--- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com, "jeffrey.hood"
<jhood_at_...> wrote:
>
> I'm going to jump in here, since I jumped in on the discussion of A-
6
> rules years ago... I have always found that in coming to a
consensus
> to an issue, all parties have to at least agree on the primary
> objective...
Ya, depending on what you mean by "all parties." I had hoped that
in the last rules "clarification" attempt that getting the prominent
A-6 flyers to agree in committee would be sufficient, but it wasn't.
No one bothers to put our "National A-6" rules in the hands of club
CDs nor USIC CD. So whatever change you guys agree on, I suggest you
campaign agressively to put the any new rule in the hand of every
known A-6 flyer, and every club's Contest Director.
Personally, I think Marty's idea of a 2 gram model would solve
several considerations. The 1.2 gram minimum limit did not exist in
original Clarence Mather A-6 rules, so the precedent exists for a
minimum weight rule other than original. The earliest A-6s were only
a 2-3 minute models, so a 2 gram model would not have worse
performance than that.
No matter how much WE know film is better, we cannot ignore
the "perception" issue that Gary H mentions. THe perception still
exists that tissue is so accessible for beginners. Accessible also
includes not needing to mail away to indoor specialty suppliers. I
can't think of an indoor class that gets more queries from beginners
who learn about A-6 and suppose "I can do that." Not necessarily
here on Indoor_Const., but the interest seems just scattered around.
A 2 gram tissue covered model keeps it a conceivably 100% hobby shop
supplied "beginners" model, which seems its original appeal.
But good luck on making any change stick nationwide.
Mark F1diddler
Received on Sat Nov 22 2008 - 12:59:15 CET
This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:45 CET