Author Topic: No BOM in Fun Scale - does this seem right? (Read 623 times)

Paul Smith · « **on:** October 14, 2009, 05:07:27 PM »

The discussion of whether Scale is also under the CL General Section of The Book got me looking at some other rules.

Namely in CL Fun Scale you can fly a "prefabricated model or one built by somebody else". OK, that's the rule. Not much room for debate about the status quo.

So there are 100 points for flying and only 10 for static. But at contests like The Brodak, Nats, and FCM, there are typically four or more guys with scores over 100, so what part of the 10 for static matters and it matters a lot.

You can look in the Tower Hobbies catalog and see a lot of RC RFT planes that would score a certain 10, just add bellcrank. As a judge, would you just look at the plane and give it a 10, or consider the source?

The ready-to-fly planes on the market now are better than almost anybody can build at home. Execpt for a handful of master craftsmen, it's futile to even try. It's like getting some fibreglas and trying to build your own Corvette. A few men could do it, but not many.

I guess somebody must have thought this was a good idea, or else it wouldn't be in The Rule Book, but I can't see awarding any points points for somebody else's or a manufacturer's work.

chuck snyder · « **Reply #1 on:** October 15, 2009, 06:06:47 AM »

As a judge I would not "consider the source." I would follow the rules.

NOte that in C/L Fun Scale the model is graded 0-5 on outline and 0-5 on color. In R/C Fun scale you get either 0 or 5 points if you have some documentation.

An automatic 10 points--well I guess so if there was a prototype done in shiny plastic film with that exact color scheme.

I have not been to Brodak for a couple of years, but at the other contests mentioned the outcome was determined by flying skill, preparation, and consistency. The static scores would not have made a difference.

Chuck

Paul Smith · « **Reply #2 on:** October 15, 2009, 08:39:04 AM »

A this year's Brodak, the spread from 1st to 4th place was 106.75 to 100.50. So you can't blow off static points and win by flying alone. Even with a perfect 100 for flying (which would be quite a chore), you still need all the static points you can get, or else be 5th place.

I prefer building all my own models. But if you can buy a pre-painted RFT plane from Tower, complete with panel lines, rivets, and detailed markings, you can beat most (but maybe not all) scratch builders. The ones I've seen hanging in shops and at swap meets look pretty good.

Scale scoring is sure a lot more generous than Stunt. Four guys getting over 100.5 out of a possible 110 is high. The winner got 106.75, which is only 3.25 away from perfect in both static and flying combined. So if you want to place you need to dig for every point.

The AMA Nats report, also in the October 2009 CLW, listed static points only, and the 7-man spread was from 8 to 10, again very close to perfect. I don't know if these models were contestany-built, mass production, or expert-built.

Dick Byron · « **Reply #3 on:** October 15, 2009, 11:44:20 AM »

As I see it fun scale is just for the fliers that want to fly and have fun making the flying part more important. I think it is good for the event. No complaints.

John Rist · « **Reply #4 on:** October 15, 2009, 12:40:14 PM »

I hope to make the nats next summer. I missed going this summer because I had one scale airplane and I destroyed it the weekend before. If I had a fun scale in the hanger I could have gone anyway. As time goes on I plan to put together a fun scale model just to be able to inter another event. I also plan to look into profile scale. Right now my main effort in going into my standoff scale. We make long trips and spend a lot of money - the chance to fly more is a good thing. I say hoorah for fun scale.

Allen Goff · « **Reply #5 on:** October 15, 2009, 02:10:25 PM »

Al tho I have never entered "Fun" scale I like the way it is set up. I can agree on two points, with Dick on having fun and making the flying part more important. And with Chuck on flying skill, preparation, and consistency will determin the winners.. Jack Sheeks told me many years ago, "if your equipment works, you should place. Go to a scale contest sometime and you will see that our equipment lets us down from time to time. (been there done that) I've seen the best of them have an off day, Chuck, Richard, Dale, Steve, Dick, Jack, Charlie, Mindy and Tom, and more. Fun scale is a good place to "get your feet wet".
On a nether note, the 2010 C/L Scale Nats is schedule for July 9, 10, 11. Then the rest of C/L start on the 12th. We are back together....

Hoss Cain · « **Reply #6 on:** October 16, 2009, 09:31:44 AM »

Quote from: Paul Smith on October 14, 2009, 05:07:27 PM

The discussion of whether Scale is also under the CL General Section of The Book got me looking at some other rules.

//SNIP//
The ready-to-fly planes on the market now are better than almost anybody can build at home. Execpt for a handful of master craftsmen, it's futile to even try. It's like getting some fibreglas and trying to build your own Corvette. A few men could do it, but not many.

