(clip)

"...due to the lack of other contestants in his age group he won, but that should not be the case. "

Why should that "not be the case"?  If he won because there were not other entries as you suggest, why should he not win?

"If the model measured up to scale and the workmanship was up to snuff the model should have been judged on it's own merits."

Was not that model "judged on it's own merits"?  If there were not any other models in his age group, what "merits" was it judged on if not on its own?    

"If we limit the size of the entries then what size does it take?"

Where did this idea come from that "we limit the size of the entries"? Thee is nothing in our AMA rules that limits the size of a CL Scale model other than weight and displacement limits.  Is there iome idea somewhere to impose some kind of an artificial limit on the size of a CL scale model?  I certainly hope not.


(clip)

"...the Musciano models should be treated the same as any other model. Scale and craftmanship..... not to small."

Why would a "Musciano model" not be treated as any other model?  Scores for scale models are based on fidelity to scale, craftsmanship and flying points.  Is there some process somewhere that is different than what the rulebook specifies?  What is "too small"?
       
"Also with the smaller, cheaper models, you may find more contestants."
Larry

Small and cheap models (compared to more expensive and larger models) could result in more contestants.  That would be good.  But, smaller and cheaper models can be built now.  We do not seem to see large turnouts at any scale contest that I am familiar with  with any size scale model.

Larry, somewhere in what you wrote is a message, but I guess I am a little slow here, I do not understand what it is you are trying to say.

Keith Trostle

There is no rule that says you can't enter a very small model in scale contest.

However the rules favor BIIIIIIIGGG models and you will see that important contests are won by people who don't mind paying for the wood, paint, fuel, lobotizimed R/C systems, storage space, and transport vehicles to come armed with the BIGGGEST models allowed by the rules.

It would be nice if at least some of the classes were reserved for ecomony models, but at the moment, even PROFILE and "FUN" scale are wide open.

Even a 1/10 scale model of a WW II type airplane (42 inch span) won the Natinals Precision Scale event in 2000.

Wait till you see my new ship. da de DA DA!!!! I hope it is finished for the nats. Half a twin.

  Ya! I was talking about planes with an 18" wing span. Well, everyone seems happy that scale is going away and I guess that will be a good thing. I still live in the past and the future looks very bleak.
Larry

I think I now understand the matter that Larry was talking about.  And I even agree with the idea that Paul Smith just posted.

We have several categories of CL Scale.  I am not sure what happened at the end of the last rules change cycle but it appeared that the Scale Contest Board voted to eliminate the CL Precision Scale event.  However, it is still in the AMA rulebook.  Nevertheless, we still have the FAI Scale event that is flown, sometimes, at the Nats and it can be flown at any contest if the organizers choose to do so.  So, we have one or maybe two CL events for precision scale where all sorts of detail and flight options would be necessary to successfully compete with other similar models.  One of the problems with these events is that there is a mandatory point deduction if the model does not retract its landing gear an it is   a model of a full size aircraft with a retracting landing gear.  Also, there will be a point deduction if flaps and/or any other function on the full scale aircraft are not operated in flight because of the realism of flight factor in the scoring.  These rules have the unfortunate result that many people do not build the airlane they would like to build because of the "required" complexity of the model.  Because of these complexities, many potential CL Scale modelers just do not build for these events.

For the so-called Designer Scale event, the same rules essentially apply with the same result that few participate.

Then there is CL Sport Scale.  There is a similar situation here because of the realism of flight scoring category and the rules which state that the model of an airplane equipped with a retractable landing gear "should" retract its gear in flight.

Profile Scale exempts the retract rule, so a wide variety of models can be more readily selected by a builder to compete.  Profile Scale can be viewed as an entry level to encourage modelers to build and fly in a scale competition.  There are varying degrees of interest in this event in different parts of the country.  Some very nice models have appeared from time-to-time and the event certainly merits continued support.  But there is a problem with "Profile Scale" in that in itself, it represents an anachronism.  Some people may view these models as caricatures of an airplane with their "slab" fuselages and will shun the idea of ever building such a "scale" model.  (That is unfortunate, because these are fun ad can be easy to do based on my experience with these at the local and Nationals level.)

Even though Profile Scale can be viewed as being an "entry level" event for CL Scale, it may not appeal to very many potential CL Scale modelers.  So, is there a solution here that I think Larry is asking for?  I think that the ideas brought forward by Larry and Paul are worth considering.  Why not try establishing a simplified CL Scale event that restricts flight options to something like only throttle control and further limits the number of flight options that can be scored.  There should be no penalty for not having a throttle, but then one of the neat things about Scale would not be encouraged.  Building a throttle equipped model is not difficult and it is tremendously enjoyable to fly.  The models should be limited to a total dispalcement of say .25 cu in and some equivalent electric power.  Or the models should be limited to a maximum wing span, but I think it better to just limit the things by its engine/motor.

