Rolling cut off date for classic poll

[RC Storick]

There has been some discussion in the rules section for the rolling cut off date to be re-instated. Not sure of what years it will include. But we will grab a poll here as not everyone is a Rules board member.

[Bob Whitely]

No! RJ

[RC Storick]

No! RJ

Everyone who wishes to view the rules board remember you have to ask and send me your AMA number.

[billbyles]

No, definitely not.  Super Seventies would be fine as a separate class as long as it does not impinge on the existing classic class.  Leave Classic alone.

Bill

[Matt Colan]

No, definitely not.  Super Seventies would be fine as a separate class as long as it does not impinge on the existing classic class.  Leave Classic alone.

Bill

Bill, think about.  If you had Super Seventies at local contests that already have classic, you could spread competitor out too thin.  If you have 8 fliers that fly in classic and add Super Seventies, you could end up with 4 fliers in classic and Super Seventies.  Contests up here in the NE have a 25 year rolling cut off date, which I think is not a big enough gap, I think 35 years would be good.

[Jim Pollock]

Well,

I seen nothing wrong with rolling the cut off date 1 year for every 5-7 years of time.  It wouldn't get to the eighties until I am pretty well long gone!

Jim Pollock   

[Mike Keville]

No.

Mike Keville
Tucson, AZ

[rustler]

That sounds like 8 fliers (same total number) flying what they wish to fly. Works for me.

I really like the proposed idea of Super Seventies. And existing Classic.

[Will Davis]

 We call the event Nostalgia '79 , Cutoff date is Dec 1979 . Not a rolling cutoff date It seems to work great  in our area . Classic planes are eligable to compete , same as OTS in Classic events .

We hope to spark a interest in some of the great designs between  Dec 69  and Dec 1979.

Will Davis

Metrolina Control Line Society / North Carolina

[billbyles]

Bill, think about.  If you had Super Seventies at local contests that already have classic, you could spread competitor out too thin.  If you have 8 fliers that fly in classic and add Super Seventies, you could end up with 4 fliers in classic and Super Seventies.  Contests up here in the NE have a 25 year rolling cut off date, which I think is not a big enough gap, I think 35 years would be good.

Nope, sorry Matt...don't mess with Classic - it's not broken so don't try to fix it.

[Randy Ryan]

Nope, sorry Matt...don't mess with Classic - it's not broken so don't try to fix it.

I agree with you Bill, and the others opposed to it here. There is a performance shift between the 2 decades that make the 2 hardly a fair mix. Sure, I know that the demarkation line isn't absolutely clear, but that's the way it is. In SAM OT, there are transitional designs that are simply cut off, they are covered by NFFS Nostagia. I think a Super Seventies event would be a good thing, that way all you Jet Freaks could get your kicks and us old Classic types could remain in that era.

[RandySmith]

Something needs to be changed, Classic  was NOT broken  when it was "messed with"  several years ago.
The original intent was to be inclusive and if you stayed around for years, maybe your old 39 year old stuntship could fly with the ones flying now.
They are having contest all over this part of the country with ships up 1984, with GREAT results, people love them, and they love including new planes.
That was the  Original intent of Classic.
I realize that Classic can't go forever, what some are arguing now is just what "they consider" Classic to be.
 For many it is much later than 1969, for others, they think it silly that is is not cutoff at 1964, or even 1959.
I can't see  why there has to be  such arguments over such a trivial things as discussing  what we  want. I am very saddened to learn that  a few people will  try to turn this into a very personal  war, and  will loose  friendships over a simple discussion about what many consider needs to be talked about.
I was also shocked at some of my emails on this subject.

The spirit of "Classic"  is historic, it was meant to keep as many old planes flying as possible, and to bring out new ones,
It was never meant to be a contest that would not allow a Nobler to have to fly against a Stiletto.
Competition  NEVER  was the main purpose for the rules of this event.

