OTS Rules

[Bob Zambelli]

An SSW post regarding the legality of the Brodak Viking inspired this.

I have been flying my OK Super 60-powered Viking for more than 10 years, entering it in OTS over 40 times.

I flew it in OTS at VSC, Garden State Circle Burners, Brodaks, Sharon, Philly Flyers, Middlesex and Palisades. I entered it around 10 times at GSCB and at times, John Miske was present.

As seen in the picture, it has an I-beam wing. This was done only out of curiosity and I thought it had an interesting look. It also has a 1 1/2 inch longer span than the original.

Since I use spark ignition, it was so nose heavy that it needed over 2 ounces of tailweight. So, I shortened the nose by one inch.

No judge at any contest has EVER challenged me regarding compliance. In fact, I have never seen any contestant challenged regarding authenticity. Same for classic – I entered an original design from 1967 in well over 30 events including Muncie and was never questioned. I had a Sterling Mustang that I modified with wing mounted gear and a 1 inch dihedral in the wing. It was flown in OTS, Classic, PAMPA and Profile. The plane’s configuration was NEVER questioned.

My point? Simple – yes, there are rules governing eligibility in many events but how often are the rules enforced? It seems to me that there is an honor system in place. BUT, what about obvious infractions, like my Viking and Mustang? Seems they should never have been allowed due to wing construction.

Comments?

Bob Z.

[frank carlisle]

Bob, I've thought about all this some and I think that it is very likely that the changes you made on these models may have quite likely been done by various modelers back in the day. It's rare that anyone builds strictly to the plans and construction variations are the norm today as well as back then.
I guess I really don't have a point to make here other than to say that your planes are designs from that era and just brcause you didn't make xerox copies of the originals doesn't mean that you violated any rules. You just did what modelers have been doing since the beginning, taking a design and building it to your own requiremenys and tastes.

[Jim Thomerson]

From the photo, it is not obvious that your wing is an I-beamer.  I built one of the Classic kits Vikings,  and I have read the magazine reviews of the time, so I am fairly familiar with the airplane.  Again the 1/2 inches are not apparent to me.  My real gripe with your Viking is that the Viking came out after ignition engines had become fairly rare at the flying field.  So I see your greatest deviation from authenticity to be your power system.    Well, probably someone put a sparker in one back in the OTS era so we'll give you a pass on that one.  Not being too serious here.  

[Randy Powell]

Bob,

I suppose it depends on honor. I built a Bill Simons' Shoestring for classic. While outwardly, it was as close a copy to the original as I could build, internally was quite different. I used Tom Morris's Millenium contruction method with strip ribs (though you couldn't tell once it was covered). I also made my own mold for a CF gear but again, it exactly copied the track and design of the original that was wire with balsa farings. I also used a simulated canopy though it exactly copied the original clear canopy in shape and outline. I tried to keep to the spirit of the event.

Was it legal? Beats me, but I did try to stick to the plans. No design changes. Original outlines, airfoils, moments and shapes. Just structural changes.

[Bob Reeves]

My understanding is the spirit of the event is to have fun and let as many fly as possible. I think most are out to have fun and not scrutinizing the competition's airplanes so who cares, I sure don't.

Heck if it were up to me the S1 would be OTS legal, close enough as far as I can see. Sheeted wing makes a better airfoil, maybe.. but really.. is that going to give the guy flying an S1 any real advantage... Guess the rules makers were thinking, well if we allow the S1 how far will it go, thicker wings etc.. Ok I can understand that so guess they had to draw the line someplace.

[RandySmith]

