Bill, I think you've summed it up quite well. I have my own thoughts on the BOM rule, and I admit they're largely affected by unpleasant memories of teenage kids and their dads arguing to the point of tears back when I was an active Contest Director. The rule is absolutely unenforceable. I'm never going to compete for the Walker Cup, so how it's applied to CLPA is of little consequence to me.
I have been around CL competition for years and years, have competed in several Nats, and have known several prominent CLPA competitors over that time span. Its been said that grieving over change is mostly grieving over what might have been, or an idealized yesteryear. Or something to that effect. Well, I believe it.
I confess to occasionally being stunned when I read statements on internet forums to the effect that CLPA has always honored the BOM rule, and that - well, that the "old farts" now posting have always built their own airplanes.
Forgive me for blinking, but some making those statements today are modelers who either (a) judged CLPA at AAA contests in the upper Midwest and simply looked the other way - after awarding appearance points to contestants they knew were flying purchased airplanes - and/or (b) actually entered AAA contests with purchased airplanes, despite signing entry forms certifying compliance with the rules! I know, I was there!
My perspective is certainly different than that of many here, who perhaps have primarily been interested in CLPA over the years. I've often said that I learned to fly control line just so that I could fly combat. My memories of contests in those mid '50s here are of (a) relatively few CLPA entries, and (b) dozens of "rough looking" Sterling Mustangs, Yaks and Ringmasters with inexpensive McCoy engines in the combat event. And those "rough looking" airplanes did not win their share of hardware in combat.
As my own flying skills improved, so did the workmanship and appearance of my airplanes. By the early to mid '60s, I was traveling to several contests each year and was frequently asked, "You're not going to fly that airplane in combat, are you!?!" Many of the airplanes I flew were my own design or modified kits.
I took pride not only in my flying, but in the construction and appearance of the airplanes I flew. With or without points for appearance. Isn't that a natural progression?
I attended the '68 Olathe Nats with extremely high hopes for my protégé, Ted Berman - an AMA Senior at the time. Ted was an incredibly talented combat flyer. I'll never forget the first time he asked me to show him a maneuver I sometimes used, sort of a 3/4th outside loop from level flight, followed by a climb into the path of the opponent's streamer. Pretty basic, but we were flying airplanes doing about 115 mph, and Ted was only about 14 at the time. He misjudged the first attempt, but scored a perfectly clean kill on his second attempt.
Within perhaps 6 years, Ted had given up CL flying for RC and the "real thing"; he had his instrument instructor’s rating within the shortest time span allowable, or at the minimum age, as I recall. He'd also been diagnosed with an almost always (at the time) fatal form of cancer, and spent perhaps 2 years in California receiving treatment that may have been experimental at the time. In all honesty, I suspect most of us who knew him assumed he was as good as dead.
So I was shocked as hell when - shortly after his return from California - he called me the night before a AAA contest here, asking if he could borrow the combat airplanes and engines he'd passed on to me in order to compete the next day. He looked as white as a sheet the next morning, only weaker. He hadn't flown any type of CL airplane for several years. But I was so thrilled to see him give it a shot - not to mention that he was still alive - that I prepped several airplanes for him, passed on flying myself and just pitted for him.
He took one practice flight, and then finished First in a cake walk. I think Phil Cartier can attest to that.
Now, back to 1968 and my promising protégé - Ted's weakness as a teen had been his building. He could easily have purchased airplanes built by craftsmen, or even by me (ha ha!) - think about all the money his father spent to get him that flight instruction. But the BOM applied to combat at the time, and I wouldn't build airplanes for him.
Long story short, Ted was the first match called. His opponent buried his own airplane quickly. The judges then began waving at Ted in an agitated manner, but made no attempt to send anyone out to speak to him. Ted moved further away from the judges and pit area, as any of us assumed the judges wanted. When Ted's engine quit, the judges (a) disqualified him for moving out of the "pilot's circle", then (b) marked the circle with lime, and (c) refused to accept written petitions on his behalf.
I was absolutely livid!
... So imagine my disgust several months later, when one of the magazines carried a construction article by Jim Mears which openly stated that several of these planes were given to seniors for the '68 Nats, and, if I remember correctly, Sherwin Buckstaff won the event flying an airplane he didn't build. Moreover: Looking at the judges for the event, I will to my grave be pretty certain they knew that.
I sent an angry letter to then Executive Director John Worth, detailing not only the events of the '68 Nats but BOM problems in general, and his response was pretty much "so what?"
And that, folks, was pretty much “the final straw” with regard to my support of the BOM rule. If violation of the rule is openly flaunted with no consequence, how can you possibly expect to enforce it? And, please, save me the drama about integrity ...
Regards,
Dennis
Topic: In the beginning. A little history. (Read 1124 times)