Silver Fox
MVP
Posts:2685
IMAC #: 1294
IMAC Region: SE
 |
| 10 Mar 2010 9:34 |
|
Posted By Mike Clemmens on 10 Mar 2010 9:21
Posted By Wayne Matthews on 10 Mar 2010 8:58
Yes, Mike... I did forget about that. Maybe you should submit one yourself?
Wayne
As you know Wayne, only AMA members are permitted to do that.
Anyone outside the AMA, has the option of paying the fee to join, or having a current AMA member send it on their behalf.
GREAT GOING Mike.... I once knew a politician who actually put her money where her mouth was.  W |
|
|
|
|
Gary Hammett
Pro
Posts:129
IMAC #: 5568
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 10 Mar 2010 9:46 |
|
I think a bonus for aluminum wheels and inflatable tires will do as much for sound as this will. This will make sound worse because we no longer have to be as quite as possible just quite enough to keep from getting grounded. |
|
|
|
|
Mike Clemmens
Pro
Posts:111
IMAC #: 2102
IMAC Region: NC
|
| 10 Mar 2010 10:02 |
|
GREAT GOING Mike....
I once knew a politician who actually put her money where her mouth was.
W
THANK YOU for the encouragement Wayne... I can assure you, I am considering both of those options I mentioned, and will VERY likely exercise one of them. |
|
| Mike Clemmens
MSC Props
http:www.mscprops.com |
|
|
james taylor
Veteran
Posts:411
IMAC #: 5569
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 10 Mar 2010 11:40 |
|
Kevin, I don't disagree with you on the props. But where in this proposal is the requirement that a pilot turn the same rpm's. Also, I will argue that the chinese made cans don't get the job done on noise reduction. And I do think that noise is a problem at some fields and that we should make an effort to reduce our sound signature. I just don't think that this proposal will accomplish anything that is positive for our group. James At any given RPM, it is proven that a prop with a smaller diameter will have less tip speed, thus less ripping sound. It is proven that at any given RPM, a cannister exhaust system will produce a softer exhaust note. Can a pilot rip a 3 blade? Of course he can. The pilot will still need to manage throttle to be very quiet. I have done much experimentation with my own plane, and been to many contests over the last couple of years and, to my ears, planes with cans and 3 bladed props ARE quieter than those with standard mufflers and 2 bladed props. I think one of the fundemental issues may be that we are not in agreement that noise is a problem. I know at our field it was never a problem until last year when the VA moved in next door. Ours is still a wonderful venue for IMAC as long as we aren't ripping up the sky. I am not saying this is a perfect proposal, but I am not sure that exists. No matter what is done, there will be a bunch of folks who disagree with it. The good thing about this proposal, in my opinion, is that subjectivity is taken out of the equation. To me that is always a positive!  Kevin |
|
| I gotta go to St. Somewhere.
Jimmy Buffett |
|
|
Brendan Jones
Rookie
Posts:21
IMAC #: 5141
IMAC Region: NC
|
| 10 Mar 2010 14:03 |
|
Was wondering, we as 'registered voters' vote to elect government officials to represent us in office. Its public record that we can see what they propose and how they vote on an issue to make a law, change one, ect. ect.
We have to be a member of IMAC, paying membership, in order to vote and elect officers to represent us on the IMAC BOD.
Is there a public record that is veiwable by the membership to see how our elected officers voted on proposals and rules ?
|
|
|
|
|
Pete Castine
Veteran
Posts:208
IMAC #: 2701
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 10 Mar 2010 14:23 |
|
Wayne, where could we read the IMAC BOD's proposal?
Thanks,
Pete
One other question: How has IAC survived for so long? Their planes are ten times louder than anything we've got! |
|
|
|
|
Rick Byrd
All Star
Posts:512
IMAC #: 3770
IMAC Region: SC
|
| 10 Mar 2010 14:43 |
|
Posted By Pete Castine on 10 Mar 2010 14:23
Wayne, where could we read the IMAC BOD's proposal?
Thanks,
Pete
One other question: How has IAC survived for so long? Their planes are ten times louder than anything we've got!
