Bob, I'll address this to you although I understand that you may not have the answer. Who is on the planning committee? Several years ago there were members that competed at the NATs that were allowed to sit in on the planning meetings and although they had no say in how things went they could voice their opinions. I believe Pete Masur use to attend these meetings (maybe Pete could chime in here), then several years ago the AMA President decided they wouldn't have the meeting open to the competitor's. They concluded among them selves that it would be easier for them (the AMA) to make the decisions.
I think based on my experience over the last 4 years that although the Ironman was a ''small problem to a few'' it certainly was not a game changer. The Ironman competitor's like to get to Muncie the night before the one day event and then as far as I could tell leave the that evening following the competition.
I'm not sure but think that the RC Scale competitors would not compete in any other events but RC Scale? The CL Scale competitors do have several serious competitors from the western US that fly in other CL events besides Scale and I don't think they will make the trip twice in one months time. I'm left wondering if the AMA fully realizes this? Eric
Eric,
I attended the Planning Meeting as the representative for C/L Navy Carrier (NCS). I also served as the proxy representative for C/L Speed (NASS) and C/L Combat (MACA). Dave Betz represented C/L Racing (NCLRA). Dennis Adamisin represented CLPA (PAMPA). Allen Goff represented C/L Scale (NASA). John Boyko and Mike Barbee represented R/C Scale (NASA). R/C Soaring (LSF) and R/C Combat (?) also had representation. Contrary to previously stated opinions, all of the SIGs present were represented by active modelers.
Tony Stillman chaired the meeting. Joyce Hager and Yolanda Jones were also in attendance.
As I said, we were presented with two choices for the calendar. There was not an opportunity to propose an alternative. While the Ironman conflict may not have been a problem for a few it was a show stopper for the majority. That made Calendar B a non-starter. The reality, from the broader perspective, is that several hundred people from C/L Scale, C/L Combat, and R/C Scale would have been affected.
The other point is that R/C & C/L Scale both operate under the NASA banner. The decision going into the meeting was already made to run both facets of Scale on the same schedule as in past few years.
One other consideration is that AMA, as an organization, has a significant investment in the IAC and seeks to utilize the facility as much as possible. The actual Nationals runs for nearly three months plus there are other events like Camp AMA so it is not as easy as it might seem to move things around.
You asked if HQ staff had any sensitivity to the potential impact on participation of this calendar. Probably not so much. All I can say is that AMA Executive Council has effectively outsourced the promotion, participation in, and success of the Nationals to the SIGs. It became our concern and decisions had to be made.
Topic: 2016 NATS (Read 4122 times)