The Big problem we have is ,most all Contest on a local level cannot  add  another event, they simply do not have the  circles, time, or judges and manpower to add more. 
So  however this is decided, new event or  add to Classic. It most likely will need  to have them flown on the same circle at the same  time, using the same judges.
That is how it is being done for the past several years.  And  I can see  no  reason to  fear  PAMPA members having a say so on what will be

Below is one of my post from the other  Classic thread, it address some of the  Gloom and Doom  worries  about changing Classic  back to what it was  "BEFORE" it was  changed"

"I chuckle at what I hear about this with all the gloom and doom. I also have find it funny that for several years many contest have had S70s or Nostalgia 70 contest, but this is the way they are run...
The planes are all flown in one contest on the same circle, at the same time, with the same judges, then after the flights, The Clerical work begins, and they have 2 sets of trophies to give out instead of one. One for Classic and one for N-79.
For all intents and purposes this is just a Classic Contest that is allowed to include planes of the next decade. with 2 sets of trophies.
Of all the people running local contest I have asked or read the writings of, They do NOT need or Want another separate event. They do not have the circles for it, they do not have the time to run it, nor the manpower to judge and run another event.

Many people think It is a good thing that one person (or just a few) does not say what is and what is not. This should be decided by PAMPA membership of all the pilots, not one or a few people.
The rolling cutoff date would not hurt anything about Classic, it would put it back , similar to the way it was.
((it could be a 35 year cutoff,ending in 1979))
With that done, Classic would then be "inclusive" meaning more people flying historic planes,  instead of "exclusive" less historic planes flying and many people being shut out on their 38 year old designs.
Remember  this is about keeping the Classic designs flying and having people build the older planes for bringing out for show tell and fly.
It is not ALL about competition, If that were so you have bigger worries than someone flying a Stiletto in Classic, Number one would be eliminate the modern engines, That is the single biggest advantage the ships have. Then you have to STOP those electric Classic and Old Time ships that are flying now. We won't even go into CF parts, and the multitude of other parts not available when Classic was flown. Much less  the  major redesign of a lot of the Planes that show up now at contest.
There are really no where close to enough of us to swamp this event and overwhelm Classic with such a huge number of new ships that it will kill off the old ones.
And the things you mentioned  Foam wings  large motor more trim systems   uniflow tanks are  all used in the event now. Just look at the 65 powered Shark 45s, and the  65-76 powered P-51s or Bearcats
People WILL  build what they want to for Both Old Time and Classic, even the older designs, This has been proven already , Billy Werwage Showed up with a very small Vulcan , Ares  then 62 Ares  for  about 10 or 12 years instead of his later USA-1.  Ted Fancher shows up with a Ruffy instead of any number of clearly better ships. these examples  could go on and on.

I can see no down side to discussion of this and letting the members vote on "our"  event. And  however it goes  people should "NEVER" let this get into a war that destroys  friendships and creates enemies of what few  people we having  enjoying this event

Regards
Randy

[Brett Buck]

I agree with you Bill, and the other opposed to it here. There is a performance shift between the 2 decades that nake the 2 hardly a fair mix

   I would pretty strenuously disagree with you there. The performance shift, or at least the most obvious shift, was in 1986-1988 with piped engines (and later, the realization that the prop was most of the magic) - NOT with the airframes. There were a few improvements in the airframe from 1970 on, but from then to the last great stand of the ST46 (86 NATs) the amount of improvement is relatively minimal. Yes, the Genesis/Gemini (big tail volume) was an improvement, and the Imitation and it's derivatives (long tail, blunt airfoil, relatively small flaps) were an improvement, but other airplanes remained competitive and that was about it. And none of that was entirely new, just finally used by people expert enough to make use of it. Anything about an Imitation *could have* been made in 1955 with essentially identical results.

   The differences are the engines not the airplanes, so restricting the airplanes to 1969 and allowing any engine effectively defeats the argument of "it is like it was".

     Brett

[billbyles]

   I would pretty strenuously disagree with you there. The performance shift, or at least the most obvious shift, was in 1986-1988 with piped engines (and later, the realization that the prop was most of the magic) - NOT with the airframes. There were a few improvements in the airframe from 1970 on, but from then to the last great stand of the ST46 (86 NATs) the amount of improvement is relatively minimal. Yes, the Genesis/Gemini (big tail volume) was an improvement, and the Imitation and it's derivatives (long tail, blunt airfoil, relatively small flaps) were an improvement, but other airplanes remained competitive and that was about it. And none of that was entirely new, just finally used by people expert enough to make use of it. Anything about an Imitation *could have* been made in 1955 with essentially identical results.

