Modelers vs pilots

[Avaiojet]

  Actually, Chuck's reading comprehensions skills absolutely suck. And he had trouble with numbers. He didn't even read the correct numbered post!  He just looks for any opportunity to post those same tired of photos of his hanger queens even when the thread is all about flying models, which we know he doesn't do either.

  Type at you later,
    Dan McEntee

 
  You can't resist. 

When are you going to Post photos of the models you've built and contribute to the Forum with a Build? Rumor has it you're really more of a "buyer" than a "BOM."

I may have been mislead? Have I?

BTW. I designed and built these models also. And Yes, I will have "Finishing Builds" when it comes time.

I am absolutely a "BOM."

[Brett Buck]

Time for me to chime in with my Novel idea! LOL. I am from Missouri and it's called the show-me state for a reason. in the words of the late RR (trust but verify) To end this controversy for everyone take a VIDEO of the build. No excuses everyone has a camera (cell phone) Then there are not just pictures and paragraphs of the testimony of a build but a full log should it come into question.

  So, you think it is a good idea to DQ every single airplane being flown now (aside from yours, presumably)? We going to time-tag it so you know the video is the airplane you have right now, or taken 25 years ago? Can't fake those time-tags, eh? The fuselage I built in 1991 is *identical within about .010"* of the one I built in 2011 and is the one used on the airplane I first flew in 2020, even internally. How would you tell the difference?  Unless I had someone else build the second one - or the first one - or the third one.

    See the problem?

   The more specific and elaborate the rules, the more ways there are to exploit them. The corollary is that making rules more elaborate punishes those who would have followed the rules in any case, and allow those who want to cheat many more ways to do it.

    This is, as it always has been, a tempest in a teapot, and "proving" things is not *in any way important*. People sign that they followed the rules, that is good enough. A few people taking extreme positions and getting really angry about it doesn't mean there is any genuine issue that demands a response.

   Of course, if someone feels they need to "fix" this so-called "problem", then *write a proposal and submit it*. About 10 years ago, I wrote 12 of them in under an hour, it is not hard. They all passed.

     No one ever does it, because *they know that these various hard-core "fixes" are going exactly nowhere*. That's not because of some mysterious evil forces are trying to keep their great ideas suppressed - but because the current arrangement is generally satisfactory to almost everyone. 

  And for the most part, no one even attempts to make a rational argument for their idea. I mean, look at this thread, where David very innocently and without accusing anyone of anything, says he really enjoys building and flying and what a shame it is some others don't. He didn't call anyone a cheater, he didn't accuse anyone of anything. The result - a flame-fest, probably not in the Top 10 as far as flame-fests go, but still, wildly over-the-top.

    Stunt and PAMPA has made some monumental mistakes over the years - not in running the contests, but in *overreacting to minor problems*, trying to *stop the arguments*. Someone might get really mad about something, and for a long time, we treated one or a few people being really mad as if it was some genuine issue that demanded some response. Even when almost everyone agreed that it was either not a problem, or so trivial it didn't matter. But no, we went out of our way to accomodate them, sometimes to the detriment of everyone else who didn't care about it.
 
    Alternately - someone is mad - so what?  Does that mean we should make extreme attempts to accommodate them, turn ourselves inside out to address their concerns, or even to point out the flaws in their logic. Examine their complaint, if they make a good point (despite the foaming at the mouth), then, that's worth considering. If they don't - move on.

    As always, it takes two people to argue about something, if someone doesn't like "all the arguments", then, just ignore them. Falling all over ourselves trying to "stop the arguing" has gotten us in trouble time and again, and just made the arguments worse.

   We have a pretty good system now, the system is not broken in any consequential way. If some (PJ {who I note made his point much better in his last post, although I think he is probably still wrong}, whoever, doesn't like something, OK - noted. They are entitled to their opinions, the rest of us are *also* entitled to their opinions, and for the most part, we have arrived at a situation that is generally satisfactory, and we have a pretty functional system for ensuring it stays that way.

