's color) on the airplane but, rather, follow its path, during maneuvers allowing peripheral vision of the moving path of the airplane to be the focus of my attention.  Combined with a still head during the maneuvers the shapes and concentricity of that path (what the pilot is supposed to be doing) become the primary images going to my brain.  I fly pretty much the same way, by the way.

Having said that, a ship painted in camouflage colors flying against a background of similar colors might be a good or bad thing.  It might make it more difficult to follow peripherally  but at the same time tend to "camouflage" errors.  Is that a plus or a minus?

Ted

p.s. Psychologically, if you believe that the color makes a difference you should probably investigate it to your satisfaction to eliminate the wrong color for being blamed for bad scores.  Which is pretty much what we all do with everything we do to try to win plastic trophies!

[Ted Fancher]

       In this case, you could argue it was "in spite of" instead of "because of" the color. It looks a lot better in context- next to that trophy:

OMG!!!!  Did he actually fly that thing in public!!!!!!!!

[Paul Smith]

At the 1970 Nats they still used US Navy judges.

Some flyers used red white and blue American colors.

Some used navy blue to stroke the Navy judges.

A Nazi camo plane won.

[Brett Buck]

Having said that, a ship painted in camouflage colors flying against a background of similar colors might be a good or bad thing.  It might make it more difficult to follow peripherally  but at the same time tend to "camouflage" errors.  Is that a plus or a minus?

Ted

p.s. Psychologically, if you believe that the color makes a difference you should probably investigate it to your satisfaction to eliminate the wrong color for being blamed for bad scores.  Which is pretty much what we all do with everything we do to try to win plastic trophies!

       The latter bit is of course the reason I was trying to steer people away from that. Since it doesn't have any consequential effect, you don't want people to go off on that tangent and spend a few years (or a few decades in a few obvious pathological cases) blaming mysterious outside forces for their results.

     I think the premise coming in was that the color would camouflage mistakes from the judges, but if it was true, it would camouflage it even better for the pilot. It definitely *does* matter to the pilot whether you can see it or not (as noted previously) and it is much easier for the judges to see the airplane well enough to score it. So, if it's good enough to hide from the judges, the pilot is going to be completely incapable of flying it precisely. Which leads back to the basic premise, do whatever is necessary to make the airplane and pilot fly better and/or easier, that will make the geometric shapes better, and that WILL greatly affect the scores,
  
     Brett

[Brett Buck]

What every one seems to be forgetting, is no matter the planes paint scheme, one must wear white pants, a solid color shirt, red, blue, green or yellow, but not orange and white Nike's or New Departure's. High zoot sun glasses and an appropriate ball cap with a great logo of some long lost club from the 50's or an engine mfr logo.  If nothing else, you will attract snide comments. 

   Or a black polo shirt, jeans, and a rubber horse head:

[Doug Moon]

The best way to approach this is to choose a scheme and color combination that YOU will like.  You will be the one who spends the most time looking at your plane.  Yes you should choose colors that wont disappear in green backgrounds if you have to fly where trees are close in the background. But I would only give that weight if you have to fly there ALL of the time and the trees are really close. 

In the end you build your plane for YOU not the judges, not your flying buddies or anyone else, it is your plane paint it however you like.  Then fly the crap out of it.

At the beginner level it would be a good idea to choose a simple two color scheme with a few trim lines and practice application and how to keep it light.  I noted the part where you said you will be coming up the ranks in 5 years.  That is certainly possible and I hope you succeed in your mission.  If your flying is going to top notch in 5 years your building AND finishing will have to be there as well.  Not only do you have to build it straight and light you will need to finish it well and keep it light.  Pick simple schemes to hone your craft quickly. Pick the colors you want and go burn some fuel.

[TigreST]

  Hmm, Baron Von Richthofens  ( The Red Baron) plane was red and he got the highest score !

[Fredvon4]

I should not comment---- I am strictly a spectator and "fun for me fly only" guy-----BUT I have been to many many contests regionally and Nats.... long before they were a one place only event

Not too much you can do about local venues and ad hoc judges who may or may not have favorites and expectations other than you should tryy very hard to NOT----- BE THAT GUY...  

I mean do not be:
Late, slow, arrogant, argumentative in the pilots meeting, asking inane minutia questions in the pilots meeting, project a "chip on the shoulder" persona.....In other words, be the guy folks WANT to like

Always remember, it is a past time HOBBY----and the flying is SUPPOSED to be FUN and provide not only YOU-- but others enjoyment

I seriously doubt any Jim Walker, Brett Buck level flyer has ever left the circle-- after a poor flight--- and thought -- "the judges screwed me because my plane was not the right color"....