Pete the proposals are now on the AMA site http://www.modelaircraft.org/events/ruleproposals/rcscaleaerobatics.aspx Anything that doesn't have a name on the RCSA is from the BOD. |
|
| Rick
Team Futaba, Hobbico, Desert Aircraft, Carden Aircraft, DurantDirectDrive.com, Smart Fly, J&J Tailwheels, B&E Graphics, Grasshoppper Built, FlightPower Batteries
|
|
|
Rick Byrd
All Star
Posts:512
IMAC #: 3770
IMAC Region: SC
|
| 10 Mar 2010 14:44 |
|
Posted By Brendan Jones on 10 Mar 2010 14:03
Was wondering, we as 'registered voters' vote to elect government officials to represent us in office. Its public record that we can see what they propose and how they vote on an issue to make a law, change one, ect. ect.
We have to be a member of IMAC, paying membership, in order to vote and elect officers to represent us on the IMAC BOD.
Is there a public record that is veiwable by the membership to see how our elected officers voted on proposals and rules ?
Brendan the record is in the Minutes of the BOD meeting that we have every month. Has being elected. The Scale Aerobatics coontest Board is selected by the AMA District VP's. |
|
| Rick
Team Futaba, Hobbico, Desert Aircraft, Carden Aircraft, DurantDirectDrive.com, Smart Fly, J&J Tailwheels, B&E Graphics, Grasshoppper Built, FlightPower Batteries
|
|
|
Mark Mcclellan
MVP
Posts:3690
IMAC #: 2711
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 10 Mar 2010 14:46 |
|
Go to the top of this page and click on Info Central on that page you can see the min. of all the Board meetings. |
|
| Was the Southeast RD 2009-2010 |
|
|
Brendan Jones
Rookie
Posts:21
IMAC #: 5141
IMAC Region: NC
|
| 10 Mar 2010 15:23 |
|
Posted By Rick Byrd on 10 Mar 2010 14:44
Posted By Brendan Jones on 10 Mar 2010 14:03
Was wondering, we as 'registered voters' vote to elect government officials to represent us in office. Its public record that we can see what they propose and how they vote on an issue to make a law, change one, ect. ect.
We have to be a member of IMAC, paying membership, in order to vote and elect officers to represent us on the IMAC BOD.
Is there a public record that is veiwable by the membership to see how our elected officers voted on proposals and rules ?
Brendan the record is in the Minutes of the BOD meeting that we have every month.
Has being elected. The Scale Aerobatics coontest Board is selected by the AMA District VP's.
Hey Rick, thanks for answering. I couldnt find the minutes of the meeting that pertained to the rules proposal on this sound discussion that was voted on by the IMAC BOD before being sent to AMA and as to who was for it and who was against it on the IMAC board, maybe i looked over it somewhere. |
|
|
|
|
james taylor
Veteran
Posts:411
IMAC #: 5569
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 10 Mar 2010 19:57 |
|
Okay folks,
I have thought of another way to state my opposition to the Candito rcp.
If I can fly a plane that has a 2 blade prop and in-cowl muffler in a manner that produces the same or less sound than a guy that flies a plane with a 3 blade and canister exhaust, why should I get less points than he did?!!!
James
|
|
| I gotta go to St. Somewhere.
Jimmy Buffett |
|
|
Gary Hammett
Pro
Posts:129
IMAC #: 5568
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 10 Mar 2010 20:04 |
|
James you hit the nail on the head. Some people think they don't get a fair deal the old way. Gary |
|
|
|
|
Jerry Hailey
Veteran
Posts:547
IMAC #: 6231
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 10 Mar 2010 20:08 |
|
Good point James, this is the reason this RCP should not pass.
Sound is sound regardless of what equipment you use you achieve the level.
|
|
|
|
|
james taylor
Veteran
Posts:411
IMAC #: 5569
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 10 Mar 2010 20:15 |
|
The goal here is to reduce the amount of sound that we as a group generate. If a pilot wants to take the time to find a prop and learn a throttle management technique that results in a quiet aircraft, I don't care what equipment he has in his plane!!!!!!! The important thing is to motivate our pilots to make the effort.Telling pilots what prop and exhaust system they should use doesn't do that.
James
|
|
| I gotta go to St. Somewhere.
Jimmy Buffett |
|
|
Larry Shreffler
Rookie
Posts:25
IMAC #: 4317
IMAC Region: SW
|
| 10 Mar 2010 20:18 |
|
Very good point James, why not include in the rcp that if you have an engine of 100cc or less you get a 1.5 bours  |
|
| Larry S. |
|
|
Wayne Geffon
All Star
Posts:564
IMAC #: 4189
IMAC Region: NC
|
| 10 Mar 2010 20:25 |
|
If you are in favor of this RCP ask yourself how silly it will be to not give the bonus to an electric plane flying a 2 blade prop.
