Re: Bostonians and No-Cals

From: dennisatyson <ddtyson_at_peoplepc.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 01:29:48 -0000

I always assume emotion when it comes to DS ;),


--- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com, Don Slusarczyk <don@...> wrote:

> Bob,
>
> > I don’t particularly appreciate your jumping to such an absurd
> > conclusion. I mentioned dropping the event partly with tongue in cheek
> > and also because it does appear that the popularity of indoor No-Cal
> > is possibly waning. But I have no problem if you and the (about) ten
> > other guys who can (or want to) build very light models want to keep
> > on battling it out indoors.
>
> Guess I did not understand you correctly when you said:
> "Maybe the event should simply be dropped from indoor competition. "
>
> I took that to mean that you feel Nocal should be dropped from indoor
> competition. Seems like a rational conclusion from the statement you
> posted. I have no clue if your being serious or not in your suggestion.
> Perhaps an emoticon would have helped out.
>
> > Whoa! Can we slow down a bit here? That’s a lot of “bans,” a word I’ve
> > never considered using regarding model airplane events, including the
> > ones you mentioned. In any case,“ban” (your choice of words, not mine)
> > is a bit severe, don’t you think?
>
> Dropped or banned what is the difference really if you can't fly the
> event, dropping it from indoor is essentially banning it form being
> flown but that is semantics . Anyhow, it was just an extension of the
> argument I was laying out based on my interpretation of your original
> post in regards to dropping Nocal. The point I was getting at was if
> Nocals fly too long and needs to be dropped as an indoor event , then
> what about other indoor FAC events that fly too long as well when flown
> indoors? Should they be dropped as well? Most can't get 2 minutes
> indoors with a Golden Age scale model but when some guys get 4+ minutes
> in that event that is OK, that is twice the flight time. But if an
> "indoor" guy does 7minutes with a Nocal that event is "ruined" as
> others can only do 5 minutes. So it is OK to fly twice as long in other
> events except Nocal. Where does it end is what I was getting at but
> since you were tongue and cheek in your initial comment then my point is
> moot now.
>
> > It was interesting to see you invoke the name of the late, great Jack
> > McGillivray. What does he have to do with a discussion of suggested
> > changes in the No-Cal rules? And what “double standard” are you
> > talking about?
> >
>
> The reason I mention Jack is he is the person I knew the longest in
> regards to FAC events, met him when I was about 12 years old, and he was
> the biggest influence on me personally in regards to indoor scale flying
> as he was able to make indoor scale models light, fly long and get lots
> of scale points and that appealed to me. The double standard I am
> referring to when certain FAC guys like Jack for example (as I knew him
> the best) would make a 1.5 gram Cessna Cardinal Nocal, or 5 gram peanut
> scale models, or use gear boxes to get longer flight times, and that was
> all OK and in the spirit of FAC when he did it. But when the rest of the
> indoor duration guys pickup on what was being done, then they were
> somehow ruining the events with their competitive drive, etc. Jack was
> very innovating in adapting FAC events to indoor techniques as well as
> Ken Groves (laminating tissue layers together to get rid of bulkheads
> and stringer etc, talk about skills needed to make molds etc). Jack is
> the one who told me how to fudge the wings on nocals so I find it funny
> when I now mention the fudging of nocal parts people are appalled by it
> but it has been going on for 20+ years and by big time FAC modelers.
> Gorden Roberts had a plan for a Spirfitre Nocal that had a triangular
> hollow motor stock. That was OK he was a FAC great, but an indoor guys
> rolls a hollow tube for a motorstick and they ruin the event with
> special indoor skills. That is what I was getting at. Don't know else
> how to explain it.
>
> Don S.
>
Received on Sun Jun 10 2012 - 18:29:49 CEST