IMO guys N Gals who are wired into top level competition are much more critical of their own skill and performance and consciously adjust for every regional and national venue. The also tend to see if there are trends and exploit them

As evidenced here in two pages...the top guys have all NOTED that the ultimate color scheme only need accomplish 3 things...  
Be good enough for as many appearance score points as possible;
Stand out enough for YOU to see and pilot well with minimal distraction in all manner of backgrounds;
Be appropriately visible to the judges for same reasons

I have personally seen more than one flight where the pilot NAILED some particular maneuver enough so to off set any lower appearance point score

I have also witnessed a lot of flights that got high scores while I watched and thought...... that is one ugly ass airplane

But hell what do I know... a guy in a Clown suit, on a Unicycle, Juggling chain saws, and doing the PAMPA gig is jut plain fun to watch

[Mike Griffin]

I have no idea if the color of a model has any influence on a judge watching it go through the pattern.  However, after spending my life in sales and marketing, I can tell you that colors have a tremendous influence on buying decisions. 

Mike

[Paul Walker]

Derek....I'm old, but believe that it was '99 or 2000?
Judging Paul flying that plane......the first outside square had me convinced that we were going to soon be picking up pieces of florescent stuff....

Sorry, don't believe him.
It was taken in 1992, a good year.

Color stood out in Europe where the site was surrounded by trees. On purpose!

[Chris Wilson]

   The question asked was does it matter what color your airplane is. My opinion is that the answer is no, it is irrelevant, and that you should avoid this  and the many other similar traps that people fall into again and again. No one is compelled to pay any attention - maybe I am wrong. Probably not, I have been doing this forever and have seen these traps and have fallen into a few myself, but got out when I paid attention to people with more experience.

   I would think people who are unsure of themselves need clear information about what matters and what does not, and the worst thing anyone could do is encourage them in their insecurities. Stunt is as simple as it gets, and I hope people can get that.

     What do you want? I have flown in large contests for decades and judged around 10,000 flights from all skill levels, they asked for an opinion and I gave one, and now you are arguing about it. Should I tell you that it's really important, even though it isn't?

     The most successful stunt plane of all time was painted pink and faded flourescent yellow, so I think that's what you should all do. Happy? I am sure it was a coincidence that it was also in perfect trim and had nearly infallible engine runs.

      Brett

Hi Brett,
           in response to "What do you want?" I was hoping for something along the lines of -
I am only human, try my best, I recognise that others may have favourites etc. This would correspond to my own observations in life about judging, making decisions and giving a personal score on anything.

  To me a good judge recognises their foibles, regards their own traits, works around them and gives a considered decision taking into account ALL the evidence.
In other words not a 'black and white' answer concerning colour (excuse the pun) but instead we get absolutes like 'LUDICROUS', 'irrelevant' and its a 'waste of time.'
  It sounded like you totally discount the notion before giving it any credence by saying that it doesn't matter, yet it obviously matters, and is in the minds of those who you are judging. A total lack of discrimination is a lofty goal to aim for but very hard to attain, and at times seems an inhuman destination.


But please, I accept that you indeed bypass colour preference as a learned response, and wow I wish I had that filter in my head at times!
My fervent hope here is that you and other judges take into account EVERYTHING presented for judging and only then discount what is irrelevant to your task at hand, not the other way around.

The issue from here on in is how to quantify all of this, how does ones show proof of bias in all of this?

To sum up it seems that , "The masses suspect but the Clergy of the stunt world admit nothing."

[Brett Buck]

  To me a good judge recognises their foibles, regards their own traits, works around them and gives a considered decision taking into account ALL the evidence.
In other words not a 'black and white' answer concerning colour (excuse the pun) but instead we get absolutes like 'LUDICROUS', 'irrelevant' and its a 'waste of time.'
  It sounded like you totally discount the notion before giving it any credence by saying that it doesn't matter, yet it obviously matters, and is in the minds of those who you are judging.

    No one has ever been compelled to do anything I say, if I am so clearly wrong, by all means, do anything you want. And, since it "obviously* matters, it's a great compliment to me (and Ted and David and whoever else)  that I have managed to function successfully despite ignoring a relevant aspect of the hobby. And judge 10000+ flights without ever once realizing it.