   The differences are the engines not the airplanes, so restricting the airplanes to 1969 and allowing any engine effectively defeats the argument of "it is like it was".

     Brett

Well, Brett,

A lot of flyers seem to want to keep classic with the current cutoff date, regardless of your sorta scientific analysis of what really makes the difference between the eras.  In the end, if the majority want to keep the cutoff date at the end of 1969 then it should stay that way.  While I much prefer to keep the current cutoff date, if a vote is taken within PAMPA regarding this issue and the date is changed then I will live with it...the democratic way.

[billbyles]

Something needs to be changed, Classic  was NOT broken  when it was "messed with"  several years ago.
The original intent was to be inclusive and if you stayed around for years, maybe your old 39 year old stuntship could fly with the ones flying now.
They are having contest all over this part of the country with ships up 1984, with GREAT results, people love them, and they love including new planes.
That was the  Original intent of Classic.
I realize that Classic can't go forever, what some are arguing now is just what "they consider" Classic to be.
 For many it is much later than 1969, for others, they think it silly that is is not cutoff at 1964, or even 1959.
I can't see  why there has to be  such arguments over such a trivial things as discussing  what we  want. I am very saddened to learn that  a few people will  try to turn this into a very personal  war, and  will loose  friendships over a simple discussion about what many consider needs to be talked about.
I was also shocked at some of my emails on this subject.

The spirit of "Classic"  is historic, it was meant to keep as many old planes flying as possible, and to bring out new ones,
It was never meant to be a contest that would not allow a Nobler to have to fly against a Stiletto.
Competition  NEVER  was the main purpose for the rules of this event.

The Big problem we have is ,most all Contest on a local level cannot  add  another event, they simply do not have the  circles, time, or judges and manpower to add more. 
So  however this is decided, new event or  add to Classic. It most likely will need  to have them flown on the same circle at the same  time, using the same judges.
That is how it is being done for the past several years.  And  I can see  no  reason to  fear  PAMPA members having a say so on what will be

Below is one of my post from the other  Classic thread, it address some of the  Gloom and Doom  worries  about changing Classic  back to what it was  "BEFORE" it was  changed"

"I chuckle at what I hear about this with all the gloom and doom. I also have find it funny that for several years many contest have had S70s or Nostalgia 70 contest, but this is the way they are run...
The planes are all flown in one contest on the same circle, at the same time, with the same judges, then after the flights, The Clerical work begins, and they have 2 sets of trophies to give out instead of one. One for Classic and one for N-79.
For all intents and purposes this is just a Classic Contest that is allowed to include planes of the next decade. with 2 sets of trophies.
Of all the people running local contest I have asked or read the writings of, They do NOT need or Want another separate event. They do not have the circles for it, they do not have the time to run it, nor the manpower to judge and run another event.

Many people think It is a good thing that one person (or just a few) does not say what is and what is not. This should be decided by PAMPA membership of all the pilots, not one or a few people.
The rolling cutoff date would not hurt anything about Classic, it would put it back , similar to the way it was.
((it could be a 35 year cutoff,ending in 1979))
With that done, Classic would then be "inclusive" meaning more people flying historic planes,  instead of "exclusive" less historic planes flying and many people being shut out on their 38 year old designs.
Remember  this is about keeping the Classic designs flying and having people build the older planes for bringing out for show tell and fly.
It is not ALL about competition, If that were so you have bigger worries than someone flying a Stiletto in Classic, Number one would be eliminate the modern engines, That is the single biggest advantage the ships have. Then you have to STOP those electric Classic and Old Time ships that are flying now. We won't even go into CF parts, and the multitude of other parts not available when Classic was flown. Much less  the  major redesign of a lot of the Planes that show up now at contest.
There are really no where close to enough of us to swamp this event and overwhelm Classic with such a huge number of new ships that it will kill off the old ones.
And the things you mentioned  Foam wings  large motor more trim systems   uniflow tanks are  all used in the event now. Just look at the 65 powered Shark 45s, and the  65-76 powered P-51s or Bearcats
People WILL  build what they want to for Both Old Time and Classic, even the older designs, This has been proven already , Billy Werwage Showed up with a very small Vulcan , Ares  then 62 Ares  for  about 10 or 12 years instead of his later USA-1.  Ted Fancher shows up with a Ruffy instead of any number of clearly better ships. these examples  could go on and on.

