--- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com> , "olbill61" <wdgowen_at_...>
wrote:
> The people who have successfully conquered the MS problem wouldn't
have to change anything>>
The expert may not have to rebuild at first, but will of course
eventually decide to go even lighter using bracing. Then it's back to
the status quo of newcomers trying to match the weights of what the more
experienced can do, but can't match the strength.
<<and would probably still win but the beginning flyers would have a
much better chance of building a flyable model to the minimum weight.>>
Sure, in the case of ezbs they are "asking for i,t" that is, if a
heavyish but flyable model is not acceptable to them, due to
perceptions. But are there many LPPs not flyable? Many A6s not
flyable? Newcomers want to have the perception that their models are
potentially competitive, even if their skills are lacking. To be merely
flyable is usually not good enough, almost right after one's first
flyable duration model.
>> I've seen a few beginning indoor flyers who have spent a lot of time
building a model but just get really demoralized when they couldn't make
it fly.>>
Being the one apparent "beginner" among many experienced flyers at a
contest may be more demoralizing. But if tweaking an event or two will
solve this, then who would object--simply show its success on local
level, and that should ascend to national level tweak.
<<Having this type of experience is not good for keeping people
interested.>>
Depends on what interests people in the first place. Is it to have a
flyable model? A "fun" model? Or a competitive model with skills to
match? Surely, if the perception is that a .24g ezb will become de
rigeur, that may turn off participants for the event, but not
necessarily bad for a newcomer who should try LPP anyhow. JMO.
MB
Received on Fri Sep 07 2012 - 10:39:31 CEST