Here are the PAMPA rules for Old Time

PAMPA Rules For Old Time Stunt
1.0 Applicability. All Pertinent AMA regulations (see sections titled Sanctioned
Competition and General in AMA rule book), the General control Line Rules and
CL Aerobatics rules shall be applicable except as specified below. Any deviations
from the above or those specified below should be clearly spelled out in contest
advertisements.
2.0 Philosophy. Old Time Stunt offers stunt fliers an additional event intended for
enjoyment, for more relaxed competition and for nostalgic recreation of the era
which led to modern stunt. Because its figures are simpler than those required for
modern Precision Aerobatics, Old Time Stunt may attract new fliers to CL
aerobatics events and competition. Above all, the event should be fun.
3.0 Model Requirements. The model must have been designed, published or kitted
prior to December 31, 1952. Eligible published designs must have been published
with a cover date prior to Dec.31, 1952. The contest director, at his discretion,
may require proof of model eligibility for Old Time Stunt. Proof of eligibility lies
with the contestant. Challenged contestants may show dated published plans,
magazine construction article, dated photographs and/or letters of confirmation of
the date of the design. Plans of un-kitted, un-published designs must be made
available to PAMPA membership.
3.1 Allowable Modifications
3.1.1 Undercarriage.
3.1.1.1 Tailwheel. A tailwheel may be added to those designs
which originally had a skid, providing the model’s angle of
attack (on the ground) closely approximates the original
design.
3.1.1.2 Landing gear. Landing gear material may be changed. The
landing gear length need not exactly duplicate the original,
providing the models angle of attack (on the ground)
closely approximates the original design. Landing gear
must exit in the same location as the original design. It shall
not be relocated to provide for perceived advantages in
ground handling.
3.1.2 Adjustable leadouts
3.1.3 Adjustable tip weight
3.1.4 Structural changes to strengthen the aircraft.
3.1.5 Control ratios and control mechanism location.
3.1.6 Building material substitutions (hinges, glue, paint, covering
material, landing gear material, etc.)
3.1.7 Use of muffler pressure and uniflow fuel tanks.
3.1.8 Trim tabs.
3.1.9 Fuselage width may be modified to accommodate commercial twoinch
(2”) fuel tanks and allow them to be replaced or serviced.
3.1.10 External doublers may be changed to internal, and doublers may be
added to any design without penalty.
3.2 No Modifications, other than those listed above, shall be permitted. Any
modifications (other than those listed in section 3.1) which, in the opinion
of the judges or contest director, significantly change the appearance
and/or performance of the aircraft as originally designed, shall be grounds
for disqualification; to: change of airfoil, change of moments, rudder
articulated by control system, change of asymmetry or symmetry, size, etc.
Drop-off landing gear will not be permitted (Note: Where drop-off gear
was a feature of the original design, contestants should preserve the
appearance and location of the original gear, but must disable its drop-off
function for competition.)
4.0 Builder of the Model. The BOM rule shall not apply to the Old Time Stunt
event.
5.0 Appearance Points. Appearance point shall not apply to the Old Time Stunt
event.
6.0 Flight Pattern Points. 25 flight pattern points will be awarded flights in which all
maneuvers are attempted or completed in the correct sequence. Pilots may omit
maneuvers and remain eligible for FLIGHT PATTERN POINTS providing he/she
notifies the judges before each flight of those maneuvers which will be omitted,
and execute the remaining maneuvers in the proper sequence. A crash shall not be
grounds for deduction of flight pattern points, providing all maneuvers prior to the
crash are performed in the proper sequence. Exceeding the eight minute time
period shall result in a loss of flight pattern points.
7.0 No Flap Bonus. A bonus of 10 points will be awarded for use of an aircraft
design which does not include operating wing flaps. (When using Garden State
Circle Burner’s (GSCB) scoring, this bonus shall be 20 points.
7.1 In the event that OTS Phase II is flown (all applicable OTS rules except
that models shall have operating wing flaps), the 10 (or 20) point No Flap
bonus will be waived.
8.0 Spark Ignition Engine Bonus. A bonus of 10 points shall be awarded for use of
an operating spark ignition engine.
8.1 Glow engines converted to ignition may not be used. Ignition engines
must either have been manufactured during the Old Time Stunt era or be a
reproduction engine that has been approved by the Society of Antique
Modelers (SAM).
8.2 Diesel engine bonus. A bonus of 5 points shall be awarded for use of an
operating diesel engine
9.0 Maneuvers. Maneuvers and maneuver descriptions from the 1951-1952 AMA
rule book shall apply. A minimum of two laps is suggested between each
maneuver to allow judges time to register scores (Not completing two laps will
not result in a loss of pattern points.)
9.1 Takeoff and Level Flight. These are two separate maneuvers. Correct
takeoff consists of model rolling some distance after release, rising
smoothly, and climbing to normal level flight height of 6 to 10 feet, within
one lap. Two level laps follow.
10.0 Scoring of Maneuvers. The PAMPA 1-10 x K-factor, or alternate GSCB system,
will be used. See sample score sheets at the end of this document. Pre-contest
announcements shall state which system is to be used, PAMPA or GSCB.
10.1 Unattempted Maneuvers will receive no score (0).
11.0 Rules Change Procedure. The procedure for changing, amending or adding rules
is similar to those procedures used by AMA. Rules change procedures and forms
are available from the PAMPA Rules Chairperson.

[Bob Zambelli]

I've always agreed on the fun part of OTS, especially encouraging more to enter.

When I ran OTS for the Philly Flyers, I stressed the spirit/theme of the design rather than the date. If someone showed up with a plane that fit those guidelines, he/she could enter. If a plane was close but published a few years later, we would accept it.

Two examples are the PDQ Circus King and the Veco Tomahawk, the former being almost a copy of the Ringmaster. Interestingly, we never had a Nobler or Chief enter.