I can see no down side to discussion of this and letting the members vote on "our"  event. And  however it goes  people should "NEVER" let this get into a war that destroys  friendships and creates enemies of what few  people we having  enjoying this event

Regards
Randy

<snip>

<I can't see  why there has to be  such arguments over such a trivial things as discussing  what we  want.>

I agree that we should be able to discuss this rationally without getting into arguments that turn personal; however, when people start stating that "I just don't understand why the other guys don't understand my perfect, impeccable logic on this subject and why can't they be reasonable and see things my way" then the discussion becomes useless.  And, obviously, "what we want" is not all that trivial.

<I am very saddened to learn that  a few people will  try to turn this into a very personal  war, and  will loose  friendships over a simple discussion about what many consider needs to be talked about.>

I agree that it is unfortunate that a few people will turn this subject into a very personal war.  Most of us can discuss this rationally, some can't.   

<I was also shocked at some of my emails on this subject.> 

I can only imagine...vituperous, harsh, (obscene?), irrational, etc.

<snip>


<Many people think It is a good thing that one person (or just a few) does not say what is and what is not. This should be decided by PAMPA membership of all the pilots, not one or a few people.>

Agreed, if the PAMPA membership votes to revise the cutoff date then we live with it.


<I can see no down side to discussion of this and letting the members vote on "our"  event. And  however it goes  people should "NEVER" let this get into a war that destroys  friendships and creates enemies of what few  people we having  enjoying this event>

Again, I agree...let the PAMPA membership vote on this.  As much as I am in favor of keeping the cutoff date as is, if the majority of the membership votes to change it then so be it.

Bill

[PatRobinson]

Hi Guys,
I guess I am the guilty party who moved beyond just talking about a super seventies ( I hate that name) stunt event and I proposed that my club actually change our rules to include airplanes built through Dec. 1979.
I went back to the original name of Nostalgia to avoid confusion and Ed Ruane added 79 & our new event
"Nostalgia 79" was born.
I then went on Stunt Hanger and announced the event in order to give guys a chance to build a plane if they wanted.

Then some other guys liked the idea and Brodaks and some other clubs decided to change their event. I even heard that some clubs were already using a rolling cutoff for their nostalgia event. Who knew?!!  

I was inspired to propose a change because of an earlier thread by Randy Smith. He said that if you told someone that their 30+ year old car wasn't a "classic" you would be regarded as foolish but for some reason the rules say that a 30+ year old stunt design isn't called "classic". Randy was using way too much common sense for me to disagree.

If you think about any "nostalgia"-based event it is really more about owning and getting the opportunity to fly designs from the past that you liked or you always wanted to fly more than than it is about building the ultimate
competition  machine. It is all about enjoying the airplanes and the memories that go with them for older guys and about trying the old that is "new again" for younger flyers to finally experience for the first time.  
There is nothing magic about 1969 or 1979, it is all those wonderful airplanes and the memories they create within each of us that are the MAGIC, the real MAGIC.

In regards to being competitive I remember in the 1970's that several Shark 45's powered by Supertigre 46's were more than competitive against the 1970's era ST46 powered designs. This leads me to agree with Randy Smith and Brett Buck that power/prop has a lot more to do with performance than design. I haven't noticed 70's airplanes dominating the 50's-60's planes with modern power at our event so the gloomy predictions of their demise seem a little unfounded.

I have followed several threads on this topic and have come to some conclusions.

1. Don't mess with VSC or even talk about it. People just get unreasonable,nut's & On'ery at the least mention of changing anything.

2. Classic at the Nat's is run under PAMPA rules I presume, and quite honestly I think changing the PAMPA rules is so unlikely that it is akin to "tilting at windmills". It is unfortunate but I think change is unlikely. However,if some other group decided to sponsor and run Nostalgia 79 at the NATS,the possibility of having a NATS event could possibly become a reality.

3. Classic, Nostalgia 79, Old Time are all unofficial events which means except for AMA safety requirements neither the AMA or PAMPA have ANY jurisdiction over the rules a club chooses to establish for any of their own
nostalgia-based events. So, except for VSC and the NAT's PAMPA rules aren't that big of a deal for most contests.
So for example, if FCM decided to add Nostalgia 79 to their Muncie event, they don't need to follow PAMPA rules.

