Bill Carney
There is nothing in the P-18 rules proposal about this 2 minute max idea.
There is also nothing in the rules proposal about a flier being able to
score a P-18 flight as an LPP flight. Although a model built to the P-18
rules will meet the rules for LPP, allowing a flight in one event to be
scored in a different event *after the flight has been made* is not
something that is allowed at any AMA contest.
For instance if I want to fly a standard class glider in the unlimited
event I have to declare this intent *before* the flight is made.
How do you propose that these ideas will become part of the P-18 rules?
On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 7:00 PM, William Carney wcarneyjx_at_gmail.com
[Indoor_Construction] <Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>
> Gary,
>
> Sure, I'll fly P-18. I even designed a model that meets the provisional
> rules. It'll do two minutes most of the time, but not always. In the hands
> of beginners I don't see the whole field maxing out. Sure, I'll max out and
> put it away and tell any kid who ties me they get free bag of stripped
> rubber in the size of their choice or a kit or whatever.
>
> I can tell this tie thing really has you worked up. I'm sure I can explain
> what I am suggesting better. There don't have to be any ties. If a flyer
> wants to get credit for flights over two minutes they can, in LPP. If a tie
> is so abhorrent to anyone they can place last in LPP instead of tieing for
> first in P-18. If they want to do better in LPP then they build real LPP
> and the hook is truly set by then.
>
> Bill C
> On Jun 17, 2016 4:19 PM, "Warthodson_at_aol.com [Indoor_Construction]" <
> Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> That does not solve anything. It is still a pointless event. I have been
>> trying to think of an other event where the best you can do is tie. So far
>> I can't think of one. Monopoly, Ping-Pong, foot race, crocket, SO, spelling
>> bee, dodge ball.
>> Bill, will you be flying P-18?
>> Gary Hodson
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: William Carney wcarneyjx_at_gmail.com [Indoor_Construction] <
>> Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com>
>> To: Indoor_Construction <Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Fri, Jun 17, 2016 3:44 pm
>> Subject: Re: [Indoor_Construction] Re: P-18 vs. AMA WS
>>
>>
>> Gary,
>>
>> I probably never fully explained my proposal. I was too busy having to
>> explain what a beginner gets out of a beginner event. My proposal includes
>> a provision that if the flyer gets a flight of more then two minutes they
>> can score that flight in LPP. What this does is provide a framework for
>> them to get to be able to do two minutes with a P-18. Once they can do that
>> consistently buy are getting beat in LPP they'll have motivation to build a
>> LPP.
>>
>> Bill C
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 5:32 PM, Warthodson_at_aol.com
>> [Indoor_Construction] <Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I have been reading all the messages on the P-18 vs. SO subject & I
>>> have only one strong opinion: A 2 minute MAX creates a pointless event & I
>>> think even a beginner would agree.
>>> Gary Hodson
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Sun Jun 19 2016 - 04:24:40 CEST
This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:48 CET