Looking into a BOM solution

[Bill Little]

(snip)
The wing shown above  is illegal under the new interpretation of BOM all though the pilot has to build it. Kit= four shell,laser cut ribs,4ea 3/16"x3/16" wood spars 4 each 1/8"x1/8" spars, shear webs and lost foam cradles. A complete ARC is legal and this kit wing is NOT this is my narrow dispute with the new BOM interpretation.You can also cut out solid panels and build it as a built up wing Photo attached.
(snip)
Jose Modesto

Hi Jose,

What makes the wing illegal? 

Bill

[Larry Cunningham]

Wait! I have the solution! It came to me in the middle of the night, after a strange dream wherein I was eating a giant marshmallow and woke up to find my pillow missing.

It's SO SIMPLE - three easy steps:

1) Keep the BOM, make no further efforts to rigorously define it.

2) Change maximum appearance points to 2.0: further demonstrate just how much we all actually value the "building" aspect of modern CL Stunt competition.

3) Enforce BOM rigidly, penalize violators by loss of all of those (2 available) valuable appearance points plus loud public scorn.

Yes, some compromise will be involved, but all sides have to bear some of the pain, do they not?

Workaround continues to be quietly building away and ignoring silly time wasting ill-defined "rules", getting on with flying and competing.

L.

PS - thanks Randy for the kind wishes. I'm doing well, glad to be home after 89 days in hospital, feeling great, blood sugar very good, losing weight, and happy as a hog on ice. Wife, family, friends, doctors, nurses, hospitals, insurance company, even my two cats have all been great blessings to me; I'm very grateful.

"What I look forward to is continued immaturity followed by death." -Dave Barry

[john e. holliday]

Mr. C, glad to hear you are back home and doing well.  Of course I don't expect to see you at VSC, so take care of yourself.   

[sleepy gomez]

I believe I have a solution to the BOM rule. There will be no more fuss about who built it, who bought it, or who covered it.    Precision Aerobatics should have a claimer rule.  As in IMCA Modified racing where there is a claimer rule of $1050 for an engine costing engine $5,000 to $25,000 I would suggest that a claimer rule of $200 for a PA plane at the end of the contest would be fair.  Would that not put flying back into the event?   Would it not even up the playing field? 

[Derek Barry]

So Derek your point is that AMA BOM can be violated as long as the majority agrees. The first to use the technology is against the BOM.That is my point in how the AMA BOM has been changed through out CLPA history. I'm glad you finally understand and agree with me. Derek that was not so painfull to admit.

Jose Modesto

That was your point, you said that "The approval of new technologies has always been done by first violating the rule. Then the rest of the contestants follow along the rule breaker, creating a new fact on the ground. These mass violations of BOM create a new fact never reflected in the AMA BOM law this is were we are today. " I was only saying, that by this system the sharks would lose. I do not agree with cheating until you get your way.

The problem I had with my wing was pretty simple.....not enough glue. I did not do a good enough job joining the take apart hardware and the balsa sheeting in the top and bottom of the wing. Adding some glue fixed the problem and it has been through some BAD wind without failure.

[Alex Becerril]

Not so many agreeing with the sharks. Not enough to win by overwhelming landslide like the foam wing I think...

 The Shark.....nothing but the Sharks!

[jose modesto]

Bill L. the wing is a hard fiberglass and wood molded outer surface. (Remember that we are talking about what can be supplied to another modeler.).
That makes it a violation of Bill's interpretation. Bill L. relevant portion of Bill R. BOM interpretation
"painted airplanes ,or solid hard finished surfaces such as molded fiberglass or Carbon Fiber molded surfaces will not be allowed under BOM."
Bill L. if Bill's interpretation stands then the open bay molded shell wing is the one that is BOM. The solid surface is not BOM
Again my disagreement is very minor.
My point is that its a kit and it has to be built by the pilot. if you compare it to an ARC(that is legal) the kit is real building and the ARC is assembling. which is closer to true BOM i would say the kit. Bill L. there is no paint involved but yes you have fiberglass cloth exterior surface.
Minor disagreement with Bill R.
Jose Modesto

[Derek Barry]

Jose, I would also wrap that wire all the way around the spar. It looks like it is only around the piece of plywood?

[Derek Barry]

The Shark.....nothing but the Sharks!

 I use "Sharks" as a general term. I am referring to all purchased composite airplanes.

[steven yampolsky]

I believe I have a solution to the BOM rule. There will be no more fuss about who built it, who bought it, or who covered it.    Precision Aerobatics should have a claimer rule.  As in IMCA Modified racing where there is a claimer rule of $1050 for an engine costing engine $5,000 to $25,000 I would suggest that a claimer rule of $200 for a PA plane at the end of the contest would be fair.  Would that not put flying back into the event?   Would it not even up the playing field? 

