stunthanger.com
General control line discussion => Open Forum => Topic started by: Chris_Rud on July 19, 2019, 06:45:57 AM
-
https://pampacl.org/live-scores-2019-semifinal/
-
Top 5
Paul
Orestes
David
Derek
Chris
Todd missed by 1/4 point. I know the feeling...
Brett
-
Top 20 scores from Open, taken from the PAMPA live feed:
(I’ll post Advanced scores once they’re all posted as well.)
(https://stunthanger.com/smf/open-forum/live-scores!!!!-open-semifinal-and-advanced-final/?action=dlattach;attach=300844)
-
Chris Cox missed by 1 point.
Congrats to all! That is tight competition!
Mike
-
I knew of a couple, but how many of the top five are "electric?" How many in the top ten are electric?
-
Now I remember why I fly for fun. Those judges must have been hard and the weather didn't help from what I read. Come on Derek its your turn to take it all for a change. H^^
-
Yeah, me too...
Oh, yeah, I forgot about that, sorry (kind of...).
Brett
-
Is there a delay in getting all scores tabulated?
-
Yes, many stunt contests, if not all, use paper/pencil to record each score. Using a system of runners and tabulators, these entries are examined and summed after the flight is over.
While an electronic system, such as a tablet app, that collects and communicates each score as it happens is a possibility, our sport does not have that, to the best of my knowledge. Would be a fun project to design and implement an Android app, perhaps drawing from technology used in other judged sports like gymnastics, diving, etc.
-
Yes, many stunt contests, if not all, use paper/pencil to record each score. Using a system of runners and tabulators, these entries are examined and summed after the flight is over.
While an electronic system, such as a tablet app, that collects and communicates each score as it happens is a possibility, our sport does not have that, to the best of my knowledge. Would be a fun project to design and implement an Android app, perhaps drawing from technology used in other judged sports like gymnastics, diving, etc.
Unfortunately, without a substantial yearly budget for maintenance and updates, I am not sure how to accomplish that. It's been possible for at least 15 years, technically. We looked at it briefly when I was the PAMPA VP but there was no money for anything like that.
Brett
-
I was referring to todays scores. Seems a lot of the advanced scores are not posted as of this writing....
Is there a delay in getting all scores tabulated?
-
Yes, many stunt contests, if not all, use paper/pencil to record each score. Using a system of runners and tabulators, these entries are examined and summed after the flight is over.
While an electronic system, such as a tablet app, that collects and communicates each score as it happens is a possibility, our sport does not have that, to the best of my knowledge. Would be a fun project to design and implement an Android app, perhaps drawing from technology used in other judged sports like gymnastics, diving, etc.
AMA has a system for electronic scoring using tablets that they use for RC Pattern. The hardware is on-site and available for anyone who is set-up to use it. Scoring & tabulation virtually instantaneous, results posted ASAP on video screens or can be posted via the live scoring feed Chris Rud set-up. Printable scoresheets available after flights for those who want them.
AMA wants to set up CLPA but we have not stepped forward to work with them - biggest barrer involves integrating our administrative program (the NATs program) with their scoring program - not an automatic but doable. First contacts were made a few years ago, but am ashamed to say I did not ride it home while I was sitting in the big chair...
The tabulators are some of the hardest working and least appreciated of the NATs workers, but I hope we can move to electronic tabulation someday soon.
-
Top 5
Paul
Orestes
David
Derek
Chris
Todd missed by 1/4 point. I know the feeling...
Brett
I have missed winning the WHOLE thing by less than 1 point.... It's tough but makes you come back and try again.
Congrats to everyone and the 2019 Top 5!!
Tomorrow is a new day.
Who is your money on?
-
I have missed winning the WHOLE thing by less than 1 point....
I lost in 2008, after dominating the entire week, on the last flight of the flyoff. Point and a quarter. Then there was Derek beating me by 0.04 points at the TT.
Todd and I both got knocked out on appearance points in 2002, I think, and Bobby was perhaps referring to the time I knocked him out by something like half a point at the 2004 NATs (which is probably the toughest contest I have ever been in, what with the 120ish entries and what amounted to a single qualifying round). Chris McMillin still remembers me knocking him out of qualifying in 93 by a fraction of a point, since he mentions it almost every time I see him!