Other than people trying to exert their opinions on the entire IMAC community this RCP does nothing
|
|
| Wayne
(the tall one) |
|
|
james taylor
Veteran
Posts:411
IMAC #: 5569
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 10 Mar 2010 20:31 |
|
Larry,
Since I fly a 35% plane that sounds good to me, but let's up the limit to 106cc! We should also say that only cans or pipes made by MTW, KS, 3W or greves will qualify for the bonus. While we are at it, we should specify that the 3 blade must be a mejzlik since they are the quietest. We could also specify what size prop would be needed for each engine. Now that I think about it, I don't like the way that the CompArf's squeal on snaps, that might bother our neighbors too, so we better not give them any bonuses either. Oh my, the list is endless!!! Okay, enough sarcasm, ya'll see me point.
James
|
|
| I gotta go to St. Somewhere.
Jimmy Buffett |
|
|
Gary Hammett
Pro
Posts:129
IMAC #: 5568
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 10 Mar 2010 21:20 |
|
How about a bonus for management of the throttle and keep the sound down, O but thats what we have now. Gary |
|
|
|
|
Kent Porter
MVP
Posts:1089
IMAC #: 3730
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 10 Mar 2010 21:46 |
|
Sound is a very touchy subject to say the least. Some of us out here take the sound issue very serious. There has to be common ground. As a CD if there is any thought of having sound issues at a venue by all means do not host an IMAC event there! You will only be asking for trouble. This is something to consider. Imagine your the neighbor across the street from a nice RC park. Come Friday morning trucks with trailers, vans and motor homes start filing in. By late afternoon these guy have a packed house. Airplanes.... BIG AIRPLANES have been flying all day. COOL! Well 0830 Saturday morning and the first call for wheels up! From 0830 til 1730 the planes are flying two some times three and four at the time. Back and forth, back and forth...... It really does not matter at this point how quiet these airplanes are! It now becomes very annoying to hear. Put yourself in the neighbors shoes once again! Contest Directors... Please pick and choose your venues wisely!
Kp |
|
|
|
|
|
Wayne Geffon
All Star
Posts:564
IMAC #: 4189
IMAC Region: NC
|
| 10 Mar 2010 22:43 |
|
Posted By Kent Porter on 10 Mar 2010 21:46
Sound is a very touchy subject to say the least. Some of us out here take the sound issue very serious. There has to be common ground. As a CD if there is any thought of having sound issues at a venue by all means do not host an IMAC event there! You will only be asking for trouble. This is something to consider. Imagine your the neighbor across the street from a nice RC park. Come Friday morning trucks with trailers, vans and motor homes start filing in. By late afternoon these guy have a packed house. Airplanes.... BIG AIRPLANES have been flying all day. COOL! Well 0830 Saturday morning and the first call for wheels up! From 0830 til 1730 the planes are flying two some times three and four at the time. Back and forth, back and forth...... It really does not matter at this point how quiet these airplanes are! It now becomes very annoying to hear. Put yourself in the neighbors shoes once again! Contest Directors... Please pick and choose your venues wisely!
Kp
AMEN! |
|
| Wayne
(the tall one) |
|
|
Dean Nistetter
Pro
Posts:126
IMAC #: 4655
IMAC Region: SC
|
| 10 Mar 2010 22:56 |
|
I share the same opinion that many others do that mandating equipment is wrong on many levels. Yes, I have already contacted my Scale Aerobatics Board representative and shared my concerns.
Having said that, I would like to challenge certain people’s argument that IMAC contest noise causes the loss of flying fields. Think about it, most flying fields that hold IMAC events only do it once per year. Those same flying fields probably also host fun flies and have a variety of non-IMAC members who fly big birds, war birds, etc. on a weekly basis. I don’t have specific data but I would imagine that the vast majority of 50cc+ size planes are not IMAC flyers. Of those, I doubt many fly cans or 3 blade props. These people fly every week at local fields. Have you heard many of the gas powered war birds or 50cc ARFS out there? AMA is not regulating their equipment even though they are AMA chartered clubs. Doing so would be absurd and seriously harm our hobby.
