An obvious (to me) first step would be to poll indoor flyers on the subject.
Don DeLoach
Editor, NFFS Free Flight Digest
_____
From: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
[mailto:Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jake Palmer
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:20 PM
To: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Indoor_Construction] Re: BOM vs BAM
Mark,
I'm not aware of any indoor kits that include anything more than pre-cut
pieces and hardware. I think if any of the items I mentioned previously
were in a "kit", it would fall well outside the AMA definition of "average
kit".
Jake
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Mark F1diddler <f1diddler_at_yahoo.com>
wrote:
--- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Indoor_Construction%40yahoogroups.com> , "jakep_82" <82.jake_at_...>
wrote:
>If we allow purchased hubs, which are arguably the most complicated part of
a model, we are effectively gutting BOM. Why not then allow other purchased
sub-assemblies like motor tubes and tail booms, or wings and stabs?>>
Jake,
At the moment, all the above items would be allowed by AMA BOM rule, if, IF
those items existed within "the average kit." Oh, but also provided you
spend more than a "few minutes of unskilled effort" toward final assembly.
So maybe a few minutes of very skilled effort would be perfectly legal, or
perhaps many minutes of very, very, very unskilled effort would also be
legal. (sarc., but serious.)
Or does "average kit" merely mean average price? Because the first kit
vendor who put a pre-framed P30 wing in a kit was not "average" at that
point. Indoor needs to become different from all the above, obviously.
MB
Received on Thu Oct 25 2012 - 16:27:07 CEST
This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:47 CET