There are a ton of people with similar stories; suffice it to say, if it wasn't difficult, it wouldn't be worth doing.
Brett
-
Results
-
Who was the "Rookie of the Year"?
Larry, Buttafucco Stunt Team
-
Was PW flying last year's P-47? I read a post on Alberta CLC's facebook site that he crashed his new "ImpAct" ...another bird strike? ??? Steve
-
Who was the "Rookie of the Year"?
Larry, Buttafucco Stunt Team
Don Cranfill
-
Was PW flying last year's P-47? I read a post on Alberta CLC's facebook site that he crashed his new "ImpAct" ...another bird strike? ??? Steve
Steve you'll need to add something new to your stunt dictionary "ANTEATER".
Dave
-
Hi Norm:
Five of the top ten were electric powered. Not an issue either way anymore...
Bob Hunt
Hi Bob, nothing directed at any particular individual, but I do have an issue with electrics. I have felt since day one, that electrics should compete in a division for electrics only and I have made my opinion public for some time now. I'm not old fashion, but I guess you can call me a perfectionist. IMHO, being able to set up a fuel burner to run right and do the pattern is what it is all about. I've heard replies to my opinion in the form of "well you still have to fly and steer the plane through the pattern," true, but the electric motor does away with one aspect of the competition. The ability to show up at a contest with a plane, that starts and runs right, after signaling the judges. A plane that "chugs" around in level flight and kicks in with power during the maneuvers. Yes I know...there is a point of technology involved with the set up (programming) of an electric, as I've been told. I'm all in favor of advancements in these types of technologies, but when the technologies takes advantage of a "contest," I begin to lose interest in our part of the hobby. I'm sorry, I have no desire to compete with or build an electric airplane. As I said in the beginning of my reply. My opinion is not directed at anyone in particular.
Congratulations to the top five and all of the other contestants, who I know, worked hard to get there.
Norm
-
Hi Bob, nothing directed at any particular individual, but I do have an issue with electrics. I have felt since day one, that electrics should compete in a division for electrics only and I have made my opinion public for some time now. I'm not old fashion, but I guess you can call me a perfectionist. IMHO, being able to set up a fuel burner to run right and do the pattern is what it is all about. I've heard replies to my opinion in the form of "well you still have to fly and steer the plane through the pattern," true, but the electric motor does away with one aspect of the competition. The ability to show up at a contest with a plane, that starts and runs right, after signaling the judges. A plane that "chugs" around in level flight and kicks in with power during the maneuvers. Yes I know...there is a point of technology involved with the set up (programming) of an electric, as I've been told. I'm all in favor of advancements in these types of technologies, but when the technologies takes advantage of a "contest," I begin to lose interest in our part of the hobby. I'm sorry, I have no desire to compete with or build an electric airplane. As I said in the beginning of my reply. My opinion is not directed at anyone in particular.
Congratulations to the top five and all of the other contestants, who I know, worked hard to get there.
Norm
Norm, sorry if this comes across as harsh, but here's the reality. If you don't think that Paul Walker, Chris Cox, Chris Rudd, Orestes, Howard, Igor, ect, ect, ect and many of the other top fliers that are using Igor's system haven't spent many, many flights tweaking and re-tweaking the several parameters in the active Igor system, you are sorely mistaken and being purposefully quite ignorant. These fliers adjust parameters manually, for conditions, just the same as the needle valve tweakers of the hobby. Even the more simple governor based Hubin and KR timer give RPM adjustability for conditions. The same 30+ year OLD, very tired, argument can and was said about tuned pipe engines. It's Cheeeeeeating....Blah, blah, blah.... It's just as easy to get boost/brake/rpm set totally wrong in the electric world as it is with the proven, good PA/OS/RO engines , ie, pipe adjustments, fuel, props (and.. not to mention the slightly masochistic use of old, crappy slag engines) in the glow realm.
Use what makes you happy. Fly Happy.
-
I haven't had any time to watch any video. What was Todd Lee flying this year? A new model or the Seafang Thang from last year or the year before? I think Jim told me at the SIG fun fly that he was working on a new Opus?