OTOH, while they may look good, almost NONE are of true scale outline and markings. Most have flat tail feathers, while the aircraft has airfoiled surfaces. Wings are generally of more area than the full-size. There are tail-feather servos hanging out of the side, and/or servos hanging out of the wings.
Take a look at everyone's favorite, the P-51 Mustang, and until just recently, there has never been an ARF that fairly well simulates the 1:1 scale's turtle-back's fairing into the Horizontal Stab. Almost all of the models of the mustang have a stab mounted like a sport flying box fuselage. YUCK!

Quote

I guess somebody must have thought this was a good idea, or else it wouldn't be in The Rule Book, but I can't see awarding any points points for somebody else's or a manufacturer's work.

Dave Platt, as chairman of the Scale Contest Board, was instrumental into bringing in Fun Scale into the AMA RC competition rules. I do not know when CL FS came into being as for some 35 years I paid little attention to my roots, CL modeling.

IMO, Dave did an excellent thing. He offered a plan where local clubs and sport fliers could take some interest in flying their sport models in competition. Most of those models were either ARFs or purchased from someone else.
The largest obstruction to model aviation's growth, the BOM, was removed. Objectively, the everyday ARF pilot now had an opportunity to enter a competition and get a taste of it. Hopefully some may decide to build their own and show the top dog just who IS Top Dog.

The 10 points for documentation simply brings to the sport pilot that documentation requirements do exist. Then the Ugly Stick no longer becomes an Eindecker on the contest field.

Again IMO, after reading the rules, especially for CL Fun Scale, I think that there is still a significant amount of regulations aimed at keeping the Good Ol' Boy club on top. Either there was a type of airplane with the color scheme generally like the model represents or there wasn't. 5 points if so, and no points if not.
Off topic, but the requirement for engine control on the CL Fun Scale will keep many new potential CL Scale fliers back on their home base enjoying the sport 2 line flying. IMO, again more GOB Politics with less concern for the sport itself.

clscale7 · « **Reply #7 on:** October 16, 2009, 10:59:50 AM »

The Garden State Circle Burners rules that I have a copy of only have 90 flying points and 10 static points. regardless if the flying points are 100 or 90 the majority of the points are flying. In sport scale where 100 points are static and 100 points are flying the static plays a huge roll in how you place. However in Fun scale it allows models that are ARF's, models built by someone else and models that would not typically enter fun scale such as semi-scale stunt models or even carrier models. Then the Garden State rules even allow Stunt options as a an option.

A good example is that a stunt B-17 can fly inverted flights and outside loops would be allowed in Fun scale under Garden State rules, but a sport scale judge would not allow that same B-17 to do an outside loop in sport scale because the real B-17 could not perform an outside loop.

Having entered both fun scale and sport scale the event is just fine, the 10 static points may make a difference between two pilots who fly equally well, however as said before if your model is not flown well but looks great you will still place at the bottom. While my models may not get the most amount of static points I concentrate on making sure my equipment works and can put in a great flight and earn the most amount flying points possible.

The fun scale rules don't need to be changed, allow the ARF's and models built by someone else, ultimately you are being judged on how well you fly the model.

John Rist · « **Reply #8 on:** October 16, 2009, 01:16:05 PM »

The more I think about fun scale the better I like it. The 10 points for looks are just enough to keep the event from becoming another stunt category. It then provides a platform for practicing flying "SCALE". I have a bunch of hours of work in my extra 300S and trust me it was painful the two times I planted it. I am looking forward to putting together an ARF for fun scale.

QUOTE: A good example is that a stunt B-17 can fly inverted flights and outside loops would be allowed in Fun scale under Garden State rules, QUOTE end

I hear what you are saying but I would hope that this would lower realism of flight points. After all we are talking about a scale contest ----

My last $0.02 worth. I just got back from the St Louis scale contest. Their were some profile scale ships that did not have a throttle. They were WW II fighters and they filled the flight list with loops, inverted flight, and wing overs instead of taxi etc. As best as I remember they did quite well. The rules do not demand a throttle but personally I like the challenge of getting a throttle to work well on a U-Control.

Clancy Arnold · « **Reply #9 on:** October 16, 2009, 01:42:17 PM »

I can do nothing about the RULES for 2009-2010 BUT I am trying to do something for after January 1, 2011.

Here is the text of three of the Rules Change Proposals that I have submitted.

If you agree with my proposals then tell your Scale Contest Board representative.

Control Line Scale Rules Change Proposals

Text of Rules Change Proposal CLS 11-12
Control Line Fun Scale for event 526.
Question? Should there be a downgrade if the contestant enters a “Profile” model in this event?
The rule book is mute on this point therefore the static score should be reduced if a Profile model is entered.

Note: Many entries in Event 526 are Profile models and Profile models have even won the NATS in the past.

Note: This rule change would allow a “new to scale” modeler to fly “what he brought”.

