Rules Proposals

[john e. holliday]

I have just came from the AMA site.  Finally they are using AMA numbers to log in.  After changing and logging in, I went to the rules proposals page.  There is nothing there for control line.  I had also asked Gary McClellan about the proposals at the NATS and was told he would check into it.  Does this mean everything is kosher.  Have fun,  DOC Holliday

[Bradley Walker]

There are several rules changes that have been submitted.

[john e. holliday]

I guess our illustrious technical director must still be sitting on them as they are not posted.  Have fun,  DOC Holliday

[SteveMoon]

I sent in my usual proposal to eliminate BOM, so there should be
something there.  Steve

[don Burke]

I think the proposals have to go through a vote of the respective committees before they will be listed for counter proposals.  Look for publishing after the cutoff date.

[RC Storick]

I sent in my usual proposal to eliminate BOM, so there should be
something there.  Steve

If this passes we should go to all FAI rules!

[SteveMoon]

Yes, Sparky, you are right. We should just go to FAI.
I have been hearing a lot of people saying this very
thing, including several prominent competitors at the
Nats.

Steve

[Bradley Walker]

I think the proposals have to go through a vote of the respective committees before they will be listed for counter proposals.  Look for publishing after the cutoff date.

I wish someone would actually publish the rules submittal procedure, the rules voting procedure, etc.  Then we would all know how it works.

Oh, wait...

Nevermind...

[Trostle]

I wish someone would actually publish the rules submittal procedure, the rules voting procedure, etc.  Then we would all know how it works.

Oh, wait...

Nevermind...

Brad,

Maybe you have found it already, but for those not familiar the the AMA Contest Boards, the entire process for these boards is provided in the AMA website.

Keith

[peabody]

I'm still curious as to the vote and discussion of the modification to the modification to the interpretation of the BOM......but wtf....

FAI rules are significantly easier for most CD's to follow now because of the fact that there are a bunch of laptop computers floating around. When Dave Cook and Steve Buso first conducted an FAI meet in Coxsackie many years ago, it was necessary for Dave to drag his MAC PC, and a generator...usual annoyances with light and running out of fuel caused delays....today, we have the ability and should utilize it...

[Bradley Walker]

Brad,

Maybe you have found it already, but for those not familiar the the AMA Contest Boards, the entire process for these boards is provided in the AMA website.

Keith

OK.  Great!  Where?

[Bill Little]

This a touchy subject according to the "House Rules".  But if we can not get out of hand, we can discuss this to a degree.

I would love to see us get back to the original rule, and ENFORCE IT.  However, I know that we have passed that point.  I see a very hypocritical situation occurring in the BOM rule as it exists today.  It is there, but it is no longer the "original" rule, and is not enforced as such, even though the rue has only slightly been changed though the "interpretation".  Which I do not see in the Rule Book as of yet.

My main problems with doing away with the rule are mixed.  I LOVE the tradition of the event.  Knowing that I am flying the same event that Bob Palmer, George Aldrich, a young Billy Werwage, et. al., were involved in gives me a good feeling!  I also do not feel that *I* should be penalized for building as much of my own airplane as is possible! 

Everyone who gets into the event knows (at the present time) that you must build your own plane to fly in the NATS Age Group categories, and even at most local contests (except in our area!)  Why should it be different today than it was 20-30-40, or more years ago?  I know the "bending of the rules" (50%, sheeting foam wings, etc., ) that have occurred for a long, long, time.  But if the individual can live with it in their own consciousness, then so be it!

Remember this is really a "banned" political subject, so we better be careful! It still might get yanked by Sparky, and if so, no problem! LOL!!

Thanks, guys.

[Trostle]

OK.  Great!  Where?

The Contest Board procedures are on the AMA website.  You do not have to sign in as an AMA member for access to this document, though you can get to it when signed in as an AMA member.

When you get on the AMA website:

Go to "Competitions".

Then go to "Rules Proposals".

Then go to "Cycle Information"

There, you will find the 21 page document titled "AMA Contest Board Procedures".

The Rules Proposal form is in that document as well as under the "Competions" section listed above, then go to "AMA Documents", and the proposal form is document #333.

This might get you there:

http://www.modelaircraft.org/events/Contest%20Board%20Procedures%20Changes_v2final.pdf

[Bradley Walker]

I would love to see us get back to the original rule, and ENFORCE IT. 

Funny thing is that has always been my feeling also.  No matter how things have been twisted about my friends and I being "anti BOM'rs", we have always been scratch builders and stall worths of the rule "as written".  We have never been a fans of "unwritten" rules.  In light of ENFORCEMENT we have favored elimination.

Anyway, the future is in "component kits".  I am fine with that, although I have never used one in competition.

I am looking forward to going to FAI rules, if that is the future.  One of the main advantages to going to FAI rules would be that they are managed by the FAI, which is a global organization and not subject to local politics or influence.

[Chris McMillin]

If this passes we should go to all FAI rules!

And this sentiment from "Mr. Builder"?

Chris...

[Bob Reeves]

It is kinda funny, I think most antiBOMers feel the same way Brad does and for the same reasons.

[Dick Byron]

Steve,
       I just wanted to let you know I support your proposal wholeheartedly.

[RC Storick]

And this sentiment from "Mr. Builder"?
Chris...

Thats right Chris! If we are to throw away the tradition of the BOM why not go all the way and come in line with the whole world.

We will soon look like RC fliers. With all Arfs. Except for the few die hards.

[RC Storick]

This a touchy subject according to the "House Rules".  But if we can not get out of hand, we can discuss this to a degree.
Remember this is really a "banned" political subject, so we better be careful! It still might get yanked by Sparky, and if so, no problem! LOL!!
Thanks, guys.

We can let this fly until it gets out of  hand. NO Name calling and no flaming. Just talk it out like adults!

[Bradley Walker]

Thats right Chris! If we are to throw away the tradition of the BOM why not go all the way and come in line with the whole world.

We will soon look like RC fliers. With all Arfs. Except for the few die hards.

I don't know Robert...

Have you gone to the competition side of RC at the Nats?  Are you serious that you think there are not a tremendous amount of people building in RC (and yes, buying too)?

Anyway...  I tend to think that the "component kit" industry has been going strong hot and heavy for decades (without advertising I might add).  I would think that would continue to grow.  Shoot, the new "interpretation" was the best thing that ever happened to the pre-fabricated component industry.

Anyway, I think that the rest of the world has been suffering without the BOM for 50 years.  My friend Brian Eather is the greatest modeling craftsman I know of...  in my opinion he might be the best one of the best CL craftsman in the world... 

He seems to manage to do just fine without it. 

As far as I can tell, the Aussies have all the fun and none of the BS.

The true of the matter is that we need to get some butts in the seats, if making more pre-built component kits and ARF's helps, then so be it.

[steve pagano]

Does any one have a link to the website that has the C.L.P.A. rules? Especially the B.O.M. rule.

               T.I.A
                         -Steve