Type at you later,
Dan McEntee
-
I was heavenly into photography back when it was film based. I did weddings and had a dark room (witch is now my model shop LL~) to produce the B/W pictures for the newspaper. I shot 120 frames at a wedding and expected to get 110 to 115 good pictures for the brides album. Along came digital. All us old timers were bitching that digital would destroy photography. But low and behold photography is still alive and well. AND when I look at wedding pictures of today (friends weddings) I see good pictures and crappy pictures. SO it seems that their are good photographers and ones that don't know what they are doing. It still takes a person with a good eye and some formal art training to shoot good wedding pictures. So as progress gives us new tools for our hobby it is still the person handling the tools that makes for good or bad results. I will admit that digital cameras makes it possible for any dummy to get in the wedding business and it rubs me the wrong way that I perfected skills (dark room etc) that are no longer needed. But picture quality has not gone up or down. It's still the eye behind the camera that makes a good picture.
My point is that man is a creative critter. What tools he uses doesn't matter. What he does with the tools is what matters.
The one exception might be Old Time Stunt. It should require a Fox 35 LL~.
-
Hi Bob, nothing directed at any particular individual, but I do have an issue with electrics. I have felt since day one, that electrics should compete in a division for electrics only and I have made my opinion public for some time now. I'm not old fashion, but I guess you can call me a perfectionist. IMHO, being able to set up a fuel burner to run right and do the pattern is what it is all about. I've heard replies to my opinion in the form of "well you still have to fly and steer the plane through the pattern," true, but the electric motor does away with one aspect of the competition. The ability to show up at a contest with a plane, that starts and runs right, after signaling the judges. A plane that "chugs" around in level flight and kicks in with power during the maneuvers. Yes I know...there is a point of technology involved with the set up (programming) of an electric, as I've been told. I'm all in favor of advancements in these types of technologies, but when the technologies takes advantage of a "contest," I begin to lose interest in our part of the hobby. I'm sorry, I have no desire to compete with or build an electric airplane. As I said in the beginning of my reply. My opinion is not directed at anyone in particular.
Congratulations to the top five and all of the other contestants, who I know, worked hard to get there.
Norm
Where does the tuned piped engines fit in? Not trying to argue or belittle your opinion at all, just curious.
-
Todds plane.
-
Where does the tuned piped engines fit in? Not trying to argue or belittle your opinion at all, just curious.
Hi Crist...I think I know what you are referring to, regarding my post, but it may be a surprise...I've never had any disapproval of pipes, in fact, I'm going to pipe my next creation.
Norm
-
OOOHHHHHHH!!!! Thanks for the picture Gordon. Any idea what Todd had for power? Todd does know how to fly, doesn't he?
Type at you later,
Dan McEntee
-
Dan,
It was an EVO 60. Did not get information on modifications, if any.
John
-
Norm, sorry if this comes across as harsh, but here's the reality. If you don't think that Paul Walker, Chris Cox, Chris Rudd, Orestes, Howard, Igor, ect, ect, ect and many of the other top fliers that are using Igor's system haven't spent many, many flights tweaking and re-tweaking the several parameters in the active Igor system, you are sorely mistaken and being purposefully quite ignorant. These fliers adjust parameters manually, for conditions, just the same as the needle valve tweakers of the hobby. Even the more simple governor based Hubin and KR timer give RPM adjustability for conditions. The same 30+ year OLD, very tired, argument can and was said about tuned pipe engines. It's Cheeeeeeating....Blah, blah, blah.... It's just as easy to get boost/brake/rpm set totally wrong in the electric world as it is with the proven, good PA/OS/RO engines , ie, pipe adjustments, fuel, props (and.. not to mention the slightly masochistic use of old, crappy slag engines) in the glow realm.
Use what makes you happy. Fly Happy.
Hi Brent, nothing you said came across as harsh. I listen, learn and file away all kinds of these types of conversations, in case I change directions in "doing it my way." BTW I never gave a thought of a tuned pipe as cheating. My next creation will be piped.
Same to you...Fly Happy.