      The question was asked, does it matter, my *opinion* is that it does not and that the underlying logic, like you display above, can be a crippling impediment. Again, in my opinion, it is:

     (1) not supported by anything I have seen over the last 40 years of intense study
     (2) the thought process is an absolutely classic "trap" for people trying to advance themselves in the event. If you ever give into the (mistaken) notion that Given that anyone who can afford to travel to big contests can afford the best equipment ever available, and that no more than average physical skills are required to compete at any level, these sorts of psychological traps are far and away the biggest impediment to success. You see it all the time, it's the biggest reason that we don't have 50 people all competing at a US National/World championship level, rather than 10 or so.

       My best advice (which I got from my mentor Ted Fancher, perhaps not verbatim but in concept) is that *you* control your own fate, so worrying about "what color airplane", "what color pants" - which is definitely believed to be a factor by some-, "what the judges are buying today", "getting your name noticed", "presenting better", "the judges are against me", "halos", etc, or any other factor outside your control is a distraction and a potential trap for everyone.

     There are a raft of examples I could provide where people have outsmarted themselves with this kind of reasoning, some over the period of decades, and to their great detriment. I had a few cases of it myself, at a point where I was already competitive in Expert but not quite to the highest levels. Fortunately there were people around me to point it out (Ted) and get me sorted out, otherwise, I might be another of those guys our there sabotaging myself.

  But as always, I can only tell you what I think, it could be wrong. A few people will probably pay heed, others will not, maybe they will be able to work through it themselves, or not.

    Brett

[Ted Fancher]

Orange

[Dan Berry]

Orange

Sweet! I guess I am all set to hammer the competition.
Oh wait.
Not.
I just remembered that flying good gets the good scores.

[Ted Fancher]

Orange

OK, OK.  That was too cute by half.

The phrase  I used frequently (to which Brett referred) back when writing about stunt or giving clinics, etc. was more or less "...It's the pilot's job to fly and the judges' job to judge.  Each will do the best they can and at the end of the day they should shake hands and say thanks; either for flying well or for working hard so the pilots could fly the best they are able."  The results posted on the scoreboard are "the truth".

The entire process is so replete with variables (as is any subjectively performed/analyzed undertaking) and the results so dependent on essentially instantaneous performance and assessment as to make an informed analysis of the "performance/evaluation/causative  reasons for variable "numbers" to be rendered meaningless.

IMHO...worth no more nor less than any other...time spent worrying about predicting the personal peccadilloes of the dozens if not hundreds of judges for whom an avid stunt pilot is going to present patterns over a lifetime is time that could have been better spent in joyful building, trimming and practicing.

I've no doubt that Chris is serious in his interest in such factors but I think it is ultimately telling that this thread is replete with input from knowledgeable sources that pretty much agree with the last few paragraphs.  Chris is certainly free to pursue alternative points of view and I look forward to his ultimate analysis.  If it is persuasive and backed with verifiable data I'd be happy to review it.

Actually, the crux of this subject is one that has led many of life long stunt fliers to take joy in participating for a lifetime.  It is the "artistry" of the event that inoculates us against the (layman's) boredom of appearing to just do the same thing over and over again for decades.  True artistry isn't doing something one way because it'll sell in the marketplace.  It's doing something that makes the artist's heart swell and brings a smile to his face.  That is unlikely to be the result of a lifetime sequence of orange Nobler clones.

Just my opinion.

Ted

[Tim Wescott]

   No offense, I will not be like you.......I will do it 5 years or less.... you don't know who or what I am, as I don't know you

It took me five years of hard work to get from beginner to under-Expert (under-Expert is when you're too good to fly in Advanced, but have no hope of actually placing in Expert).  Had my body not failed me (shoulder and now gut issues) I think I could reasonably expert to occasionally place in Expert in local contests after another five years, and assuming that I don't age out before I get my skills up, win occasionally in another five.  I may still manage it, if I can get my health issues straightened out.

The "hard work" was going out and putting in three to six flights every Wednesday and Saturday, and spending my free time in the shop building planes.

This is a much faster advance than I've seen most other people on this forum manage.  That doesn't mean that it can't be done -- it's just that I haven't seen many other people climb that fast unless they're either retreads that just need to re-learn skills, or they're absolute phenoms like Chip Hyde who did RC Helicopter aerobatics, then picked up CLPA and within a year was flying better than me.

So while I laud your enthusiasm, please don't get discouraged if you don't climb the ranks as fast as you anticipate, or when (not if) you get squeezed out of Advanced and have to go without trophies in Expert for a few years.

[Trostle]

   
(Clip)

   No offense, I will not be like you.......I will do it 5 years or less....
     