If a field is in jeopardy due to noise issues then it’s likely the accumulation of all their flyers year round and not just one IMAC event per year. If an IMAC contest is held at a non-sensitive field then why should the flyers be penalized by a default standard more restrictive than those required by a local club? If a field is noise sensitive then either DON’T hold an IMAC contest there or use the CD’s authority to enact special rules consistent with the local club’s requirements.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete Castine
Veteran
Posts:208
IMAC #: 2701
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 10 Mar 2010 23:12 |
|
Well said Kent!
Pete |
|
|
|
|
Pete Castine
Veteran
Posts:208
IMAC #: 2701
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 10 Mar 2010 23:20 |
|
Wayne (the tall one),
Totally agree with your comments on the RCP, except one: I'd prefer to see a sound rule in place (which a CD could easily waive) rather than no sound rule (which a CD has to implement in certain cases). I guess this comes from seeing all of the noise issues from the NE and noise concerns in the SE.
I think if everyone coming into IMAC (or progressing through IMAC) is indoctrinated into the "quiet is good" approach, it will foster more long-term efforts to quiet our planes. Thinking back on the advancement of quieting planes in the last 10 years, it great how far we've come. I think (or I'd like to think, anyway) that part of the advancement is due to the sound rules that IMAC put in place. I'm not suggesting all hell will break loose if we eliminate the rule and everyone will be ripping props all over the place, but I think part of the motivation to be quieter will be lost.
And it would certainly be better to show up at a contest and discover that the sound rule was waived, than to show up at a contest and discover a sound restriction was put in place that you weren't aware of (or prepared for).
Pete |
|
|
|
|
Kevin Wilson
All Star
Posts:838
IMAC #: 5341
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 11 Mar 2010 8:03 |
|
Posted By Wayne Geffon on 10 Mar 2010 22:43
Posted By Kent Porter on 10 Mar 2010 21:46
Sound is a very touchy subject to say the least. Some of us out here take the sound issue very serious. There has to be common ground. As a CD if there is any thought of having sound issues at a venue by all means do not host an IMAC event there! You will only be asking for trouble. This is something to consider. Imagine your the neighbor across the street from a nice RC park. Come Friday morning trucks with trailers, vans and motor homes start filing in. By late afternoon these guy have a packed house. Airplanes.... BIG AIRPLANES have been flying all day. COOL! Well 0830 Saturday morning and the first call for wheels up! From 0830 til 1730 the planes are flying two some times three and four at the time. Back and forth, back and forth...... It really does not matter at this point how quiet these airplanes are! It now becomes very annoying to hear. Put yourself in the neighbors shoes once again! Contest Directors... Please pick and choose your venues wisely!
Kp
Good point Kent! I seem to remember saying something similar last year regarding ACS and getting lambasted on one of these forums. i.e. Our planes are large, fast, and cover alot of ground in a hurry, therefore, if your field cannot accomodate, you should rethink holding an IMAC event.
I have been told in no uncertain terms that ACS is designed to reduce footprint for flyover AND sound, and that this was necessary so we don't lose any more fields. If ACS and sound truly go hand in hand, then we can't have it both ways.
Personally, I dislike the subjectivity and lack of criteria for both sound and ACS, and would like to see something done to fix it. It is apparent that most disagree with this RCP, but I have heard very little in the way of suggestions that would significantly reduce sound. Most seem to feel all is OK. So what should be done?
|
|
| ARD - Florida |
|
|
Wayne Geffon
All Star
Posts:564
IMAC #: 4189
IMAC Region: NC
|
| 11 Mar 2010 8:45 |
|
And it would certainly be better to show up at a contest and discover that the sound rule was waived, than to show up at a contest and discover a sound restriction was put in place that you weren't aware of (or prepared for).