-
OOOHHHHHHH!!!! Thanks for the picture Gordon. Any idea what Todd had for power? Todd does know how to fly, doesn't he?
Type at you later,
Dan McEntee
Yes he knows how to fly as well as all the other things that make a champion. His Dad taught him well as you did Sean. But we have a tough crowd at the top in Open stunt and any little thing can change the out come at any contests as you well know. Amazing how many of these young lads I've watched through the years and kept track of. Myself it looks like no more flying for me and it is going to be one or more of my kids and grand kids. D>K
-
Todds plane.
Was Todd on the front row too? Anyone else?
Thanks,
Bruce.
P.s. live scoring sure beats the old days of waiting for the October issue off MA👍
-
Sigh... Okay, Norm, please understand that you are entitled to you opinion, and I will fight to the death your right to have it. Having cleared that up let's take a look at the rule book for our event. Nowhere does it suggest that having the knowledge or the necessity to set up a glow engine is in any way a part of the event before or after the introduction of electric power. This event is about geometry scribed on the inner face of an invisible hemisphere. Yes, there is a component of being able to build and finish the model also.
The fact that you enjoy the challenge of setting up a glow engine to perform as you wish it to is a personal thing for you. No one should feel the need to have to accept that challenge if they don't want to. For some that challenge is easy, and for some it is hard, but in any case there are no points available for the act of doing it, nor should there be.
Setting up an electric power system may be easier in your mind, but for some it is not. Many are so entrenched in glow thinking that they are having trouble learning the necessary lessons to use electric effectively.
Before glow came along there was ignition. Now, there was a challenge! When glow did come along I'm told there were many who hated the idea. Now anyone could get a powerful engine to perform well and without the need for so much engine knowledge. Let the record show that glow prevailed and did so for a long time. Heck, it is still very viable and will be for years to come. Does that mean we should stop all development of power systems for our event? If we were to subscribe to that way of thinking, we would all still be driving horse-drawn carriages.
Why do some people feel that the event was to be forever based on internal combustion power? If that were the case it would have been named "Internal Combustion Precision Aerobatics." It was, instead named Precision Aerobatics. And it has been an event ripe with technical advancements throughout its years. So we are to now stop those advancements because some don't care for a new power mode?
I'm always amused by the fact that when electric power was first used in a CL Stunt model, some people suggested that it should have its own event because it would never have the power potential that glow had, and so would never be competitive with glow powered models. Now, just a few short years later, many of those same people are crying that electric models have a performance advantage over glow, and should have their own event for that reason. The fact is that just today, on the nation's largest stage in CL Stunt flying, a glow powered model won the National Championships! Doesn't seem like there is an advantage for electric over glow in light of that result. Of course the next three spots were taken by electric powered models, and the second placing model was only a couple of points behind over two flights and 30 maneuvers. Gee, could it be that we have achieved parity? What an awful thing!
Let's keep our eyes on the ball, guys; this event is about flying geometry, building and finishing. It is also an event that has always welcomed new ideas and new technologies... right up to the point when someone actually made an electric model competitive with a glow model, and then the specter of censorship appeared. In fact, there have been contests that have penalized those who had the temerity to show up with an electric powered model. In some cases a 10 or more point penalty. Hey, now there's a way to grow the event and make people welcome...
Bottom line: Electric power is here to stay, and it will continue to improve over the years to come. I don't think you will ever hear any electric flier suggest in the future that glow models should have their own event. Listen, and please listen good. There are so few of us in the entire universe that fly CL Stunt models that it behooves all of us to get along. If you feel that electric powered models have an advantage over what you are flying, there is no rule that says you can't also fly electric. Conversely, there is no rule that says you have to give up your glow engines. Just fly what you like, and get along with all the other children.
I thought all of this was behind us by now; but I fear it will continue to be a major issue that will do nothing but tear us apart.
Bob Hunt
I agree 99.99%. The only thing i don't agree with is the notion that this will tear us apart. There is no "real" IC vs Electric debate or division. Norm stands alone on this "online debate" but in the real world, nobody cares.