   So, aside from finding the accusations unseemly - what the heck are we arguing about?

     Brett

[PJ Rowland]

What are we arguing about?

That is actually a REALLY good point. Ive had a few days to personally reflect on the issue and the problem, and my opinion is only one based on "giving back"
I have completely ignored that the Yatsenko RTF has allowed more people into the hobby, and has allowed others to make gains within the sport at a more rapid rate.

Does this bother me??

What would I prefer??
Noone to fly against or be able to discuss Stunt
Or
A growing hobby with new people..

Im not doing a backflip, I do think building and competition is the core of Stunt and a reflection of personality.

Its a matter of pride.

Here is what is interesting to me... the guys who actually DO build virtually 100% of the plane seem to be more passionate about those achievements. They KNOW how much work is involved in getting even an 18 point 550 capable setup.


Here is an Idea
Why dont we ALL explain why WE enjoy the hobby .

Here is mine :

I Love stunt planes. I fell in love with the beauty of them, from the paint to the flight.
I love building but I can ONLY build stunt planes. My skills at other areas like scale, or RC, is limited.
I enjoy the ability to develop a new design and have something better from year to year.

I enjoy the process of flying aerobatics and enjoy practice and trim.
I flew recently during sunset and felt totally peaceful and that provides me joy.

I enjoy seeing other people like Brett and enjoy listening to his technical understanding of the sport. I share the passion of Derek and have enjoyed his artistic planes.
I dont want to name everyone who does the sport ,but I gain inspiration from these types of people whom.are at the top of their game.

I am in total awe of Orestes and have seen him fly live many times including his Worlds flight. , Ive personallly told him I think he flew virtually a flawless pattern with machine like bottoms and deserves to be a proud World champion.

I can say that and still think flying a shark isnt right.


What I want might not be what someone else wants. I want to share this sport with others who share my views.

[RC Storick]

Those airplanes would have been challenged in the years they snuck in had it not been stopped by a rule change of imposing a $50.00 fee for the AMA to do their job of which you are sure to lose as it is in their interest to keep the $50.00.

The camel's nose is under the tent and soon the whole camel will be in. We have no one to blame but ourselves for letting this happen.

[John Gluth]

      So contentious because contests which are sport, are being confused with the hobby of building. BOM rule is not confused about that, but apparently even the best of us are!

      Has anyone ever heard of a golfer that made his own clubs? Of course not. BOM is about craftsmen investing talent and meticulous time in their masterpieces.
   
      BOM has nothing to do with elitism. Model BUILDERS are AMA’s roots. In 1963 building was the only way we could fly. I sensed blurred vision of that when AMA officers promoted, “drones are the future of AMA”! A local E-RC, foamy flyer exclaimed to me, “I don’t know why you waste your time building…”.
 
     Guys that speak model airplane, in particular CL, are my best friends and they are best friends! Contests are competition. Let’s not confuse sport with hobby.
   I enjoy several SCRATCH-BUILT, CL hand-me-downs, and always welcome at the field even though I never became a proficient flyer.

[Dave_Trible]

      So contentious because contests which are sport, are being confused with the hobby of building. BOM rule is not confused about that, but apparently even the best of us are!

      Has anyone ever heard of a golfer that made his own clubs? Of course not. BOM is about craftsmen investing talent and meticulous time in their masterpieces.
   
      BOM has nothing to do with elitism. Model BUILDERS are AMA’s roots. In 1963 building was the only way we could fly. I sensed blurred vision of that when AMA officers promoted, “drones are the future of AMA”! A local E-RC, foamy flyer exclaimed to me, “I don’t know why you waste your time building…”.
 
     Guys that speak model airplane, in particular CL, are my best friends and they are best friends! Contests are competition. Let’s not confuse sport with hobby.
   I enjoy several SCRATCH-BUILT, CL hand-me-downs, and always welcome at the field even though I never became a proficient flyer.

