We need a list

[Jim Mynes]

For the last couple of days I’ve been pondering about what I might want to build for a Classic model. I thought there used to be a sticky at the top of the Classic thread, but it’s no longer there, if ever it was.
No sticky list in the Old Time thread either, which is another good reason to do this.
The Nostalgia sub-forum has a couple of stickys with lists, updated lists, etc.
I finally found an archive for Dave Day’s old web site, and perused his Vintage (OTS) and Classic listings, but they are obviously incomplete, lacking the Jamison Special in Vintage and Caprice in Classic, and I assume many more.
I’m pretty sure Tom Morris’ books are fairly comprehensive, but even so, once a book is published and more data becomes available it obviously is not included.
What we as the Stunt Community need is a comprehensive list of every model ever made and the date it was born. That, of course, is not realistic, but every model we can come up with facts on IS an achievable goal.
Perhaps PAMPA, being the de facto Boss of Stunt, should put such a list on their web site, making it easily accessible for those who wish to look at it.
I think such a list should include, at a minimum;
Name of Model. Designer. Wingspan. Date of Birth
Name of Model is obviously needed.
Designer would be used to differentiate similarly named models, for instance Williamson Ringmaster vs. Kania Ringmaster.
Wingspan would help differentiate different versions of a model, for instance the 43” Magician vs. Midwest Magician.
Date of Birth would be the earliest confirmed appearance of the model, whether it was flown, published, kitted, photographed, or otherwise came into being.
Maybe there are more data points needed, but these, I think, would be the bare minimum.
I know, I know, I just volunteered to do this just by suggesting it needs to happen. Well guess what? I don’t have the knowledge (data) to make it happen.
I would be willing to compile data into a spreadsheet, but I would need the facts from any and all sources. And I would need PAMPA to host the list. And I would need a small committee of knowledgeable Stunt guys to confirm the data, because anybody could send in wrong data and I wouldn’t know the difference.
So there you have it. We need a list. Who wants to help?
And let’s not make this thread “The List”. It’s more of a “should we do this, if so who wants to help?”. Data input would come later, via email or PM.

[Gordon Van Tighem]

https://stunthanger.com/smf/classic-planes/eligibility-list/msg522603/#msg522603

[Brett Buck]

I finally found an archive for Dave Day’s old web site, and perused his Vintage (OTS) and Classic listings, but they are obviously incomplete, lacking the Jamison Special in Vintage and Caprice in Classic, and I assume many more.

   Definitely see the previous thread (linked above).

    The Dave Day list for OTS is for their event, not the US/PAMPA version and they have some different (and interesting) rules. There was also a pretty big argument in the UK over how OTS was being run, and some sort of controversy between OT and regular events that I know something about (from talking to a few of the people involved), but I also know enough to not to comment on it!

    As before, it's OK to have a list as long as it says it is not exclusive, that is, being on the list makes it legal, but not being on the list is not necessarily illegal. I thought PAMPA ought to stay out of the "approved design" business when I was VP, but we did it anyway in a few cases.

     Brett

[Jim Mynes]

   Definitely see the previous thread (linked above).

    The Dave Day list for OTS is for their event, not the US/PAMPA version and they have some different (and interesting) rules. There was also a pretty big argument in the UK over how OTS was being run, and some sort of controversy between OT and regular events that I know something about (from talking to a few of the people involved), but I also know enough to not to comment on it!

    As before, it's OK to have a list as long as it says it is not exclusive, that is, being on the list makes it legal, but not being on the list is not necessarily illegal. I thought PAMPA ought to stay out of the "approved design" business when I was VP, but we did it anyway in a few cases.

     Brett

My intent is to simply create a list of models and their DOB, to be used as a tool, not an official eligibility list. Of course, that will be its primary use, but in the bigger picture it is information that needs to be captured before it’s gone forever.

I don’t want to be morbid, but when I look around at a contest, at 58 years old I’m one of the young guys. It seems like every month I read of one or more of our friends that pass on to the big pull test in the sky. If we don’t capture this information soon it will be gone forever.

I’ve seen threads where people put effort into an OTS list, a Classic list, a N-30 list, and their efforts either don’t pan out or get lost in the noise of the forum. If PAMPA maintained one master list, sorted by date, then anybody could look at it and draw their own conclusions.

The beauty of doing this as a spreadsheet is that it can be updated. If there is an error or omission, bring the evidence and He Who Maintains the List can make the correction. This ability to update it at any time prevents it from being exclusive.

This doesn’t put PAMPA in the “approved design” business, but by using the list you can rest assured that your model’s DOB has been scrutinized by knowledgeable people and has passed the straight face test.

[Jim Mynes]

Other than back issues of all the model airplane  mags, Dave Day's lists, the PAMPA book for OTS and Classic,  another source of OTS and Classic, N30 and modern models is plans lists from PAMPA,  the FM list, Tom Dixon's lists, etc.  Most of these state which era the model dates from, give WS, eng recommended, designer, etc. One more source..

I'm going to go back to the Air Trails listings after 1954 and see if they did an update of the list I sent.

Ty, thanks for your input here and by email. This post kind of proves the need.

You identified many sources for this info. My take on it is we need to clean it up, make one master list for easy reference.