Bob, Rick et al-
You guys are all correct. Having SO as an introduction has been an asset. Certainly in some geographic areas (in Ohio for instance) became "mini-hotbeds" due to efforts of many enthusiasts (John Kagen, the late Doc Hacker and others). We have had this discussion many times at AMA Ed committee meetings and I even drew up a list of observations but no specific solutions. Here's a couple of those having to do with middle school and high school age youth...
1) Youth involvement is directly proportional to "bragging rights" (ie: does my involvement raise my status with my peers, my girl/guy friend?)
2) Is this activity something that will get me into a good college, is there any money to earn?
3) How much time does my involvement consume? I have lot's of homework, band, sports, Science Olympiad, Choir, etc. etc.
Earning something of value is what gets the attention of either mom and dad or their son and daughter. "Money" would get the most attention but its hard to come by. So what other incentives are there?
Here are some ideas...
A) A national postal event with a running tally on the NFFS website. A simple design with an adult sign-off (non-related) to allow for posting official times. That organization can be evoloved security wise over time. This means that a student may show their buddies that he has been offically acknowledged-NATIONALLY- that's bragging rights! AWARD the top 10%.
B) Contact technically driven universities with such a program idea and sell them on offering scholarships. They don't need to be a lot in $'s but now a student gets bragging rights for earning "money".
C) Pick design parameters that are relatively simplistic to start. An SO airplane is still to complex. The commercial plastic prop should be strongly considered to ease the divisions of performance.
D) Marketing the ideas, that's the challenge. We can discuss this process ad-nauseum. I believe a promotion geared towards schools and especially guidance councilors, math, science and technology teachers is the link. Have them select a few students. Make the opportunity LIMITED in each school, that drives desire and competition.
The bottomline is that indoor is not for everybody but there are many who would flourish. Get the nerds and engineering types a tangible goal. Make sure that they at least get a certificate and a unique "letter" for participation for their letter jacket (many schools now allow lettering for academics as well).
Be realistic and do not expect students to continue flying their whole life especially just after they leave school. But stay in touch, if possible, let them get independent, families started, homes bought, etc, etc.
Regards,
Tom Sanders
SO National Supervisor
AMA Ed Comm member
--- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com, themaxout@... wrote:
>
> Bob (et al),
>
> I have also experienced that problem. But I ask one question...how did
> the local club do in nurturing themselves to those kids with a place to take
> their interest? That question isn't critical to anyone, but an objective
> one. I remember when I first found out that there was actually an
> organization that liked free flight and actually had meetings and get togethers and
> flying sessions and...well you get the picture.
>
> As having been part of that whole process, those participants need a place
> to go from being a high school S/O flyer to being an active flyer in the
> AMA or the NFFS. Those that did usually had a mentor or parent that guided
> them along. It's a big calling to take someone under their wing and make
> the effort to be a mentor, and without that effort to keep the flame
> burning, today's kids usually fall back into the video game thing. And, in these
> times if you approach a kid to offer a stepping stone you had better go
> thru the parents. We usually tell them go to this web site or whatever and
> tell them something, but how much follow up is there to them with a brochure,
> a club schedule, a designated person that follows up(?). Very little.
>
> I also find it a bit puzzling in recent posts that there is an attitude
> that "indoor is OK the way it is and does not need to change" pushing for more
> difficult event classes. But, the dichotomy is the success of the pro-am
> event. Why were the "ams" interested in that and not rejecting it because
> they wanted to build an F1D? Well, because it was within their reach.
>
> If one asks only of newcomers to build something that takes an inordinate
> amount of time to even get flying, it sort of defeats the purpose. The
> minor leagues in baseball gets those guys capable of stepping into the major
> leagues...they just can't step up to the plate as a normal rookie and start
> hitting home runs against a Roger Clemens...BTW...any relation?..and can he
> get me any tickets?
>
> True, there are some really great indoor flyers and I have had the
> privilege to fly with them, albeit my skills aren't up to theirs, but then again,
> I am not a dedicated 100% indoor flyer. I have many outdoor free flight
> events on the plate too. And like has been presented in the posts, it is
> truly fascinating to watch John Kagan, Bill Gowen and Brett Sanborn fly, but I
> don't want the only event I can enter to be F1D either. I like the CLG,
> Penny and F1L events...I can achieve them and still have fun. Indoor needs
> those "dumbed down" events to get the numbers out and maybe then one can
> aspire to the full tilt EZB or F1D. And, I admit...at my age I need a mentor
> too.
>
> JMHO...
>
> Rick Pangell
> Editor of "The Max-Out" Newsletter of
> The Magnificent Mountain Men FF Club of Colorado
>
>
> In a message dated 10/10/2010 11:33:39 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time,
> rclemens2_at_... writes:
>
>
>
> Chris told us, "Long story short, exposure (to indoor flying) is the key."
>
> I agree, but the actual results of exposure to indoor modeling are dismal,
> at least where youngsters are concerned. How many years have we exposed
> junior and senior high kids to indoor flying via the Science Olympiad Right
> Stuff event plus balloon-launched glider and soon the new helicopter event?
> Tens of thousands of students have flown nationwide in SO competition over
> the years. Many, girls as well as boys, built and flew their models very
> well indeed. As a mentor and event director I've seen amazing strides made in
> SO flying events. I doubt any other program have or ever will come close
> to the exposure level SO has given our hobby. I've also given dozens of
> indoor flight demonstrations for schools and Scout groups. Everyone in the many
> audiences is always amazed and impressed. But how many of these kids have
> begun or continued in full-fledged indoor flying/competition? A literal
> handful. Yes, a small group of SO graduates have most certainly done very well
> for themselves. But what of the other thousands? They are gone, probably
> never to come back. That's a pretty poor return, from our standpoint, for
> the effort many of us have expended in the SO movement. These days I'm
> flying and competing mostly outdoors. I see the same problem there, at the same
> time realizing exposure of outdoor flying to potential newcomers, young or
> old, is much more unlikely.
>
> I believe the simply fact is that model airplanes (as well as full scale
> aircraft and aviation in general) of whatever type simply don't hold
> anywhere near the lure for today's kids as they did- and still do for us . I doubt
> that this lure can ever be recreated on any meaningful scale. We will get
> a few kids plus some adult newcomers and returnees, but the glory days of
> our hobby, indoors or out, are gone. We are a slowly dying breed, like it or
> not. I plan to enjoy it as long as I can. Thankfully it will certainly
> outlive me.
>
>
> Bob Clemens
>
> Fine Photographic Prints
> _http://BalsaBob.imagekind.com/_ (http://balsabob.imagekind.com/)
>
Received on Tue Oct 12 2010 - 07:30:36 CEST