Post by: Craig Beswick on June 21, 2021, 07:18:05 PM
I watched some of your YouTube video of Appearance judging. I thought you said the judges were supposed to be 10' away from the plane?
The bit I watched the judge just about had his nose touching the plane looking at the stabilizer fillets! I was surprised he didn't have a magnifying glass out. Ha ha!!!!!!!!!
Thanks for the effort in providing the videos, much appreciated.
Craig
Post by: Dave_Trible on June 21, 2021, 07:40:03 PM
Dave
Post by: RC Storick on June 21, 2021, 07:46:26 PM
Post by: mike londke on June 21, 2021, 08:39:04 PM
Hey Robert,I was one of the appearance judges and nowhere did I ever read we were supposed to be 10 feet away. Maybe you can volunteer to do it next year.
I watched some of your YouTube video of Appearance judging. I thought you said the judges were supposed to be 10' away from the plane?
The bit I watched the judge just about had his nose touching the plane looking at the stabilizer fillets! I was surprised he didn't have a magnifying glass out. Ha ha!!!!!!!!!
Thanks for the effort in providing the videos, much appreciated.
Craig
Post by: Craig Beswick on June 21, 2021, 08:55:46 PM
So, you can all stop being thinned skinned and think you have been insulted or offended in some way.
Before you all decide to have a kick at me, not all of us, on here, know the rules or have access to them.
Happy to volunteer and all the credit in the world to those that do volunteer. May be a bit difficult for me 13,000 miles away.
Craig
Post by: RC Storick on June 21, 2021, 09:32:07 PM
Models shall be judged for appearance complete and ready to fly. After model has
been judged, nothing will be removed from or added to the model which, in the
judges’ opinion, changes in any manner the appearance of the model from the
way it was when presented for appearance judging. However, during an attempt
for official flight after the contestant has begun to crank the engine, if it becomes
necessary to remove the propeller spinner for change of propeller, etc., then it is
permissible to leave off the spinner for that particular flight. Any damage to the
model after judging, or changes that may be made as a result of such damage, will
not be cause for loss of appearance points. Appearance judging will take place
just before contestant’s first flight. Judges shall exercise prudence in assigning
points, and reserve excellent point values for those models which are decidedly
above average.
Appearance (Minimum-0 Maximum-20)
10.1.
Appearance points are added to the contestant’s flight points for scoring
purposes.
Oh and I have done that job in the 180 building
That first paragraph was taken from the AMA rule book and in my opinion is way to vague I also think that appearance should be worth at least one maneuver (40 points)
Post by: Ken Culbertson on June 22, 2021, 05:56:55 AM
10. Appearance....Appearance judging will take placeHow we define "just before" is one of the reasons so many of us can't make the NATS. I am simply pointing this out, I don't have a solution.
just before contestant’s first flight.....
Ken
Post by: Dan Berry on June 22, 2021, 06:30:56 AM
Post by: Dennis Saydak on June 22, 2021, 07:30:40 AM
Perhaps a magnifying glass could be a consideration, especially for Sr. age judges? S?P
Post by: peabody on June 22, 2021, 07:51:49 AM
The "10 foot" Rule applies to one of the Scale classes, I believe. Judges have always been close up and personal with CLPA entries, often examining the undersides as well. Almost every year, the "Pilot's Choice" model which is voted on by the competitors comes from the "front row" of appearance judging.
Two things that haven't been mentioned:
1) Almost annually the film covered models are immediately moved to the back row. I have seen some exquisite film covered models. And a terrific film covering takes a TON of time and patience.
2) Again, there were no models the received less than 10 points. This really bangs the Advanced flyer that admits that he didn't build the plane. 20 points is a LOT. Ten MIGHT be overcome.
Pylon guys (I think) used to do appearance judging....they seldom new CLPA competitors and did as good a job as the current batch of volunteers.
Thanks them....
Post by: Derek Barry on June 22, 2021, 09:29:26 AM
10. Appearance.
Models shall be judged for appearance complete and ready to fly. After model has
been judged, nothing will be removed from or added to the model which, in the
judges’ opinion, changes in any manner the appearance of the model from the
way it was when presented for appearance judging. However, during an attempt
for official flight after the contestant has begun to crank the engine, if it becomes
necessary to remove the propeller spinner for change of propeller, etc., then it is
permissible to leave off the spinner for that particular flight. Any damage to the
model after judging, or changes that may be made as a result of such damage, will
not be cause for loss of appearance points. Appearance judging will take place
just before contestant’s first flight. Judges shall exercise prudence in assigning
points, and reserve excellent point values for those models which are decidedly
above average.