Pete
Thanks for the comments Pete. Any waiver would have to be posted for all to see no later than 30 days from the start of an event. If someone was surprised by a waiver or lack there of on showing up at an event, that would be their fault for not paying attention to what that specfic contests parameters were. |
|
| Wayne
(the tall one) |
|
|
Gary Hammett
Pro
Posts:129
IMAC #: 5568
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 11 Mar 2010 15:17 |
|
I have heard "the current sound rule does not work" but every contest I go to you can hear people say things like "if I use that prop it will rip so I use ____" . and "I got out of the throttle because I knew I was about to rip the prop". Most everyone other than newer pilots make strides to make a 10 on sound. So to say the current sound rule does not work is an incorrect statement. Could it be better, possibly. But it does work. Take away the sound rule and add a bonus for what's on your plane and we will have real sound problem. |
|
|
|
|
Brad
Pro
Posts:129
IMAC #: 6304
IMAC Region: NE
|
| 14 Mar 2010 7:34 |
|
OK, IMAC Newbie here, but I've had some experience dealing with sound issues at our field. Most of the discussions I've seen on sound fell into two categories. The first is that judges in IMAC have not been willing to hold pilots accountable for loud planes for fear of unfairly DQing a very good pilot. Thats understandable. The second is that equipment is a personal choice.
Clearly we need a system that removes the subjective nature and makes it easier for the judge, without telling pilots they have to use certain equipment. The ground test has proven to be unreliable at correlating performance in the air specifically because pilots use throttle management and figure placement, which is exactly what we want to see. There have been other discussiions on other threads as well. What we really need is performance data that can be verified and compared.
I would propose that any rule changes on sound be put on hold, and that each IMAC region make specific efforts to collect sound data using ANSI rated sound meters. The meters will be placed at a standard location, away from the pit area, and monitored by a designated person. That person will read the highest db level recorded for each competitor during thier sequence. It doesn't affect the score this year. We track the data and then we can come up with a standard, based on the range of levels seen, and use that standard to push the overall noise levels progressively down. The more contests we do this at, the more data we'll get, the better our standard will be. It won't be subjective and overly restrictive, it will reward throttle management and figure placement as well as equipment selection, and it will be based on noise levels in the air.
Brad |
|
|
|
|
Jerry Hailey
Veteran
Posts:547
IMAC #: 6231
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 14 Mar 2010 12:15 |
|
Brad I like the way you are thinking, putting the plane in the air and judging the sound is a better than a ground test.
However we do not have equipment to measure the sound level as it is heard at the place where it needs to be quiet. Let me explain what I am talking about. The real reason we want to reduce the noise of our RC airplanes is to keep the peace with the neighbors. The surrounding neighborhood is the people that we do not want to complain to the local county government and get airfields shut down.
Take this example, if you fly a big gas engine airplane 50 feet over someone’s back yard and they take a trip over to the pilot to complain, are you going to show them that you were only 95db and that was legal by the AMA rule book? That person could give a flip about db levels; all they want is a peaceful neighborhood. This is why sound will always be subjective, no equipment will tell you how pissed off the neighbors are.
So the subjective sound level should fall on the shoulders of the CD. If you are 50 miles from the nearest house, then the sound level is not critical, but if you are flying at a field that has a nearby neighborhood, then the sound level needs to be acceptable in the area of the neighborhood.
Let me give you an example of how the sound score was handled at on IMAC event in the SE last year. During the pilots meeting the CD said “We are in a remote area here and sound has not been a problem, so no one will be grounded for a zero sound score. However if you have a loud airplane we will come over and talk to you about things you can do for the future because some fields you will fly at will have strict rules on sound. We do have one house that is a about a mile or so off (the CD pointed to the house) if you fly over this house you will be considered past the deadline, stay away from the house!“
This was my first contest and I had a loud airplane, stock mufflers and a Vess 2 blade prop. I went to the CD and said” I know I am loud, what can I do?” The CD was very helpful on cans, three blade props, and most important lesson for me was throttle management. He gave me some great tips on how to ease into throttle and only go wide open when you are on an up line.
My opinion on this is to raise the K value and give the CD the option to handle the sound levels on a field by field basis.
|
|
|
|
|
Silver Fox
MVP
Posts:2685
IMAC #: 1294
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 14 Mar 2010 12:34 |
|
Guys.... it seems it has not sunk in as yet.... Let me repeat... All the postings on this thread is irrelevant right now.
The option that a pilot/AMA member has now is to CALL or contact your AMA Scale Aerobatics Contest Board representative for your AMA District & give your input.
They are not coming on this thread to read what you have to say.
As Michael Clemmens has said....you could also submit your own Sound RCP directly to the AMA if inclined to do so. The decision is now out of our (IMAC BOD) hands and is with the SACB of the AMA.
I hope that is understood.
