Re: The Problems with Indoor FF

From: John Kagan <john_kagan_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 15:06:41 -0000

Don,

While I know your heart is in the right place, I believe your thinking is off-target on some core points. You aren't going to get support, at least from me, until they are a closer match to the reality that I see. But hey, that's what forums are for: let's debate what you've said and see if we can come to some agreement.

>> `The indoor FF community needs to get on board with the larger community of Free Flighters/NFFS. There is strength in numbers, with AMA, FAI, the magazines, the public, the mass media etc. Indoor FF—the smallest of all of the tiny factions of aeromodeling--is on the thinnest of ice. Would you not agree?'

I'm big and you are puny, so you should get on board with me. Not a great way to earn support. Especially since, in the big picture, "you" are pretty small too. That's a lot like Pee Wee Herman believing he deserves to be Mini-Me's boxing coach because he's bigger. Pee Wee's still a shrimp.

In 2008 there were 54 Indoor FF Nats registrants and 218 Outdoor Nats registrants. In 2007 there were 92 and 263. More outdoor guys, sure. But not orders of magnitude.

And, while we are on Nats numbers, let's take a peek at your claim that Indoor FF is "the smallest of all of the tiny factions of aeromodeling". 2008 Nats Registration: Control Line Scale: 20, RC Combat: 35, RC Electric: 24, RC Helicopter: 27, RC Scale: 38.

How about we use this message instead: We are all in the same boat. We need to do the same kinds of things to boost participation. Let's work together.

See how much nicer that sounds?

>>`--How many people on the planet are capable of building a competitive (sub-0.5 gram) Easy B?...'

>>`--the prohibition on high tech materials in many of the indoor events has now backfired…'

>>`--Many Indoor FF models are generally too challenging for the average non asylum-dweller to construct'

>>`--virtually every indoor event has been loopholed to death and taken over by expert flyers. The only remaining rays of light are A-6 and LPP, and perhaps F1L. Two of those three are not AMA events.'

Actually, two of those three *are* AMA events – but that's nitpicking.

Your common theme is that we have to change the activity to make it more appealing, and I couldn't disagree more. Indoor FF has inherent appeal. In 16 years I haven't met a person yet who wasn't awestruck.

There are plenty of events to get a newcomer hooked, and the harder events are waiting when they are ready. Worrying about the minimum weight of EZB is barking up the wrong tree, as least as far as this topic is concerned. Especially since F1L is a 1.2 gm EZB.

What we *do* need to do is work on exposure and flying sites.

Everyone loves Indoor FF. A small fraction has the whatever-it-takes to actually pursue it. The more people you expose, the larger number that "small fraction" generates - a la Science Olympiad. A simple concept, but one that helps us focus in the right direction.

Also, it's no fun if there is nowhere to fly. Another simple concept, but good for orientation of effort.

BTW – as an outsider, the concept of driving a motorcycle around in circles under an F1A ship and flapping is freaky. Do you feel you guys need to cut that cr*p out to attract new participants?

>>`"Don't touch!" "Slow down!" "Control your kids!" The average person off the street visiting an indoor FF meet must feel like a visitor in an asylum. Weird-looking, high-strung people telling me where to stand and how fast to walk. I'm outta here! Indoor FF will never survive unless its leaders work quickly to turn this absurdly introverted culture around.'

My first reaction is to your claim "Indoor FF will never survive unless…".

I read an article that lamented the rubber situation, declining participation, lack of flying sites – and predicted the complete demise of Indoor FF within a few years. The interesting part was that the article was in a 30 year old issue of INAV!! (I just searched through my stack of junk in the basement to try to find it, but I'm way too messy, unfortunately).

My prediction is, and you can mark my words: Indoor FF will never die. Even if every living Indoorist stops flying, someone will come across an indoor plan or article and revive it – the way we started rebuilding civilization after discovering the old library in Planet of the Apes. We can influence how many people are participating at any one time, and more people is more fun, but I don't think we need to change the core nature of Indoor FF.

My second reaction is, Yeah…we need to plan ways to communicate with visitors that fulfills their curiosity – without negatively impacting what we like to do.

It's a fact: Indoor FF spectators don't recognize when we are engaged in a high-concentration, stress-filled part of our activity. They ask questions while we are winding, and no amount of counting turns out loud or making looks of intense concentration will prevent them from repeating there question louder and more in our face as though we didn't hear them the first time. It is entirely appropriate to say, "…87, 88, 89, *90*", then stop and tell them that you would love to talk, but just after you get this motor wound without breaking it and your flight launched.

We also need to continue exposing ourselves (well, exposing our activity anyway). I've tried to do my small part by writing stuff, but we need lots more. People love Indoor FF when they see it. They just need to see it more.

We also also need to continue obtaining flying sites. The site is the chicken to the participation egg, but that's the part we have direct control over.

And all that is a looong way of saying: Don, ease up on the mischaracterization of Indoor FF and let's work together for the common good of all FF.
Received on Tue Jun 02 2009 - 08:07:30 CEST