Appearance (Minimum-0 Maximum-20)
10.1.
Appearance points are added to the contestant’s flight points for scoring
purposes.
Oh and I have done that job in the 180 building
That first paragraph was taken from the AMA rule book and in my opinion is way to vague I also think that appearance should be worth at least one maneuver (40 points)
That's the general rule, not the precision aerobatics specific rule.
Make it 40, won't change anything but the final score. If you think you'll get a 39, and everyone you hope to beat will get 20, you're wrong.
Derek
Post by: Trostle on June 22, 2021, 10:26:57 AM
Pylon guys (I think) used to do appearance judging....they seldom new CLPA competitors and did as good a job as the current batch of volunteers.
As far as I know, there was one time that "Pylon guys" were asked to do the appearance judging at the Nats. That one time was a disaster. A semi-scale model that deserved 20 points or close to it was placed on the last row because it was not shiny.
Keith
Post by: Steve Helmick on June 22, 2021, 10:31:51 AM
How we define "just before" is one of the reasons so many of us can't make the NATS. I am simply pointing this out, I don't have a solution.
Ken
At the NATS (not having been to one), from what I've read, AP judging is normally done the night prior to start of official flying. Seems fair enough. I am mystified why that would prevent somebody from attending. Please 'splain! ??? Steve
Post by: Scott Richlen on June 22, 2021, 10:55:52 AM
Quote
I also think that appearance should be worth at least one maneuver (40 points)
I whole-heartedly agree! What makes PA appealing is the flying of beautiful planes to their jeopardy. Nobody cares if you wreck a POS.
Speaking of which....at my first Nats up in Massachusetts (forgot the name of the airbase) I flew a rebuilt Magician. When we returned to the building where they were doing the appearance judging to see the results it had been placed out in the yard! I guess the judges were afraid that it was so ugly that it might be contagious to the other ships. ;D
Post by: Ted Fancher on June 22, 2021, 11:01:16 AM
This part of judging is a shine contest and look at the weights I am not willing to forgo a light airplane for shine.
Hmmm. Sparky. How light would you think a 650-700 Square inch stunter needs to be to make the top five or win a Walker Cup? I saw a lot of top five airplanes over the years and don't remember any that weren't excellent examples of craftsmanship and finish!
With all due respect I've seen a lot of such competitive/Champion airplanes and I don't remember any that weren't pretty shiny.
Ted
p.s. Plus, I sure don't recall any shaggy "Dogs" out of the "Sparky" shop! H^^ H^^ H^^
Post by: john e. holliday on June 22, 2021, 11:46:45 AM
Post by: Paul Smith on June 22, 2021, 11:49:21 AM
That was in the 16-to-40 days. It boiled down more to guys who knew each other trying to beat each other.
There was no reason the judge could not not have given 40's to many planes if each satisfied all four of the criteria. Just like any other stunt. They can give as many 40's as there are perfect stunts.
I had a modified Midwest PT-19 and another local guy had a Jetco Shark built like the kit box. I bet him on originality.
Post by: Paul Taylor on June 22, 2021, 12:49:46 PM
As far as I know, there was one time that "Pylon guys" were asked to do the appearance judging at the Nats. That one time was a disaster. A semi-scale model that deserved 20 points or close to it was placed on the last row because it was not shiny.
Keith
I think that was Ron Burns??
Working off memory here. 😂
Post by: James Holford on June 22, 2021, 01:15:22 PM
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Post by: Trostle on June 22, 2021, 01:29:11 PM
Heaven forbid you have no chance at the Nats if ya bird aint shiney
Not so!
Keith
Post by: Ken Culbertson on June 22, 2021, 01:31:37 PM
At the NATS (not having been to one), from what I've read, AP judging is normally done the night prior to start of official flying. Seems fair enough. I am mystified why that would prevent somebody from attending. Please 'splain! ??? SteveAccording to the AMA Schedule (above link) Appearance Judging is on Monday. Qualifying does not start until Wednesday.
If you are only flying PA you have 2 days. For the serious contenders this is a non issue. To put in a top 5 performance you need to get settled in but a lot of us would love to attend simply to start building name recognition. Those extra 2 days are difficult for a lot of us.
Ken
Post by: Ken Culbertson on June 22, 2021, 01:49:49 PM
I only time I was ever involved with appearance judging at The Nats, the judge got his nose right down to the model and felt the finish.Those 4 categories caused a lot of confusion. How do you get maximum points in realism and originality at the same time for example. If I remember there were numerous heated discussions on just what they meant. Now days the range of appearance points awarded is nowhere as dramatic as it was in the 60's. They could make or break you. That is why there was such a push for "realistic" originals. Shine was only 1/4 of the equation.