(Clip)

Interesting how one comment can be interpreted in different ways.

One reading of this would indicate that Tom feels he is not like Brett, that it will only take him "5 years or less" to reach the pinnacle of the stunt world which took many at that level many more years to achieve.  In my opinion, I feel that is rather presumptuous, but it is my opinion nonetheless. 

Or, did Tom really mean that he was only going to pursue this CL Stunt activity for no more than 5 years?  And then is he going on to other endeavors?  Maybe he could give us a dissertation at that time on his findings on how color does or does not cloud/influence judges' scores.

Keith

[Trostle]

 
(Clip)

Apparently talking about this subject might be read by a judge and he, himself will be more aware of to really study and look a little close and have in the back of his mind that color could have some play.

(Clip)

Just wanted to get a census from fellow modelers.

(Clip)

I think at the start of the season that a judge might read this and really try to remember a dark color plane verse's a light color plane flown by the same guy as he judged and see if there is a different how the maneuver looks , even in the intersection.

I am curious to watch fellow flyers with different color planes this year and judge for myself   

Your comments above deserve some response.  And this is not intended to put you down in any way, so again, turn down your sensitivity meter.

You think that "this subject might be read by a judge and he, himself will be more aware of to really study and look a little close and have in the back of his mind that color could have some play."  Have you read the responses in this thread from those who are experienced judges?  I think their consensus is universal that they, as judges, are tracking the path of an object and score accordingly, regardless of the color.

Now, you are suggesting that judges remember what some guy flew one year and then think about the difference in the appearance in how a maneuver looks because it is painted differently.  That is not the job of a judge.  It is not to compare or remember how a flier is now flying compared to some distant past at some far away, forgotten circle.

So, I am very interested in your experience after this next year on your opinion on how "different color planes" affect how you, as a critical observer, might score.

Keith

[Trostle]

Orange

Orange works.

Keith

[Scott Richlen]

If I do any judging this year, one thing I can tell you is that anything that looks like a quadcopter and is RED will get a very low score from me.  In fact, it doesn't even have to be red, I'll even mark down a green one, or a blue one.   

[Ted Fancher]

Sweet! I guess I am all set to hammer the competition.
Oh wait.
Not.
I just remembered that flying good gets the good scores.

Oh, Dear, Dan!  I just re-read my comment about "...orange Nobler clones..."  In a court of law I would plead ignorance of your lovely orange Nobler clone at the time of typing!

Good looking airplane.   I had an orange and yellow "Chizler" that did pretty well in Classic for a number of years.  Maybe Tom was right all along and Orange pigment is, in fact, the deciding factor!  Better dust off your trophy shelves!

[Dan Berry]

Oh, Dear, Dan!  I just re-read my comment about "...orange Nobler clones..."  In a court of law I would plead ignorance of your lovely orange Nobler clone at the time of typing!

Good looking airplane.   I had an orange and yellow "Chizler" that did pretty well in Classic for a number of years.  Maybe Tom was right all along and Orange pigment is, in fact, the deciding factor!  Better dust off your trophy shelves!

Not a Nobler clone!!
It's a Palmer Hurricane. In an actual color scheme.
It IS easy to see but isn't actually trimmed yet.
I'm a long way from getting any trophies with it but I'm excited that the color will automatically give me 30-50 points.

[Chris Wilson]

 Chris is certainly free to pursue alternative points of view and I look forward to his ultimate analysis.  If it is persuasive and backed with verifiable data I'd be happy to review it.

Ted

Hi Ted,
          I honestly think that is not possible to prove anything either way and it remains in the realm of subjective.

So inversely, can you show verifiable data that things like colour do not influence people? And I think that its not an alternate argument but indeed mainstream.

I have shown that colour, shape, speed, patterns and (in one case sound) indeed does alter opinions but to what extent?

How do you quantify it beyond suspicions and superstitions?

Do red ones go faster? If you believe they do then they do, and that's all that matters.

Do maroon models score badly because they disappear into a speed blur, some believe so, so they do.

Are some judges (or pilots) partially colour blind and don't realise to what extent - my vision isn't perfect.

  I will leave you with this, I am a Graphic Artist of 38 years and colour is my field of expertise. To get something noticed use a colour that falls outside of the natural environment that it is presented in, to show direction or to lead the eye into the desired direction use repeated lines that point there, use shape to 'cartouche' or contain or focus the eye onto what is most important and use speed (as in what duration does the eye have to recognise something) as a guide to complexity.
The design of something will undeniably tell a message, whether its mobile or not, and the message will affect mood, but again, to what extent?
But I can guarantee you that if you videoed an F2B schedule, scored it and then computer changed the colour of the model the scores would change.