So guy's, there is no reason to argue because except for VSC and the NATS you & your club can have whichever event you want. no matter what PAMPA says. Guys, just enjoy the airplanes because that is the main reason for nostalgia-based events,anyway.
  That is just my 2 cents.
                                                                         Best Wishes,
                                                                                               Pat Robinson
                                                                                              

[Brett Buck]

A lot of flyers seem to want to keep classic with the current cutoff date, regardless of your sorta scientific analysis of what really makes the difference between the eras.  In the end, if the majority want to keep the cutoff date at the end of 1969 then it should stay that way.  While I much prefer to keep the current cutoff date, if a vote is taken within PAMPA regarding this issue and the date is changed then I will live with it...the democratic way.

   So far I haven't seen any good counter to the point that the engines are what makes the difference. If I was going to propose something myself (and I am probably NOT),  I would instead add a bonus or penalty system that gives more points to period engines and/or penalizes hot-rod engines. Say we call them "Fidelity Points" (which were originally intended to include evaluation of the engine).

  Based on what I have seen (on-line and in private email) since this came up, I would say a small majority would prefer a rolling cutoff. But it's not overwhelming like the BOM poll.

   And for clarification, the PAMPA EC is the entity that votes on the OTS and Classic rules proposals. It's not a full membership vote.  So - assuming that someone actually proposes the change to a rolling cutoff -  everybody with an opinion on the topic should probably let their director know what they want. It's premature now, since as far as I know, no one has made that proposal officially.

     Brett

[Bradley Walker]

Yes, the Genesis/Gemini (big tail volume) was an improvement, and the Imitation and it's derivatives (long tail, blunt airfoil, relatively small flaps) were an improvement,

I think you will find the Patternmaster pre-dates all of those designs, and had all of those features....  and the design won the Nats *after* the pipe came out.

[MikeyPratt]

No
Mikey

[RC Storick]

If you haven't voted yet please do so. It looks as if its only 50-50 or there close.

[Matt Colan]

Something needs to be changed, Classic  was NOT broken  when it was "messed with"  several years ago.
The original intent was to be inclusive and if you stayed around for years, maybe your old 39 year old stuntship could fly with the ones flying now.
They are having contest all over this part of the country with ships up 1984, with GREAT results, people love them, and they love including new planes.

Contests up here in the Northeast have classic ending in 1984 or have a 25 year rolling cut off date.  The Bob Lampione's PMs are not at the top.  At Lee in 2008, Mike Chiodo won with an Olympic, and Buddy Weider came in second with a caprice, and I believe Mr. Champione came in third.  My grandfather has a Big Job that is competitive in classic and that was designed in 1948.  He flew against much later designed airplanes and is still competitive.  I fly classic because I enjoy flying, and yes I would like to bring home a trophy, but that isn't my top priority, having fun is

That was the  Original intent of Classic.
I realize that Classic can't go forever, what some are arguing now is just what "they consider" Classic to be.
 For many it is much later than 1969, for others, they think it silly that is is not cutoff at 1964, or even 1959.
I can't see  why there has to be  such arguments over such a trivial things as discussing  what we  want. I am very saddened to learn that  a few people will  try to turn this into a very personal  war, and  will loose  friendships over a simple discussion about what many consider needs to be talked about.
I was also shocked at some of my emails on this subject.

The spirit of "Classic"  is historic, it was meant to keep as many old planes flying as possible, and to bring out new ones,
It was never meant to be a contest that would not allow a Nobler to have to fly against a Stiletto.
Competition  NEVER  was the main purpose for the rules of this event.

The Big problem we have is ,most all Contest on a local level cannot  add  another event, they simply do not have the  circles, time, or judges and manpower to add more. 
So  however this is decided, new event or  add to Classic. It most likely will need  to have them flown on the same circle at the same  time, using the same judges.
That is how it is being done for the past several years.  And  I can see  no  reason to  fear  PAMPA members having a say so on what will be


All the contests I've been to have either 3-4 circles, 1 or two for practice and the rest are being used to compete.  Also if contests had 8 guys flying in classic, and four of them want to fly in Super seventies, there would be four flying in classic and four flying in super seventies.  The amount of competitors could be spread too thin.