I am not suggesting an immediate formal rules change proposal.  Rather, local groups can set up their own events and see what works and what does not work.  Then, over time, if the interest justifies, start thinking about establishing a formal rules proposal for such an event.

Mike Keville has done something like this with his "1/2A Multi-Engine CL Proflie Scale" event.  (there is that "dreaded" Profile thing again.)  The first of these contests was held in Tucson last Fall and there is an indication that more will enter this year particularly with proxy flying allowed.  (Mike is the originator of the Vintage Stunt Championships and we have seen what that has turned into during the last 20 years.)

There is an example of how a "simplified" set of rules might encourage participation in an event.  Look at the "unofficial" .15 Profile Carrier event.  I know that, locally, there are getting to be as many .15 Profile Carrier entries in our local contest as with the "Official" events of Class I, Class II and AMA Profile Carrier.

Food for thought.

Keith Trostle

Chuck,
       I do think scale is dying. When the AMA designed the Muncie sight no consideration was giver for overflying the C/L sight with the R/C stuff. That is why scale has to be flown separate from all other events. Had the R/C sight been put on the south side of the flying area we could have had a true nats . The stunt guys are some of the best builders available and some would compete in C/L scale if it was held when stunt is held. Either at the beginning or end of stunt. I could name a few but the list would be very long.

The marriage of CL and RC Scale was a bad one, and one that needs to be annulled. 
Perhaps in the style of Henry (VIII) Tudor.

Free Flight Scale (vol libre) saw the downside of getting cozy with RC on the downstroke and  took a  hard (and effective) stand agianst joinin the "Scale catagory".

The flawed logic of pairing events by flight function rather than FF/CL/RC could just as easily be (mis)applied to aerobatics, racing, and combat.

I agree!! with Paul on most of his recommendations for a new event.

I would differ in only 2 areas:

1.  Limit the engine displacement to a smaller maximum.  A .25 engine can pull a big model and would bias the playing field toward the bigger engines. 

2.  Allow throttle control to be done either mechanically or with a single function electronic control.  A single channel electronic control is easer for the contestant to set up and operate than a three line system.  It also has the advantage of safety, if line tension is lost the throttle can still be controlled.

Clancy

With all due respect to the man who sells electronic controls, we already have plenty of market to them in Precision Scale. Sport Scale, Profile Scale, Fun Scale, and F4B.

The intent (at least my intent) is to provide a refuse from the buying of advantage with electric stuff in a fundamentally MECHANICAL sport.    Thus, I say: You can use a 2-line bellcrank or a 3-line bellcrank, and nothing else.

I'm perfectly willing to abandon the old events to lobotimized radios, but I sure wouldn't work to make a new one that's no different from the old.

I have read all of the above post. It looks like to me that I best hurry up and make it to a scale contest if I want to fly in one.

My thoughts on an entry level scale contest:  It probably isn't going to work. All the young kids are flying electric park flayers.  Besides scale by nature is an advanced modeling sport.  Most don't start building scale they evolve into it.  My first airplane was a Ringmaster. 50 years later I finally have the skill, time, and money to take a stab at scale.

Electronics:  I am an electrical engineer so I love electronics. The EXTRA 300S that I am building will have 7 servos in it and a control system of my own design. Not fair you say?  Well what I consider not fair is you guys that can work magic with an airbrush and have flown in many of a stunt competion.  My point is run what you brung and hope you brung enough.  But above all have fun.

High Cost:  For this I have no answer. I built my own electronics, the servos are used from an old RC airplane, the motor is a well used ST G90.  Still I will spend several $100 on this project.  But it is still cheaper per hour then drinking beer and much better for you.  As with any hobby it will cost something. Right now at the cost of gas it will cost more to go to 2 or 3 contest a year then the airplane will cost.

Size:  I must admit I picked a large kit to build. It is a 64" wingspan EXTRA 300S by Great Planes.  I picked this plane for 3 reasons. 1) I already had the ST 90. 2) It takes a certain amount of room to install 7 servos, custom electronics and a smoke system and 3) It doesn't have retracts.  On top of this you have dozens of paint jobs to pick from.

If the creak don't rise and this thing flies, hope to see some of you over the next year or so at the few scale contest left.

PS it would be better if the scale U-control was held at the same time as the U-control nationals.