That was in the 16-to-40 days. It boiled down more to guys who knew each other trying to beat each other.
There was no reason the judge could not not have given 40's to many planes if each satisfied all four of the criteria. Just like any other stunt. They can give as many 40's as there are perfect stunts.
I had a modified Midwest PT-19 and another local guy had a Jetco Shark built like the kit box. I bet him on originality.
Ken
Post by: Paul Smith on June 22, 2021, 04:26:34 PM
For the benefit of newbies, there were four 4-to-10 items so the bottom line was 16-to-40, which is 24 points. Not all that different from the 0-to-20 scale of today.
Post by: Scott Richlen on June 22, 2021, 06:06:59 PM
Quote
I think that was Ron Burns??
That would have been at the Norfolk Nats. Ron's very scale-like F4F was in the last row.
Post by: Scott Richlen on June 22, 2021, 06:15:09 PM
Quote
How do you get maximum points in realism and originality at the same time for example.
I suppose you could ink on rivets, but use white ink. Or maybe not put them in a straight line? :o
Post by: Paul Smith on June 23, 2021, 01:44:22 PM
Easy.
Build an accurate scale model of a prototype that has not been modeled before. Example; Al Rabe's Bearcat.
Anybody who builds with Al's plans gets realism, but not originality.
George Aldrich should get max originality for the Nobler, and decent realism because it looked like a real racer.
Post by: L0U CRANE on June 23, 2021, 02:33:22 PM
1, Over the years, the Nationals - the only AMA conducted contest we're concerned about - has allowed some"adjustments" to simply-read rule book wording. F'rinstance, appearance judging immediately before a contestant's first flight would make the schedule run impossibly long, AND the judging could not be consistent over the day. The sheer number of contestants expected - and usually present - is an excellent reason for the same-time, all together judging that has worked well for so long.
2,The large number of entries has also 'allowed' flight scheduling variations. Can you imagine the mess otherwise, if only one day, on one circle were required, No, the rule book doesn't say that specifically, but it also does not say there will be so and so many circles, or that fliers will be rotate through them so that each flies before all the judges. "Seeding" also helps balance the entry around the circles. (It is also an argue starter, quite often, but consider a fairly new guy who is outstanding and 'peaking' at this Nats. If he wound up on a circle with too many top expert, several time winners, his placing can be unfairly affected. This could also 'crowd out' from advancing a current top guy if too many such are on his circle.
These things have been developed - and argued about - over many years. What we have now works, and the judges are allowed to do well in a humanly practical situation. The organizers, judges scorekeepers, and the other support people have a grueling job. Thank them occasionally, okay...?
Post by: Paul Taylor on June 23, 2021, 06:04:59 PM
That would have been at the Norfolk Nats. Ron's very scale-like F4F was in the last row.
Here are a few pics of Ron plane.
Post by: James Holford on June 23, 2021, 06:08:29 PM
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Post by: Scott Richlen on June 23, 2021, 06:17:58 PM
Quote
Cause it wasnt shiny or was it horribly built?
It was a work of art. Notice the landing gear in the picture that Paul posted? Just like the real thing. It was weathered and even had the second set of insignia that was hurriedly applied to the F4Fs early on in the war, right over the top of the old ones.
Should have been in the front row, if not by itself in the front row.
Post by: James Holford on June 23, 2021, 06:20:16 PM
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Post by: billbyles on June 23, 2021, 06:25:25 PM
Cause it wasnt shiny or was it horribly built?
Ron Burns' F4F Wildcat was one of the most beautifully built and scale finished airplanes to ever appear at the Nats. It had the most scale like appearance of any airplane I have seen at any contest. The cockpit and landing gear detail were impeccable. Simply put the judges missed the boat in this model. That year the shiny airplanes came out ahead.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Post by: James Holford on June 23, 2021, 06:26:52 PM
Talk about a gut punch.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Post by: Trostle on June 23, 2021, 06:42:34 PM
Cause it wasnt shiny or was it horribly built?
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
That was a master build by a master builder. The paint scheme represented a warbird with authentic colors and shades. It authentically represented an F4F with plenty of service time like with dull, faded colors. It had its national insignia painted over its previous national insignia as on the full scale airplane it represented.
Dull finish judged by pylon racers = back row. A travesty.
I saw the demise of this fantastic model at a contest at Whittier Narrows.
Ron has done several other really incredible semi-scale stunt models that are in a class by themselves including a Macchi 202 and a Zero.