Below is one of my post from the other  Classic thread, it address some of the  Gloom and Doom  worries  about changing Classic  back to what it was  "BEFORE" it was  changed"

"I chuckle at what I hear about this with all the gloom and doom. I also have find it funny that for several years many contest have had S70s or Nostalgia 70 contest, but this is the way they are run...
The planes are all flown in one contest on the same circle, at the same time, with the same judges, then after the flights, The Clerical work begins, and they have 2 sets of trophies to give out instead of one. One for Classic and one for N-79.
For all intents and purposes this is just a Classic Contest that is allowed to include planes of the next decade. with 2 sets of trophies.
Of all the people running local contest I have asked or read the writings of, They do NOT need or Want another separate event. They do not have the circles for it, they do not have the time to run it, nor the manpower to judge and run another event.

Many people think It is a good thing that one person (or just a few) does not say what is and what is not. This should be decided by PAMPA membership of all the pilots, not one or a few people.
The rolling cutoff date would not hurt anything about Classic, it would put it back , similar to the way it was.
((it could be a 35 year cutoff,ending in 1979))
With that done, Classic would then be "inclusive" meaning more people flying historic planes,  instead of "exclusive" less historic planes flying and many people being shut out on their 38 year old designs.
Remember  this is about keeping the Classic designs flying and having people build the older planes for bringing out for show tell and fly.

My grandfather designed a couple of planes in the seventies, but he doesn't reproduce them because he would have to fly it in CLPA.  He would like to build those planes and have them flying in classic (he built an XP-40 and his own design Minnow based on the nobler)

It is not ALL about competition, If that were so you have bigger worries than someone flying a Stiletto in Classic, Number one would be eliminate the modern engines, That is the single biggest advantage the ships have. Then you have to STOP those electric Classic and Old Time ships that are flying now. We won't even go into CF parts, and the multitude of other parts not available when Classic was flown. Much less  the  major redesign of a lot of the Planes that show up now at contest.

If everything was about competition, then it wouldn't be fun.  I fly in contests to get more flying time in, have fun, and if I'm lucky, I could head home with a trophy.  Winning is nice, but isn't having fun better?

There are really no where close to enough of us to swamp this event and overwhelm Classic with such a huge number of new ships that it will kill off the old ones.
And the things you mentioned  Foam wings  large motor more trim systems   uniflow tanks are  all used in the event now. Just look at the 65 powered Shark 45s, and the  65-76 powered P-51s or Bearcats
People WILL  build what they want to for Both Old Time and Classic, even the older designs, This has been proven already , Billy Werwage Showed up with a very small Vulcan , Ares  then 62 Ares  for  about 10 or 12 years instead of his later USA-1.  Ted Fancher shows up with a Ruffy instead of any number of clearly better ships. these examples  could go on and on.

People build what they want to build, it could be because they like the asthetics, or it could be it was there own design and they want to build it again etc.

I can see no down side to discussion of this and letting the members vote on "our"  event. And  however it goes  people should "NEVER" let this get into a war that destroys  friendships and creates enemies of what few  people we having  enjoying this event

Regards
Randy

black = what Randy wrote
red = what I wrote

[Paul Smith]

Certainly NOT.

An era ends when it ends and that point in time never changes.

The Classic Era truly ended the last time a Fox 35 Stunt won the Nats.  The "modern era" began when big ball-bearing engines took over. 

The whole concept of a cutoff date is somewhat flawed.  There were a few pioneering MODERN planes flown before the date and some "classic style" planes built after it.  Just as a few jets flew in WWII, and also a few biplanes.

If you want to "change something" about Classic, say "plain bearing 35".

"This may be the beginning of an age,
or the end of an age,
or the end of ages.
The wheel weaves as
the wheel wills
and none can see the pattern
until it is done."

[Paul Smith]

PS:

With a "rolling date" every year would open the door to a crop of bigger, better airplanes that make all existing models obsolete.  Is that what people want?

[Matt Colan]

Certainly NOT.

An era ends when it ends and that point in time never changes.

The Classic Era truly ended the last time a Fox 35 Stunt won the Nats.  The "modern era" began when big ball-bearing engines took over. 

The whole concept of a cutoff date is somewhat flawed.  There were a few pioneering MODERN planes flown before the date and some "classic style" planes built after it.  Just as a few jets flew in WWII, and also a few biplanes.

