Re: Re: New hub prototype
The topic of purchased parts seems to be fraught with opinions based on an
incomplete understanding of the relevant facts. Leo's argument isn't guilty
of "generalizing from the specific." Leo is correct in stating that parts
are currently being purchased or given, and then being used in
competitions. Naming individuals involved only serves obfuscate the larger
issue at hand. His argument is based on F1D, the highest level of our
hobby. If a new person can master this class in 4 years time, then it is
perhaps too easy. A Formula 1 driver would be hard pressed to qualify for a
FIA Super License with only 4 years of driving experience, let alone win a
Formula 1 Championship. F1D is supposed to be the Formula 1 of indoor
flying.
There have been several attempts in the US to provide potential flyers with
planes and competitions to fly them in. To my knowledge, none of the flyers
in those programs have continued flying past the one year mark.
I am all for creating competitions for models made with purchased
components to boost participation. I don't think that F1D is the place to
do it though. Catering to participants at the world championship level that
do not have "mechanical skills- or desire- or time" will not ultimately
increase participation at the world champions because these participants
don't have the time or desire to take a week off and travel to the world
championships even if the planes waiting for them there when they arrive.
Increasing participation at the world championship level has more to due
with deceasing the other barriers to entry: deceasing the cost of
attendance through sponsorship, decreasing the cost of the models by
barring purchased parts, and locating the world championships in desirable
locations where contestants are comfortable bringing their families. The
latter is especially important for juniors because their parents have to
consent to them attending the world championships.
Increasing participation broadly can be accomplished best through local
clubs. New modelers are not going to spend the thousands of dollars
required to attend a world champions. However, they might spend a
Saturday afternoon at a local event, and that is where purchased components
should be allowed, if so desired by new flyers. As the participants
progress, the restrictions, and perhaps the cost in the form of required
tools and materials, should increase. This process is somewhat analogous to
the psychology behind American fraternity and sorority recruitment. These
organizations throw a party and make participation appear fun and
rewarding. They then increase the work required to stay, so that leaving
means either the work one has done so far wasn't hard or they have wasted
their efforts thus far. That's the psychological recipe for life long
membership retention. Removing the final hurdle(s) to mastery of our hobby
will only ultimately serve to shorten the length of time participants stay
engaged. The majority of current indoor flyers were around for the 65cm F1D
rules, back when it was really hard, the 55cm rules have produced
proportionally fewer lifers, and I suspect that 55cm 1.4g will produce
fewer yet still. I fear what will happen if we make it even easier. Rather
than changing the rules, lets focus on flying regularly, so that
more people are exposed to our hobby, while simultaneously nurturing those
who show interest. That way there will still be a goal for them to
reach toward after several years of participation.
Respectfully,
Nick Ray
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 10:10 AM, 'Bob Clemens' rclemens2_at_rochester.rr.com
[Indoor_Construction] <Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>
> LeoP tells us:
>
> “Some say it is too hard and takes too long to master the sport. I say
> that such arguments are incorrect. The current Open World Champion flew his
> first AMA events (F1L and LPP) almost exactly four years before winning the
> WC last April. The current Junior WC flew built and flew his first plane
> (Science Olympiad) only just more than two years before winning the WC.
> Both are skilled and hard working competitors but what both did in such
> short relative times belay any argument that the sport is too hard and
> takes too long to master.”
>
> I haven’t flown indoor duration events for many years, but I can recognize
> a basic fault in reasoning when I see it, namely the all-too familiar
> pitfall of generalizing from the specific. In this case it’s examples of
> two individuals’ rapid success being extrapolated into a specious premise
> that therefore everyone else flying competition indoor should be able to do
> the same. In the real indoor world of varying skill levels of model
> construction and flying, it simply doesn’t work like that. Being a
> successful indoor flier doesn’t necessarily give you the mechanical skills-
> or desire- or time- to build intricate propeller hubs. Each of us modelers
> has his or her limits, our strengths and weaknesses. These can vary widely.
>
> Having witnessed the indoor scene, both as competitor and photographer
> over the past 69 years that have passed since since my first astounding
> viewing of indoor flying at the Wichita Nationals in 1946, I believe we may
> well be witnessing the gradually increasing twilight of classic indoor
> flying. Anything within reason that can be done to prolong that twilight,
> perhaps bring back the daylight, should be welcomed and encouraged. That
> should certainly include the opportunity to legally purchase and use
> pre-built prop hubs.
>
> Bob Clemens
> Rochester, NY
>
>
>
Received on Fri Jan 09 2015 - 08:31:21 CET
This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:48 CET