Ooh, I like that! Unusual.

[jose modesto]

Derek thanks on the heads up about take apart system will modify the next one.
Yes the Shark will loose if you compare it to a $35 dollar foam wing. Derek imagine that the kits cost $400.00 dollars then i think the sharks would poll better.
Its as much financial  as anything else. The fact of the white primer makes your argument easier to make. With out paint the argument would not be as strong.
Don't know if you are aware they(Yatzenko's) will provide builders kit that are in wood with glass exterior surfaces and no primer. They require more filling specially at tips and all seams, primer cover up molding defects.
This is new since the latest BOM interpretation.
They are also working on kit to meet Bill's current interpretation. No paint,glass cloth or finish looking forward to receiving this kit in Electric. we will document entire building and finishing of model for Nat's presentation. But first someone has to put up their $50.00 dollars protest money to get the facts. LOL
Jose Modesto

[Larry Fernandez]

[quote author=sleepy gomez  I would suggest that a claimer rule of $200 for a PA plane at the end of the contest would be fair.  Would that not put flying back into the event?   Would it not even up the playing field? 
[/quote]

Two hundred bucks for a plane I spent eight months building???

Are you on drugs??

Larry, Buttafucco Stunt Team

[sleepy gomez]

Larry, I see no difference than putting a $25,000 motor in a race car where it can be claimed for $1050. Oh yeah, the races seldom pay more than a couple of thousand bucks.   Maybe you shouldn't spend 8 months building a plane that would fly no better than one you could build in a week.  Or if you are a bucks up guy then go buy something that costs you no time.  Either way it doesn't matter who built it or where it came from!

[Steve Fitton]

Does the $50.00 allow you to protest one Yatsenko plane or all of the Yatsenko planes?

[RC Storick]

You get your 50.00 back when you win (and you will).

[jose modesto]

I hope you guys line up with your 50.00 the AMA will make some extra money this year. Steve one plane at the time.  Steve i will spot you the 50 if you win the protest my lost if i win you owe me 50 bucks. As you know i usually bet a sure thing.
Steve how is new plane coming along.
Jose Modesto

[wwwarbird]

Two hundred bucks for a plane I spent eight months building???

Larry, Buttafucco Stunt Team

 If the plane you had spent eight months building were legal, you'd have nothing to worry about.

[Bill Little]

If the plane you had spent eight months building were legal, you'd have nothing to worry about.

HI Wayne,

In the "claiming races", I don't think it matters if the engine is legal or not..... you just have to pay the "claim" amount to get it.  Never made much sense to me.

Big Bear

[wwwarbird]

 As a side point here, and a hinted reminder to the moderators, one of the great original attractions and things about this great forum was/is the no politics rule.

 This BOM debate has become an exact mirror image of the typical unwanted political debates. It's gone on way too long, and it needs to go away. It is glaringly obvious that no decision will ever be made that will make everyone happy. At this point the whole thing has become, quite simply, very disgusting. Especially when you make an honest comment or suggestion and it gets deleted.


 I'll say it again,  Build airplanes, go fly, make friends, have fun. That's what this needs to be about.

[Larry Fernandez]

If the plane you had spent eight months building were legal you'd have nothing to worry about.

I would worry that some jughead would claim my front row plane for 200 bucks.
And as everyone on the left coast knows, all my planes are BOM legal.
After all, building and flying are what this great hobby is all about.

Larry, Buttafucco Stunt Team
 

[wwwarbird]

 10-4 Larry.

[Bill Gruby]

 I have one simple question. Bet I get in hot water for it too. If a Forum (Board) was created to discuss Rules, why is BOM still being discussed here on the General Forum (Board)?

 "Bill Gruby" 

[W.D. Roland]

I can supply dead horse.

I now return to cutting and gluing balsa.

[Bill Little]

I have one simple question. Bet I get in hot water for it too. If a Forum (Board) was created to discuss Rules, why is BOM still being discussed here on the General Forum (Board)?

 "Bill Gruby" 

HI Billy G,

Simple answer, because the site owner decided to post it here. 


Billy Boy

[Bill Gruby]

HI Billy G,

Simple answer, because the site owner decided to post it here.  


Billy Boy

 I saw that answer comming and actually hoped it would be answered that way. You didn't need the devil, that's for starting something. Have a nice day everyone.

 "Bill Gruby"

[RC Storick]

Inclusive means everyone. If I started it it the rules section only people with access to that section would see it. Now that wouldn't mean everyone would it?

While this pole serves no true purpose it does get people to discuss the issue and hopefully come to some sort of resolve in the next rules cycle. People have buried their head for too long.

[Bill Gruby]

 Sorry Sparky, I meant no disrespect to you. I see three threads on this General Board alone. Two tryng to end it. Again, have a nice day.

 "Bill Gruby"