If you want to "change something" about Classic, say "plain bearing 35".

"This may be the beginning of an age,
or the end of an age,
or the end of ages.
The wheel weaves as
the wheel wills
and none can see the pattern
until it is done."

Paul, if you say the classic era ends when the the Fox .35 was last used to win the Nats, then the classic era would end in 1979, when Bob Gieske won with his Gieske Nobler.  That would put us with 10 years of new designs that could be used and it ends right when Super Seventies would end.

[Brett Buck]

I think you will find the Patternmaster pre-dates all of those designs, and had all of those features....  and the design won the Nats *after* the pipe came out.

Despite the aggressive promotion to the contrary, I don't think you will find it very influential on most if any current designs outside of Windy. Certainly, the Gemini was at least concurrent, but I think it preceded the Patternmaster. And it's not hard to see how they came up with it without resorting to time machines. The Gemini/Genesis was extremely influential, partly because you could get the parts from CSC.

    And the Imitation is sort of the "anti-Patternmaster", although I am pretty sure that wasn't the intent since no one was paying much attention to the Patternmaster at the time, and I am pretty sure that Ted and Bill had never seen a Patternmaster at the time (77-78). Probably closer to an "anti-Genesis", sort of the inverse of the forward-CG theory prevalent at the time.  If nothing else the Imitation/Excitation/**tion/Trivial Pursuit proved that if you had the right airfoil ahead of them the giant flaps were unnecessary if not detrimental.

      Brett


p.s. actually, I think I can document the first time Ted came across the Patternmaster/Cardinal/etc design to about 1984. I know because he wrote up his impressions of the experience in his MA column - and thus inadvertently initiated the West Coast-East Coast feud (actually not, just the West Coast - Windy feud) when he said he was afraid to do a loop with it! The point was that the trim was the diametric opposite of what he was used to, but that point was (predictably) totally missed.

[Jim Pollock]

Thaks Matt,

I was going to point out that minor fact that Bob won in 1979 with the good ol'e Fox .35.
I think classic was opened up to non period engines due to the fact that some flyers don't
have any period engines and wouldn't care to make an exhaustive search for one just to fly
in the so called "FUN" event classic. 

Jim Pollock....

[Brett Buck]

PS:

With a "rolling date" every year would open the door to a crop of bigger, better airplanes that make all existing models obsolete.  Is that what people want?

  It's the theory, correct in my estimation (and being one of the people here that flew extensively before and after) that the airplanes are not all that much better. They are mostly scaled up versions of the same thing, and Bob Gieseke was competitive into the 80's with essentially the same airplane he  flew in 1966. If there were so many breakthroughs in the 70's, how did Bear keep going.

      And certainly the airplanes aren't bigger - The Humbler/Shark 45 was 700-ish square inches in 1959, the Eclipse was about the same, the USA-1 was about the same. There have only been a few successful designs larger than that. It was all limited by the available power.

    The improvements from 1970 to 1979 were, in my opinion, minimal, compared to the change we had in the mid-late 80's when we got essentially infinite power. And its not just my opinion, I think no less a personage than Bill Werwage said the essentially the same in the GeoXL article.

     The "purist" argument about preserving an era is, in my opinion, bordering on ludicrous as long as you can use modern engines.

      Brett

[RandySmith]

PS:

With a "rolling date" every year would open the door to a crop of bigger, better airplanes that make all existing models obsolete.  Is that what people want?

Hi Paul

No one wants to "obsolete" any plane, and a rolling cutoff would not obsolete the planes flying now.
 This is about including more flyers and more planes, People will build and fly whatever they like.
If now ,all it was about was just competition, you would see most people only flying USA-1 s.
This is the same gloom and doom  that I heard about OLD TIME  being  a Nobler contest and it would obsolete  any plane  except the Nobler.
By the way  Bob G  with the Nobler and FOX 35 won NATs  and  World Championships  way up into the  seventies, he even one the 75 NATs  flying against a very large 700 sq in  Stiletto  and some pretty large 60 powered ships.

Regards
Randy

[PatRobinson]

Hi Guys,

Brett, your statement that there is a small majority of guys in favor of a rolling cutoff date surprised me. I have seen so many negative responses online I didn't realize how much support there was for the idea. You are in position to have more input and a much better read on the issue than many of us out here posess.