Change from 3. Flying: ”All rules as per CL Sport Scale (event 509).

Change to 2. 1. Static Judging Guidelines: A Fun Scale model is not to be down graded in static judging for a profile body.
3. Flying. All rules as per CL Sport Scale (event 509). Except CL Fun Scale is exempted from the Dummy Pilot rule (CL Sport Scale event 509 paragraph 5. Model Requirements.) and the retract landing gear rule.(CL Scale Flight Judging Guide, Realism in flight, Paragraph 4.2.e.) CL Fun Scale is exempted from the model must stand still without being held by a helper before take off. (CL Scale Flight Judging Guide section 4.3 Takeoff (mandatory). Note: This does not restrict a contestant from using a throttle for flight and taxi options.
Reason: To allow more contestants to enter event 526 Control Line Fun Scale and make it a true entry level event.


Rules Change Proposal CLS 11-13 and CLS 11-14 go together to make CL Fun Scale the entry level event that Profile Scale was supposed to be.
Text of Rules Change Proposal CLS 11-13
Control Line Profile Scale event 521, First paragraph, last four sentences
Reason for change: To make CL Fun Scale the entry level event in CL Scale competition. This will require switching the age classes from CL Fun Scale with the 2 Divisions in CL Profile Scale.

Control Line Profile Scale event 521
Delete last four sentences that read “There are two divisions of CL Profile Scale. Division #1 is for novice contestants only. This is purely an ENTRY LEVEL division for CL scale competition. Division #2 is open to any contestant with prior CL scale competition experience.”
Replace with “With advance notice, the event may be conducted in different classes based on skill or age level, i.e., Open, Entry, Junior, Senior, etc.”

Text of Rules Change Proposal CLS 11-14
Control Line Fun Scale event 526, Paragraph 1. Eligibility: last sentence.
Reason for change: To make CL Fun Scale the entry level event in CL Scale competition.
This will require switching the age classes from CL Fun Scale with the 2 Divisions in CL Profile Scale.
Control Line Fun Scale event 526, Paragraph 1. Eligibility:
Delete last sentence that reads “With advance notice, the event may be conducted in different classes based on skill or age level, i.e., Open, Entry, Junior, Senior, etc.”
Replace with “There are two divisions of CL Fun Scale. Division #1 is for novice contestants only. This is purely an ENTRY LEVEL division for CL scale competition. Division #2 is open to any contestant with prior CL scale competition experience.”

Logic behind proposed change, including alleged shortcomings of the present rules. State intent for future reference.

This will make CL Fun Scale, event 526, the entry level CL Scale event it was meant to be.

These are three of the Rules Change Proposals that I have submitted.
To read all of the Rules Change Proposals go to the AMA Web Site and Select:
Member Services,
Publications,
Competition Regulations,
+ Rules Proposals.
Select a proposal and the form will appear, you can read or download the Proposal.

Clancy

Hoss Cain · « **Reply #10 on:** October 16, 2009, 05:38:18 PM »

Quote

//SNIP//
My last $0.02 worth. I just got back from the St Louis scale contest. Their were some profile scale ships that did not have a throttle. They were WW II fighters and they filled the flight list with loops, inverted flight, and wing overs instead of taxi etc. As best as I remember they did quite well. The rules do not demand a throttle but personally I like the challenge of getting a throttle to work well on a U-Control.

While the rules do not specifically state, "Throttle's are not required," when a stand-alone T.O. is a required maneuver, then that rather mandates a throttle, does it not? As without the throttle, one throws away a required maneuver which may well place one down the list a place or two.

Now if I were judging, any piston engine fighter, not a German or Italian, doing inverted maneuvers best be ready to prove it had such capability. Allied piston fighters had carbs while German and some Italian had fuel injection. Carbs could not do negative-G maneuvers, thus they had to roll into their dives, etc. rather than push over. Of course pilots did not like neg.-Gs either, so roll in was customary.

Author Topic: No BOM in Fun Scale - does this seem right? (Read 623 times)

Paul Smith

No BOM in Fun Scale - does this seem right?

chuck snyder

Re: No BOM in Fun Scale - does this seem right?

Paul Smith

Re: No BOM in Fun Scale - does this seem right?

Dick Byron

Re: No BOM in Fun Scale - does this seem right?

John Rist

Re: No BOM in Fun Scale - does this seem right?

Allen Goff

Re: No BOM in Fun Scale - does this seem right?

Hoss Cain

Re: No BOM in Fun Scale - does this seem right?

clscale7

Re: No BOM in Fun Scale - does this seem right?

John Rist

Re: No BOM in Fun Scale - does this seem right?

Clancy Arnold

Re: No BOM in Fun Scale - does this seem right?

Hoss Cain

Re: No BOM in Fun Scale - does this seem right?