I think what we do CAN be defined as either sport or hobby depending on how one looks at it.  There is certainly room for everyone and in fact these are the ones who really support the hobby with their dollars.  If you are a serious competitor it really only comes as a 'total package' deal.  That is why our 'thing' is like almost no other endeavor.  National Champion in the U.S. goes to the one capable in every aspect.  We are unique in that respect.  Most other events and in most other countries  FAI rules are flown with no BOM or appearance judging.  Very well,  but that is a reason to keep our tradition.   For some this is nothing but a moot discussion since it really only applies to Advanced and Open at the U.S. Nats.  (there are a few local exceptions ).

[jerry v]

I think, some definitions are not correct. Building model airplanes with a lot of skills is a hobby. And collecting coins or post stamps is a hobby. Flying CL stunt with all physical ability, skills to set the equipment  is a sport. And playing chess is a sport. Creating model airplane from scratch, paint it, - is a hobby. But creating “Mona Lisa” is the art.
I think our CL business should be named SPort ART, or symply : SPART.

Jerry

[Avaiojet]

I think, some definitions are not correct. Building model airplanes with a lot of skills is a hobby. And collecting coins or post stamps is a hobby. Flying CL stunt with all physical ability, skills to set the equipment  is a sport. And playing chess is a sport. Creating model airplane from scratch, paint it, - is a hobby. But creating “Mona Lisa” is the art.
I think our CL business should be named SPort ART, or symply : SPART.

Jerry

I'm a good example of someone who participates in a hobby. My sport is Tennis.

Many of you guys enjoy this hobby as a Sport. But then, is it still a "hobby?"

I have absolutely no interest in building models to participate in the "Sport."

Like I said, my sport is tennis.

[Alexey Gorbunov]

Somehow, in one of the discussions on the Russian forum, in an attempt to determine who is a real modeler and who is an ARF "tester", people agreed that model builders using CAD systems for design and CNC machines for manufacturing parts cannot be considered modelers in the highest meaning this word.

[Peter in Fairfax, VA]

Alexey,

I see your point.  CNC cut ribs vs. manually cut would be a manual skill distinction.  Myself, I see using both types of ribs would still be "building."

The distinction between having building skills vs flying skills, which are distinct, became abundantly clear to me in 1972 when I was serving as an RC pattern judge as a teenager.  Our small group of judges had folding chairs along the flight line.  A scale builder was attempting to fly his creation, but having difficulty guiding it, causing us to scramble for cover and duck as the plane bore down on our position.  One of the more experienced judges allowed as how scale builders spend less time practicing their piloting skills.  Made sense at the time.

Peter     

[GallopingGhostler]

In the real aviation world, pilots are  perceived now by youth as only glorified bus drivers. Aviation is of no interest to many because it takes education, investment of time and resources, and persistence. Then when youth get into military or commercial aviation they want the perks now instead of submitting to the apprentice of experience and time that piloting takes. The Pop Culture is the cancer that causes this. Just look at America's Got Talent and The Voice. Instant Gratification. The Pop Culture is the search for 15 minutes of fame and not the reward of the realization of personal improvement and the attainment of excellence after hard work and persistence.

Yup, agreed, what you said is correct.

I saw a concrete contractor go through that problem, was hiring foreigners across the border with work visas (yes, legally) to be concrete finishers, because he couldn't find anyone locally who knew how or wanted to learn. Construction pays very good wages, but requires patience to get to the journeyman level. Few are willing to go that extra mile of 5 years of training before gaining a license.

Yet those who do, and marry the right woman (what you see is what you get doesn't work in software nor women), they have all their needs met, live in nice neighborhoods, and children are more likely to grow up successful.

Most would rather play with their intelligent phones and live in the air conditioning comfort of their parent's homes as adults, instead of working in the heat and cold outdoors framing, laying rebar, covering, plumbing, running electrical circuits, along with flat work and soil work, etc.