I am not sure why there is such an emotional response to this topic because even if PAMPA changed the rules for Classic, any dissenters can still organize their own contest the way they choose.  The organizers of VSC can still run VSC the same way as always, if they so choose.  Nothing is being imposed on anyone.

The heart of the matter being discussed is only a change of definition of "What Is Classic"- that's it!!  We are only talking about a definition change. Classic was already redefined from it's original intent as a vintage event with a rolling cutoff to an event that is defined by it's end date of Dec. 1969. So if someone proposes returning to a rolling cutoff date they are just returning to the original definition of what is "Classic".

PAMPA defines the event but it has no authority to impose it's will on clubs sponsoring events. The AMA does require clubs to clearly publish any rules changes from the norm in all their contest promotions. This is only fair to would be contest attendees and I agree with this requirement.

Brett, thank you for yor insight. It is most interesting.

Hey Randy Smith,If Brett is right about the way most guys feel about it, maybe you need to be the guy to formally make the proposal to PAMPA to re-establish the rolling cut off date for Classic. You have both the insight and the passion to effectively make the case for change. Just a thought.
                                                                                              Pat Robinson

[Bob Hunt]

One era should never eclipse another.. I vote NO! Keep Classic just as it is!

Bob Hunt

[Matt Colan]

Brett, thank you for yor insight. It is most interesting.

Hey Randy Smith,If Brett is right about the way most guys feel about it, maybe you need to be the guy to formally make the proposal to PAMPA to re-establish the rolling cut off date for Classic. You have both the insight and the passion to effectively make the case for change. Just a thought.
                                                                                              Pat Robinson

I have the passion, but don't have the insight yet.  Besides who listens to a kid 

[john e. holliday]

When I put in my vote I see it came up 35 for and 35 against.  But, as someone has stated already, what ever PAMPA wants I can live with it.  Will be sending my impressions to my PAMPA district representitive.  DOC Holliday

[Brett Buck]

Hi Guys,

Brett, your statement that there is a small majority of guys in favor of a rolling cutoff date surprised me. I have seen so many negative responses online I didn't realize how much support there was for the idea. You are in position to have more input and a much better read on the issue than many of us out here posess.
Brett, thank you for yor insight. It is most interesting.

Hey Randy Smith,If Brett is right about the way most guys feel about it, maybe you need to be the guy to formally make the proposal to PAMPA to re-establish the rolling cut off date for Classic. You have both the insight and the passion to effectively make the case for change. Just a thought.

   I would note that the poll was showing a small majority, as well. It's not overwhelming in either direction, that's for sure, and it's not a really hot topic outside of a few. I have an opinion, but I don't actually care all that much about it, personally. I don't think the logic in favor of holding the current date is sound, but if it comes down to either leaving it alone, or creating another new "official" event, I would vote to leave it alone, only because I won't vote for another "official" event because I think that would be too much.

    The reason it might seem otherwise is much like the BOM thing - the people who are really passionate about it go out of their way to make their opinions known, whereas those who don't have a strong opinion tend to stay out of it. The BOM it a better example because the "volume level" of the debate is in almost total contradiction to the majority opinion (i.e. overwhelming opinion in favor of keeping it). The fact that there is an nearly continuous argument about BOM tremendously distorts the actual level of controversy - which is somewhere between little to minor.

    So, I will go along with whatever most people want (which in this case is not entirely clear). I think the rolling cutoff is the way to go, personally.

    Brett

[Brett Buck]

One era should never eclipse another.. I vote NO! Keep Classic just as it is!

   My point is that I don't think that's what would happen. Would you do anything different, or do you think the results would be very different? I doubt it.  But it *would* open it up to airplanes from eras I (and many others of my overall age group) remember and participated in.

     Brett

[Randy Ryan]

I have the passion, but don't have the insight yet.  Besides who listens to a kid 

We all listen to you Matt, your input is just as valid as anyone elses!

[Matt Colan]

We all listen to you Matt, your input is just as valid as anyone elses!

Thanks Randy, I think I know more about this sport than my grandfather because he doesn't go on the forums or read articles over and over.  I tell him what is going on elsewhere because we are the only two that fly around here.