Derek
-
Sigh... Okay, Norm, please understand that you are entitled to you opinion, and I will fight to the death your right to have it. Having cleared that up let's take a look at the rule book for our event. Nowhere does it suggest that having the knowledge or the necessity to set up a glow engine is in any way a part of the event before or after the introduction of electric power. This event is about geometry scribed on the inner face of an invisible hemisphere. Yes, there is a component of being able to build and finish the model also.
The fact that you enjoy the challenge of setting up a glow engine to perform as you wish it to is a personal thing for you. No one should feel the need to have to accept that challenge if they don't want to. For some that challenge is easy, and for some it is hard, but in any case there are no points available for the act of doing it, nor should there be.
Setting up an electric power system may be easier in your mind, but for some it is not. Many are so entrenched in glow thinking that they are having trouble learning the necessary lessons to use electric effectively.
Before glow came along there was ignition. Now, there was a challenge! When glow did come along I'm told there were many who hated the idea. Now anyone could get a powerful engine to perform well and without the need for so much engine knowledge. Let the record show that glow prevailed and did so for a long time. Heck, it is still very viable and will be for years to come. Does that mean we should stop all development of power systems for our event? If we were to subscribe to that way of thinking, we would all still be driving horse-drawn carriages.
Why do some people feel that the event was to be forever based on internal combustion power? If that were the case it would have been named "Internal Combustion Precision Aerobatics." It was, instead named Precision Aerobatics. And it has been an event ripe with technical advancements throughout its years. So we are to now stop those advancements because some don't care for a new power mode?
I'm always amused by the fact that when electric power was first used in a CL Stunt model, some people suggested that it should have its own event because it would never have the power potential that glow had, and so would never be competitive with glow powered models. Now, just a few short years later, many of those same people are crying that electric models have a performance advantage over glow, and should have their own event for that reason. The fact is that just today, on the nation's largest stage in CL Stunt flying, a glow powered model won the National Championships! Doesn't seem like there is an advantage for electric over glow in light of that result. Of course the next three spots were taken by electric powered models, and the second placing model was only a couple of points behind over two flights and 30 maneuvers. Gee, could it be that we have achieved parity? What an awful thing!
Let's keep our eyes on the ball, guys; this event is about flying geometry, building and finishing. It is also an event that has always welcomed new ideas and new technologies... right up to the point when someone actually made an electric model competitive with a glow model, and then the specter of censorship appeared. In fact, there have been contests that have penalized those who had the temerity to show up with an electric powered model. In some cases a 10 or more point penalty. Hey, now there's a way to grow the event and make people welcome...
Bottom line: Electric power is here to stay, and it will continue to improve over the years to come. I don't think you will ever hear any electric flier suggest in the future that glow models should have their own event. Listen, and please listen good. There are so few of us in the entire universe that fly CL Stunt models that it behooves all of us to get along. If you feel that electric powered models have an advantage over what you are flying, there is no rule that says you can't also fly electric. Conversely, there is no rule that says you have to give up your glow engines. Just fly what you like, and get along with all the other children.
I thought all of this was behind us by now; but I fear it will continue to be a major issue that will do nothing but tear us apart.
Bob Hunt
Point made and accepted...Peace!
Norm
-
. There is no "real" IC vs Electric debate or division. Norm stands alone on this "online debate" but in the real world, nobody cares.
A *few* people care, and think this is a big issue, but essentially no one competing thinks this is any sort of crisis or controversy. Norm is certainly entitled to his opinion, or course, but evidence is (as recently as about 8 hours ago) that electric is about a wash with IC in a competitive sense, in all respects.
I also think that maybe some people who are railing against electric on the topic that it's too "easy" are also not well-versed in how to set up competitive IC systems. Most of the 'engines are hard, electric is too easy' people haven't tried a competitive system of either type. Truth be told, PA/RO-Jett/VF systems can be made perfectly competitive with absolutely *no* help, and complete directions on how to set it up and adjust it have been available for decades, 30ish years for the VF. A Fox 35 was a good competitive choice for about *10 years*, 15 in a stretch.
I don't fault anyone for using whatever they want to use, but IC isn't that hard or difficult to get right any more, all you have to do is follow the directions. Which is about what you do with an electric.
Brett