Keith
Post by: Shorts,David on June 23, 2021, 07:19:59 PM
1. Appearance judging is supposed to be done in private, with all models on the floor, moving forward and back and adjusting as they go. Mike and _____ (sorry) didn't have that as an option. 70+ models over a time span of 2 hours. Makes it tough. That was because it was too windy to set a model on the ground without holding it.
2. Appearance judging is pretty accurate, but still has biases. Keith Trostle and Arlie Preszler had a great judges guide based on their preferences. The next group of judges had different ones. Over all, most guys get the right score, but there are the few where you get in a huff, or, in my case say, wow, that's generous. Lol.
3. Based on my last comment, ive never heard of a minimum score like an attempt. "Well, it does look like a plane. I'll give you an attempt score of 10. Oh, the wheels turn? 11points."
Post by: wwwarbird on June 23, 2021, 09:45:32 PM
I've only ever seen photos, but it's enough to tell that Ron's Wildcat is one of the most incredible C/L models ever built, period.
Post by: Dennis Leonhardi on June 23, 2021, 11:06:31 PM
I whole-heartedly agree! What makes PA appealing is the flying of beautiful planes to their jeopardy. Nobody cares if you wreck a POS.
Speaking of which....at my first Nats up in Massachusetts (forgot the name of the airbase) I flew a rebuilt Magician. When we returned to the building where they were doing the appearance judging to see the results it had been placed out in the yard! I guess the judges were afraid that it was so ugly that it might be contagious to the other ships. ;D
LL~ LL~ LL~ LL~ LL~ LL~
Post by: Dennis Leonhardi on June 23, 2021, 11:07:02 PM
I've only ever seen photos, but it's enough to tell that Ron's Wildcat is one of the most incredible C/L models ever built, period.
y1
Post by: RC Storick on June 24, 2021, 03:25:14 AM
Now my situation moving forward. Living where I live we don't get many flights before the July NATS date. This year I have had a total of 7 flights for this year. So the next June NATS I won't be entering and will be available for Appearance judging duty again should the event director wish my services again. If not that's fine too
If the event date needs to be moved why not move it back instead of forward. August or September: There aren't many kids in this event, which was the main reason for the July timeline initially.
Post by: Scott Richlen on June 24, 2021, 05:30:47 AM
Quote
That was a master build by a master builder.
Not only is Ron Burns a master builder, he also knows his engines. Many years ago I was at a contest in Philly and heard a really great engine run in a stunt ship (I think a SIG Chipmunk) flown by Jimmy Paul (a great flyer from Richmond Virginia). I asked him later about the engine. It was an FP-40 that Ron Burns had re-timed for him. The guy really knew what he was doing.
Post by: Ken Culbertson on June 24, 2021, 06:10:31 AM
The year I judged appearance in the 180 building I think I changed the game forever. 100 Planes in 60 minutes. I had Jim Lynch and Charly Revees as helpers. When It started people were taking airplanes and setting them in rows they thought they would be in. I said STOP! I was the only person to touch the planes after weigh-in. Upon taking the plane from weigh-in I walked to the row I thought it should be in. Points were assigned after the planes were in the lines. I never could understand how that job could take 4 hours. After setting them in rows Jim and CHarlie and I discussed what planes needed to be moved. We moved 3 and it was set in stone. That year there were zero complaints. Concours came down to a tie. Denny asked me how to solved the dilemma it was done with a coin toss. Kenny Stevens was the winner.y1
Now my situation moving forward. Living where I live we don't get many flights before the July NATS date. This year I have had a total of 7 flights for this year. So the next June NATS I won't be entering and will be available for Appearance judging duty again should the event director wish my services again. If not that's fine too
If the event date needs to be moved why not move it back instead of forward. August or September: There aren't many kids in this event, which was the main reason for the July timeline initially.
Post by: EddyR on June 24, 2021, 06:38:34 AM
EddyR
Post by: James Holford on June 24, 2021, 06:42:53 AM
I remember Ron’s plane well as i was at that nats. I do not remember using none stunt flyers as judges. Ted and a talked about Rons nodel an we both had voted it as flyers choice. I was second behind Jimmies 20 point model and my Juno was in clear silk with very little color on it. It looked like you could put your finger into it as it had a very deep shine like water. I had over 2000 lines on it and all were very faint so as to not draw your eye to them but it made every rib jump out at you. I had 30 coats of clear on it all brushed on. Each coat was very than as the finished model weighted 47-48 ounces. Never did rubit out. I remember Rebecca clear coating my carbon prop with clear fingernail polish the night before judging as she said it was vey dull looking . I only had a few flight on this model but flew it to the to top three in advanced. Later a argument came up about my flight and i lost appearance points. I talked to big Art as we were good friends and he was still in a heated argument with the judges as i left that evening. They restored my score but no one told me. I arrived after they had started flying so was not allowed to fly.Another gut punch. Gotta love stunt and it's personalities.
