Thank you.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 6, 2016, at 10:22 AM, Jake Palmer 82.jake_at_gmail.com [Indoor_Construction] <Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
> Limited Pennyplane. Rules for LPP and all other AMA events can be found at the address below. It's considered an entry level indoor event.
>
> https://www.modelaircraft.org/files/2015-2016IndoorFreeFlight.pdf
>
>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Stephen Riley sriley1202_at_yahoo.com [Indoor_Construction] <Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>>
>> Newbie here-
>>
>> Please share the meaning of the acronym LPP.
>>
>> Thanks.
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> On Monday, June 6, 2016 12:07 PM, "Chris pseshooter3d_at_yahoo.com [Indoor_Construction]" <Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> I can see how P18 would attract new fliers. But then what? Are they going to fly P18 forever? If the idea of competition in the other indoor events is a barrier to entry for a lot of people, I would think that P18 only delays the inevitable.
>>
>> I would also like to know what bag of tricks you are referring to that "ruins" other events. A mechanized VP prop would be the one thing that might give first time builders trouble. But for a weight restricted event like LPP or F1L, I just don't see anything out there that is too difficult. I think quite the opposite is happening actually. The modern LPP being built of carbon fiber is easier to build due to the fact that expensive balsa does not need to be graded and tested for stiffness. The carbon hub LPP prop that is being more widely used is also not difficult to construct. If one simply does some research, they will find that this indoor thing while difficult to master, is not difficult to get started in. One just has to be willing to accept the techniques of the experts and learn them.
>>
>> Again, I get how P18 could get fliers into the indoor scene, but how do we keep them if they fear competition?
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Jun 6, 2016, at 2:47 PM, William Carney wcarneyjx_at_gmail.com [Indoor_Construction] <Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> The purpose is to attract new indoor flyers. The purpose of the Max Out suggestion is to keep it approachable to beginners. I'm not trying to discourage anybody from flying the event, just to keep them from ruining it. All of the experts' bag of tricks are useless and actually detrimental in the event. I don't want to see these things flying for 5 minutes.
>>>
>>> Bill C
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:40 PM, William Carney <wcarneyjx_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Good point Bill. We don't want this event to attract experienced flyers. We want it to attract raw beginners. There does need to be a balance though. For an event to be considered successful it must have participants. I think a club who has a high number of experts who can Max Out in P-18 might be a club who is having a lot of fun without ruining the appeal of the event to beginners.
>>>
>>> Experts can fly this event all they want, but they are not going to 'sour the milk' if all they can do is three maxes. Any real expert or progressing new indoor flyer is going to see quickly that a real LPP will be far superior to a P-18 and will want to build one to compete as such.
>>>
>>> Some will take many seasons to get there P-18 to do 2 minutes consistently, during which time they are exposed to the sights and atmosphere of indoor flying.
>>>
>>> Bill C
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 7:17 PM, William Gowen wdgowen_at_gmail.com [Indoor_Construction] <Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Maybe you can just make a list of all the people who you consider too advanced to fly the event and attach that to the rules.
>>> Or maybe you can come up with a rule that anyone who has ever flown a legal AMA indoor duration model in their lifetime is barred from the event
>>> I really don't see that this event has any attraction for advanced fliers. I've already said that I won't fly it. And that doesn't mean that I'm opposed to the event.
>>> On Jun 5, 2016 8:51 PM, "William Carney wcarneyjx_at_gmail.com [Indoor_Construction]" <Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ray,
>>>
>>> I propose that this event be flown as a two minute max event. No fly offs, no tie breakers. If an contestant wants to get full credit for his/her efforts they may but the times are scored as an official in LPP.
>>>
>>> The purpose of this proposal is the remove the incentive of "Experts" from flooding the event and making it unappealing to a true beginner. If you can get one of these things to fly for two minutes three times in one day you are probably ready to tackle a true LPP and then... By the time a beginner has gotten enough experience to "Max Out" a P-18 he or she has set the Indoor FF hook pretty deep.
>>>
>>> The rules, as written, produce an airplane that make two minutes a nominal goal. I kike seeing these models fly as they are very "indoor like" and I've seen their appeal to the public. I just don't want to see these things doing 5 minutes. Sure irt can probably be done but that is not the point of the event.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> Bill C
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 3:54 PM, rbharlan_at_comcast.net [Indoor_Construction] <Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> The cross proposal window is May 31 to July 15, so now is the time to submit any cross proposals.
>>> I expect to submit one to change the prop size max to 6", instead of 5.5". There are a lot more 6" props out there than 5.5's, namely at Volare who has six kinds of 6" props.
>>>
>>> I haven't checked for a specific cross proposal form at AMA, and, of course, if I check now, Yahoo will blow away all of this discourse and I don't want to type it again
>>>
>>> What other ideas do you have for the event, Bill?.
>>>
>>> Ray
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Mon Jun 06 2016 - 16:39:13 CEST
This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:48 CET