Uncle Mikey said: "You might want to check with OTS originator John Miske, Jr., and ask his opinion about modified airfoils."
John has been a close friend for about 50 years.
I was one of the original contestants at the very first OTS meet. The purpose of OTS is to fly the airplanes and the pattern AS IT WAS, not how we think it should be. Internal non visible structural changes were always allowed.
You can argue that it doesn't changes how the airplanes fly... but as Jim Hoffman said: " No changes to the original airfoil are permitted in OTS. This includes those "faux" reproductions having LE sheeting and/or surface spars. And while we agree that "inclusion" and "participation" are desirable, there's nothing so difficult about building an honest reproduction.
I emphasize there's nothing so difficult about building an honest reproduction.
Of course.
This is the just the usual "politics post", trying to play the "elitist vs Joe Bellcrank" card again. This time, in a particularly foolish way given that the facts are backwards. VSC and Pampa versions of OTS permit many more things than the original GSCB version; in fact, there have been very extensive arguments about how PAMPA screwed everything up by allowing "designed" and excessive variety.
I don't have a strong opinion either way about which way is the *right* way to view it because I don't care very much, people should have the contests the way they want to and the way people will enjoy it the most. But you *do* have to draw the line somewhere on modifications, and "no aerodynamic changes" is the same in both sets of rules. Otherwise you can have people re-engineering Noblers into mini-Impacts.
At least OTS (both versions) has some legitimate way of drawing the line on modification. In PAMPA Classic, there is absolutely no way in the rules of excluding anyone for any reason. The only sanction for deviations is "Fidelity Points" and most contests don't use those, so there is absolutely no penalty for flying your Impact and saying it is a Nobler. Except being called out by your competitors as a putz, of course.
This is the most important thing to note about this (and just about ALL rules debates, with a few exceptions). No one is routinely kicking people out of contests for "deviations". I have heard of two cases since OTS was invented, and never seen one. This is all "debating society" stuff, or, as in this case, someone trying to make a long-dead political point. It's not happening in real life on a regular basis and no one is measuring your airplane with a micrometer or "pixelized Boolean projection" to see if someone made one of the dreaded aerodynamic improvements. The interpretation about the "no extra ribs/seeting/spars" to keep the tissue from sagging has been known and published for 20+ years, so it's not like it's being sprung on anyone at the last minute.
And most importantly, there aren't a bunch of OTS Elitists trying to weed out the unwary or "unworthy", no amount of model airplane trophies makes someone "elite" and the entire "elitist VS Joe Bellcrank" debate is utter, complete, and quite intentionally toxic nonsense cynical conjured up to try to win political points.
Brett
Topic: Super clown ots question (Read 4461 times)