Hello District IX Indoor Free Flighters,
It's rule change season again! There are four proposals I'm required to
vote on this cycle: Three General AMA Rules proposals and one Indoor FF
proposal. I've attached the proposal summaries below. Please read
through them carefully and let me know how you'd like me to vote and
most of all, why. My ballot is due to AMA HQ by 5/1/18.
Thanks
Don DeLoach
IFFCB District IX
P.S. Club leaders: Please forward to any and all AMA member FFers who
reside in Wyoming, Nebraska, North Dakota, Kansas, Colorado or South Dakota.
19-01 (Proposer: Jerry Murphy)
General Section
SUMMARY:
AMA General rules page 21 Records Section 3 states:
When the specifications of a model, the method of timing, and the
conditions of flight comply with the rules of more than one class or
category, such model with a single flight (or single series of flights)
may establish national records in more than one class or category if the
performance exceeds the existing records. Responsibility for applying
for national records rests with the flier and Contest Director
EXACT PROPOSED WORDING:
Page 21 Section 3 Multiple Records
National records can be established for only a single class or category
declared in advance before any flights are recorded.
LOGIC BEHIND PROPOSED CHANGE. STATE INTENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE:
The present rule implies that a competitor could apply the performance
recorded in one class or category to additional classes or categories as
well even though the competitor logged no performance in the other class
or category. An example could be a contestant flying E-36 records a
total score greater than the winner of AMA A Electric. The contestant
then tells the contest director to apply his E-36 times to the A
Electric even though no flights were flown in that class and be declared
the winner, and a possible National Record as well. This same situation
could arise in AMA gas and AMA Classic classes or catagories.
EFFECT IF ANY ON CURRENT AMA RECORDS:
No effect on current records. Any current records currently on the books
should remain as it will be difficult to determine which of any records
were set this way.
GEN 19-02 (Proposer: Don Slusarscyk)
General Section
SUMMARY:
To allow each individual Contest Board the ability to decide if they
will continue or discontinue the practice of setting multiple records
with one flight. This proposal adds paragraph 3.2 to the General Rules
"Records" section (page 22). Paragraph 3.1 is the current wording and is
unchanged.
EXACT PROPOSED WORDING:
3. Multiple Records
3.1. When the specifications of a model, the method of timing, and the
conditions of flight comply with the rules of more than one class or
category, such model with a single flight (or single series of flights)
may establish national records in more than one class or category if the
performance exceeds the existing records. Responsibility for applying
for national records rests with the flier and Contest Director.
3.2. Individual Contest Boards with record setting classes, by default,
will permit the setting of multiple records as specified in 3.1.
Individual Contest Boards may restrict or prohibit the setting
of multiple records for specific classes or categories by means of the
Competition Regulations for those classes.
LOGIC BEHIND PROPOSED CHANGE. STATE INTENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE:
For at least 49 years (based on available published AMA rule books) the
AMA has allowed a model that fits multiple classes to set multiple
national records with one flight. This was most importantly true when I
was a Junior setting my first indoor National records as I was able to
set multiple records with one flight with a model that fit the rules of
two classes. Presently there are still standing Indoor FF national
records that were set in this way and some Indoor FF classes were
intentionally created to allow this overlap to occur.
Because of a recent General Rules proposal that wants prohibit this long
standing practice, it has become evident that various modeling
disciplines may intentionally or unintentionally become affected by such
a General Rules changes. Due to the way voting is done on a General
Rules changes, it is possible that a rule change may pass even though
one specific contest board votes unanimously against the proposal. This
essentially allows other Contest Boards to alter the rules of a board
they are not a member of.
This rules proposal allows each affected Contest Board to decide on
their own if they wish to continue or discontinue the multiple records
practice based on the needs of their specific sport. This proposal by
default will keep the rules exactly the same as they have been for 49+
years. So for those Contest Boards that are content with the multi
records practice, nothing else further needs to be done after adopting
this proposal. For those Contest Boards that would prefer to restrict or
discontinue the multi records practice, this proposal adds a pathway for
those Contest Boards to make those changes by means of their Competition
Regulations.
EFFECT IF ANY ON CURRENT AMA RECORDS:
No effect on current records
GEN19-03 (Proposed by: Don DeLoach)
General Section
SUMMARY:
Change requirement in General Rules that AMA Record Trials require only
one timekeeper for record attempts.
EXACT PROPOSED WORDING:
Change on page 21 of General Rules from "The CD must satisfy himself
that every applicable AMA regulation has been complied with. Where a
record is established at a record trial and involves a timed flight, the
record time must be the average of times recorded by two (2) timers
holding valid AMA licenses. The record applicant and the CD may not
serve as timers."
to
"The CD must satisfy himself that every applicable AMA regulation has
been complied with. Where a record is established at a record trial and
involves a timed flight, the record time must be recorded by any single
timekeeper who holds an AMA license. The record applicant and the CD may
not serve as timers."
LOGIC BEHIND PROPOSED CHANGE. STATE INTENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE:
Currently National Records may be set at any sanctioned A through AAAA
contest with a single timekeeper, but Record Trials require two
timekeepers. This is illogical and inconsistent.
EFFECT IF ANY ON CURRENT AMA RECORDS:
none
IFF19-03 (Proposed by: Don DeLoach)
SUMMARY:
Removes 'Builder of Model' requirement for event 227 (P-18). State exact
wording proposed for the Competition Regulations. List paragraph number
where applicable. Example: Change "quote present rule book wording" to
"exact wording required". 25. P-18 Provisional (for event 227) 25.7 The
'Builder of the Model' rule (AMA General Rules, section 10 part 6) shall
not apply to P-18.
LOGIC BEHIND PROPOSED CHANGE. STATE INTENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE:
The time is right for the AMA Indoor Contest Board to thoughtfully
consider the Builder of the Model. The simple fact is that a significant
number of Free Flighters would much rather fly than build. Amid an ever
changing (and in many cases growing) world of varied model aircraft
flying, I'm afraid Indoor FF will just continue to shrink unless we try
some new ideas. In short, we could very well be missing out on
opportunities to grow Indoor.
My proposal would only eliminate BoM for P-18. This seems like a
low-risk event in which to gauge interest in non-BoM indoor flying. No
records would be affected since P-18 is Provisional. I envision clubs
having a stock of RTF P-18s to lend out to prospective flyers at flying
events, and even given away. This has been tried with considerable
success in Outdoor FF since the BoM was dropped wholesale about 10 years ago
EFFECT IF ANY ON CURRENT AMA RECORDS:
none
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Received on Wed Apr 04 2018 - 23:44:00 CEST