Ah, but this is the forever argument and I will leave it there, thanks for the reply mate.

[Howard Rush]

Orange

Now you're talkin'.

[Scott Richlen]

Actually Chris, if you videotaped a pattern, scored it, and then didn't change any colors and ran it again, the score would change.  Maybe not significantly, but last time I saw a wiggle in the 3rd loop and this time I noticed a waggle in the 2nd.  We don't see perfectly.  But, part of the joy of competition is that it is scored by subjective judges and sometimes there are wind gusts and other things happen.  How boring life would be if the Cinderella team never won and the bookies were always perfectly accurate.

But still, no, red does not get a flyer a higher score from a judge.  As a judge, he is (or should be) focusing on a dynamic of form, size, relationship, and consistency.  He is not focusing on color any more than he focuses on other statics such as shape of tail.

By definition, if he is awarding points during the flight based on color or other static, he is not judging.   

[Ted Fancher]

Not a Nobler clone!!
It's a Palmer Hurricane. In an actual color scheme.
It IS easy to see but isn't actually trimmed yet.
I'm a long way from getting any trophies with it but I'm excited that the color will automatically give me 30-50 points.

Point taken Dan although (don't know if you're old enough to have experienced this) almost every "original" design in the classic era was an inexpert clone of George's original to one degree or another.  On closer inspection, however, I note that the flaps are definitely "Palmer-esque" and distinctly not Noblerish.  I, therefore, dutifully beg your forgiveness!  It's a pretty Hurry.

Ted

[Dan Berry]

Point taken Dan although (don't know if you're old enough to have experienced this) almost every "original" design in the classic era was an inexpert clone of George's original to one degree or another.  On closer inspection, however, I note that the flaps are definitely "Palmer-esque" and distinctly not Noblerish.  I, therefore, dutifully beg your forgiveness!  It's a pretty Hurry.

Ted

 :)Well, I'm mostly aware that most designs from then were just Noblers in wolf clothing. This is bigger though.
I don't know what I'm doing but I do enjoy it.

I mentioned early on that it seems the best fliers tend to have a lot of red on their planes but that doesn't correlate to a bias toward the red planes.

[tom creasey]

Morning everyone.....

   I appreciate the response's on this thread. There are some great comments.

I want to respond to Trostle...... I will not QUIT flying in 5 years.....I am in for the long haul. Yes I made a comment at the start of this thread about doing it in 5 years.....in the heat of the moment cause I felt my question matters and wasn't silly.....it embarrassed me in front of people thinking I ask a stupid question!!!!
 I set a goal now to become and advance flyer in 5 years.....not a world champ or National champ.

 For thoughs who said to settle down and not get to sensitive......I am the only one who can defend myself and I don't think any question is silly. I am a beginner in flight,but I have a mind of advance. building and finishing is part of stunt flying as is flying scores. I want to design my plane with a plan of execution to delivery the best plane and advantages as I can for the highest score possibly.  I know it is all in the skills of my hand to be able to sculpt the best flight and it takes hours of practice......that is what this year focus for me is to fly, fly,fly.....not worried about color right now cause it is too late cause I have warbirds and the colors are such.

The best meter I have is not sensitive meter.... it is my FUN METER!!!!

Chris Wilson has a great perspective on color as Avaiojet cause they are a graphic designers and understand the question. These two are just an example that comes to my mind as I am writing. There are more comments in this thread where guys have some great responses, sorry I didn't mention you.....you all are great fellow modelers which I look up too. Didn't mean to step on toes.....it wasn't my intention

   This thread has taking me to some really cool designs using color......I have another tool I can use in designing......something I really never sit down to really think about that the color is just important as gluing the first piece of balsa together.
 


So I am really thankful for the comments on color and for the judges that also commented.....

Everybody tight lines and fair winds!!!!

[Avaiojet]

Tom,

Hey! It's "Avaiojet," not "Avoijet."

I can understand your interest in color.

My take is simple. Judges, it's not their first rodeo. I cannot imagine how color, layout or design of a model airplane can have an effect on their decision making of your flying performance.

And I don't believe they can be "tricked," with color or the absence of a rudder.

Experience? I would say Judges have been there done that.

I didn't read or follow the Thread in depth, but someone said to paint the model any color you want.

That sounds like really good advice to me.

Tom, what's your favorite color? What color or combination of colors will that color work with for accents?

I would start with that.

CB