Re: Re: Bostonians and No-Cals

From: Chris and Josette Borland <candjborland_at_surewest.net>
Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2012 12:25:34 -0700

A lot of interesting things being brought up. But let's face it.
There will ALWAYS be better builders and flyers and they will tend to
win most of the time and rightly so because of their efforts,
regardless of whatever rules are in effect at the time. This applies
to both indoor and outdoor. Most of us can only work on trying to
close the gap for personal satisfaction and when this is successful
one feels great for a long time while trying to lessen the gap some
more.

The biggest problem with rules is that they need to be universal and
not different locally. Really major problems seem to be cleared up
quickly, at least most of the time.

I think (like) minimum weights in some classes such as A-6. And look
what happened to EZB when it changed to 1.2 grams and was then called
F1L, rapidly becoming one of the most popular classes ever. Meanwhile
the "die-hards" are able to flirt with sub .4 gram models and
continue to impress the rest of us.

My two-bits worth - Chris Borland - Sacramento

On Jun 9, 2012, at 9:53 AM, Don Slusarczyk wrote:

>
>> Maybe the event should simply be dropped from indoor competition.
>
> So if you can't compete with the rest then delete the event?
> Interesting thinking. I have seen indoor golden age models do 4+
> minutes at the Buffalo Bills field house by a well know Canadian
> FAC modeler in a flyoff, so should that event be banned from indoor
> as well? How about indoor dime scale models that fly 3+ minutes. Do
> you propose min weights on indoor peanut scale, dimes scale etc?
> How about banning 3+ minute indoor Phantom Flashes? So if you want
> to ban the event why not just ban all FAC events for indoor and add
> more time for indoor duration events.
>
> I understand the FAC rules are really meant for outdoor models but
> it is naive to think that if the same event is flown indoors that
> special models would not be made and special building techniques
> will not be adapted by the people who will be flying the event, and
> those people ARE indoor duration modelers. The reality is that the
> people who fly indoor Nocal are those who are already going to the
> indoor contest and are looking for another event to fly.
>
> Indoor duration models are different from outdoor duration models
> so an indoor Nocal is built different from an outdoor nocal just
> like F1D is built different from F1B. What I see at many indoor
> meets is that those flying the FAC events bring their outdoor
> models inside, and that is their choice. So if that is all the
> effort they wish to put into the event then so be it. But then
> they risk loosing to a model built specifically for indoor flying.
> How many people can build a 5 gram peanut scale Spitfire or
> Mustang? Jack McGillvray could do just about 3 minutes indoor with
> that model in WWII combat and won just about every time I saw him
> fly it. Why did no one say Jack was ruining the event? Jack had the
> first Cessnal Cardinal Nocal and cleaned out clocks at a meet in
> Detroit with 7+ minute flights in Nocal? Why was it OK for Jack to
> do all this stuff? I was under the impression Jack was highly
> regarded in the FAC, seems to be a double standard here.
>
>
>> As for grossly fudging outlines, that’s a disgrace. I saw a Lacy
>> No-Cal built by a well-known indoor flier, now deceased, allowed
>> to fly at West Baden years ago sporting a motor stick that
>> protruded three or four inches beyond the model’s nose! Ridiculous!
>>
> This issue was addressed and is not allowed in the current Nocal
> rules.
>
> Don S.
>
>
Received on Sat Jun 09 2012 - 12:25:27 CEST