Jim T. - look closely at my Viking and you'll see a 5/16 square lead edge. Definitely an I-beam. AND, the plans show an OK 60.

Regarding my own building philosophy, whenever I construct an OTS bird, I try my darndest to use the same engine as on the plans.

My Viking flies with an OK Super 60. (spark)
My Screwball Fury with an Anderson Spitfire. (Spark)
My Scared Kitten with a Glow-Torp .29.
My Stunt Rocket with an Atwood Triumph.
My Stinger with a Fox .35.

In my opinion, the best flying is the Stinger but it's happiest when really moving - probably in the 75 to 80 MPH region.

The powerplants of the last three were confirmed by the original designers.

Bob Z.

[john e. holliday]

Bob, from my past experiences with Old Time and Classic was, if you can't see it, its legal.  I used Tom Morris Lincoln Log construction on my Detroiter.  Even had foam blocks to replace the balsa blocks.   All I know is if the out ward appearance and diminsions are as close to the original as possible.  Its legal.  DOC Holliday

[Jim Kraft]

Hey Bob; Yours really looks pretty close to the original. The I beam is similar to the center spar on the original. Strip ribs at leading edge don't look right but to me thats minor. Also, your wheels look to be placed about right. Front end of original is fairley short anyway and yours looks about the right width. Mine built from plans done from original looks pretty colos to yours. Mine has had a Super Cyke, and now has Fox 59'. It is a fine flying machine.

[Jim Thomerson]

I looked for the Viking review and did not find it.  I found a Vampire review, so maybe I was confused.  My Control Line Classic plans are a blue line copy, 1/2 size, except for the wing rib, and have the company name taped over.  There are also some additional notes outside the original plan outline.  I think, until shown otherwise, that they are from original F&B Viking plans.  The engine shown looks like a Triumph.  the engine in the ads is hard to identify.  Could be a Triumph but is not an OK 60.  An OK 60 is fine for this airplane, I'm just kidding you about flying a sparker in an airplane designed for glow. The leading edge is shown as 5/8 square; 5/16 is pretty close, isn't it?

I have pictures from VSC 1999, of a red and yellow Viking with a Viking doll pilot.  Is that yours?  I made my Viking with a painted on full canopy, so I can't complain too much.

The other V-airplane was the Vixen, an OTS legal 1/2 A.

[Bob Zambelli]

Hi, Jim - yes, that was my Viking at VSC. Glad you like the little (?) pilot. I found her at a toy store. The really tough part was molding the fiberglass helmet and carving the little horns from balsa wood.

After that event, I tried to contact you regarding an ED engine you wanted. Left message but did not hear back.

Bob Z.

[Jim Thomerson]

Bob, don't know what happened on the ED non communication. I did get one from Ian Russell, however.  I was particularly impressed by your Screwball Fury, and took several pictures of it.  Have you ever written up how you did the take apart?  I think a lot of folks would find it very interesting.  As I recall, you moved one lever and the whole airplane literally fell apart.

[Bob Zambelli]

Hi, Jim - glad you found the ED engine you needed.

Yes, I would like to do an article on the Screwball. It's a great flying plane and the take-apart mechanism works perfectly.

Bob Z.

[Bob Zambelli]

Hi, Rudderless.
It was a toy store in the local mall. Kay-Bee, as I recall.

The doll is of a profesisional wrestler who calls herself "Sable". I cut her off from the waist down, trimmed her hair and made her into a Viking.

Be carefull, she may lead an attack on your town!

There was a photoshoot of her in a magazine. She really looks like the doll.

Bob Z.

[Randy Cuberly]

Bob,
The comment about the Brodak Viking on SSW forum was made by me. 
If you recall, I said I bought the Brodak kit after having built a previous Viking from plans and when I noticed the sheeted leading edge I became a little concerned.
After talking with several of the people who actually officiate VSC (I live here in Tucson, two miles from the site) the general concensus was that sheeting the leading edge on a OT airplane that was not originally sheeted, constituted a significant "airfoil" change.  Since airfoil changes is one thing that is specifically prohibited by PAMPA Rules I thought it best not to build the kit to use for VSC.  I also thought it pertinent to mention that, since the individual that started the thread specifically asked if there were any Issues with the plane.

Many people have flown airplanes at VSC that violate the letter of the rules.  Most of the time no one cares or says anything about it.  Probably if one of them won or placed in the top 4 or 5 some one would challenge them.  I don't think that has ever happened.

In the case of your Viking...the leading edge is not sheeted and the only significant changes that can be recognized is the half ribs at the leading edge.  Are they enough to constitute an airfoil change?  Who knows.  It was determined by people that will be officiating and possibly even CD'ing at VSC that sheeting was a significant change to the airfoil.

Nice airplane, by the way.

Randy C.