EddyR
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Post by: Air Ministry . on June 25, 2021, 07:24:14 PM
Like a B-17 , it doesnt look much like a Nobler . ? ???
Always wondered if the FAI 2 metre Max. Span was a ' get ' at Pauls B - 17 by feeble minded types . A Max Weight would be more logical .
After all , someone might want to try a 40 : 1 aspect ratio . VD~ S?P H^^ Could just cut the tips square at two meters , and dowel plug em in for A M A .
Were two Halifax tips , square and round .
Post by: Shorts,David on June 26, 2021, 11:32:39 AM
Two things that haven't been mentioned:
1) Almost annually the film covered models are immediately moved to the back row. I have seen some exquisite film covered models. And a terrific film covering takes a TON of time and patience.
2) Again, there were no models the received less than 10 points. This really bangs the Advanced flyer that admits that he didn't build the plane. 20 points is a LOT. Ten MIGHT be overcome.
Pylon guys (I think) used to do appearance judging....they seldom new CLPA competitors and did as good a job as the current batch of volunteers.
Thanks them....
[/quote]
Spot on. Regarding film. My dad has received as high as 18 points by an appearance judge who realized his plane was film and his jaw dropped. Never a wrinkle and single full length pieces on the fuselage. Astounding to those who have used film. But, his latest and best work got stuck in the baçk row which was shocking. His last nats plane scored 16 with monocote and wasn't as clean or elaborate as this one. As he put it, his last two painted planes took equal time and less skill, but some people don't feel the same way.
Post by: kevin king on June 30, 2021, 09:14:17 PM
I whole-heartedly agree! What makes PA appealing is the flying of beautiful planes to their jeopardy. Nobody cares if you wreck a POS. ;DROTFLMAO! Oh man I had to write this one down. 😆 It wouldn't be funny if it weren't true.
Post by: frank williams on September 01, 2021, 08:28:13 PM
My recollection:
The Ron Burns F4F Wildcat debacle occurred at the Virginia Beach Nats. I’m pretty sure that the appearance judging was not done by the “pylon guys”. That year It was judged by the event director himself (who has not been back since).
The “pylon guys” judged the Lubbock Nats. My plane that year, which wasn’t shabby, but certainly not front row, got more appearance points than Bill Wererage’s plane, which won the Concours d’Elegance award.
One thing for sure though, was that Ron’s F4F Wildcat was a truly magnificent model.
On the subject of plastic covered planes and appearance points, a little known fact is that there has been a concours winner that had plastic covered flying surfaces. At one of the Vincennes Nats, Kaz had a Blue Max done with white Oracover that was perfect. Nobody knew that it wasn’t tissue and dope. I think it might have been clearcoated.
Post by: Dennis Moritz on September 02, 2021, 01:48:20 AM
Post by: Will Hinton on September 02, 2021, 08:52:52 AM
On another point, I've judged c/l scale for 10 years now, and the distance for "stand off" scale is 15 feet, not 10. (And it's now classed as "sport" scale.)
Post by: john e. holliday on September 02, 2021, 10:29:06 PM
Post by: FLOYD CARTER on September 03, 2021, 11:36:16 AM
Post by: Dennis Moritz on September 05, 2021, 02:07:44 AM
Post by: Ken Culbertson on September 05, 2021, 04:24:50 PM
Have we lost something?Absolutely. In 60 years of this I have never flown a plane in a PA competition that I did not design. Dropping the Originality points hurt me big time. I was "otherwise occupied" when the appearance points changes were made or I would have opposed it big time. I am not opposed to modifying someone else design, or kits or building from plans but the amount of effort that goes into designing your own should be rewarded. But, instead we reward the guy who can spray on a 12" shine he bought at the automotive paint store. I get pleasure from drawing up a new design and I put a lot of time in on the design. I also put a of of time in mocking up my color scheme. In fact I am doing that right now.
Attached is one of many I am doing for the Trifecta. None of this is rewarded in our current system.
I personally like a smooth satin finish. I could take that to a contest and get 16 points or so. I could also take a really shiny POC and get the same 16. In some ways this mirrors the BOM discussion on another thread. I agree, why should we invest in originality when all you need is the shiniest SV-11.
Ken