Wayne |
|
|
|
|
Brad
Pro
Posts:129
IMAC #: 6304
IMAC Region: NE
|
| 14 Mar 2010 13:59 |
|
Postings on this thread are only "irrelevant" if we don't want to continue the discussion. I agree that its worthwhile to contact our regional rep, but its also important that we make such contact intelligently. Exchanging and sharing ideas between the membership is not a bad thing.
As for letting CDs make the call individually, the problem you run into then become how do deal with regional differences and comparative points. If two pilots of equal skill fly the same plane, but one flys it in a region with more prominent noise issues (NE, for example), that pilot could be regularly downgraded on a sound score, resulting in a lower standing in the regional points.
There will always be neighbors that complain about sound, and we do have to be careful about selection of venue. For example, I know my home field will never be used to host an IMAC event. Its rurally located but there is one neighbor that would complain. And they'd have a legal basis since our local government has established a noise ordinance (65 db at the recieving property boundary). By establishing a standard, we would be better positioned to determine suitability of a given venue.
Brad |
|
|
|
|
Silver Fox
MVP
Posts:2685
IMAC #: 1294
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 14 Mar 2010 15:08 |
|
OK Mr. Brad... do it the way you want ....
What I said will probably become more apparent soon enough.
Wayne |
|
|
|
|
Jerry Hailey
Veteran
Posts:547
IMAC #: 6231
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 14 Mar 2010 16:56 |
|
Wayne, I do agree that the conversation as it pertains to the upcoming vote is irrelevant. However I do believe it is healthy for the IMAC family to engage a constructive conversation to an alternative RCP. Even thought the RCP has been submitted and is up for a vote, this will most certainly not be the last RCP for sound that will ever be submitted.
I have enjoyed reading the posts with all of the different views. Some have helped me in understanding how the sound issue could be handled at my local flying field. I proposed that our local club become proactive is keeping our sound level in check. I have taken methods from IMAC and have applied them to a plan at our local club.
|
|
|
|
|
Jim Daly
Veteran
Posts:252
IMAC #: 3678
IMAC Region: NC
|
| 14 Mar 2010 17:56 |
|
Posted By Wayne Geffon on 11 Mar 2010 8:45
Any waiver would have to be posted for all to see no later than 30 days from the start of an event.
If someone was surprised by a waiver or lack there of on showing up at an event, that would be their fault for not paying attention to what that specfic contests parameters were.
Wayne, How do I apply for a Sound Waiver for my contest? Where do I go to fill out a form or what is the proceedure? |
|
Jim
The "Yakov" one!
When you've got a YAK you have the Edge
and you don't need anything Extra! |
|
|
Silver Fox
MVP
Posts:2685
IMAC #: 1294
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 14 Mar 2010 18:08 |
|
OK.... It's just that we had the last 4 years to have these discussions & now time is upon us..
W |
|
|
|
|
Wayne Geffon
All Star
Posts:564
IMAC #: 4189
IMAC Region: NC
|
| 14 Mar 2010 19:22 |
|
Jim,
I am not exactly sure of how this applies to you guys in Canada.
Checking on it... |
|
| Wayne
(the tall one) |
|
|
Mike Clemmens
Pro
Posts:111
IMAC #: 2102
IMAC Region: NC
|
| 14 Mar 2010 20:07 |
|
To the best of my knowledge, there are no deviations permitted. If I am wrong, I stand to be corrected.
http://www.maac.ca/docs/2008/sanction_form_eventcomp_eng_copy1.pdf
"I the undersigned agree that, if sanctioned, the above event will be carried out in full accordance with all rules and regulations of the Model Aeronautics Association of Canada." |
|
| Mike Clemmens
MSC Props
http:www.mscprops.com |
|
|
Wayne Geffon
All Star
Posts:564
IMAC #: 4189
IMAC Region: NC
|
| 14 Mar 2010 20:39 |
|
Thanks Mike. |
|
| Wayne
(the tall one) |
|
|
james taylor
Veteran
Posts:411
IMAC #: 5569
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 14 Mar 2010 21:27 |
|
Posted By Wayne Matthews on 14 Mar 2010 12:34
Guys.... it seems it has not sunk in as yet.... Let me repeat... All the postings on this thread is irrelevant right now.
The option that a pilot/AMA member has now is to CALL or contact your AMA Scale Aerobatics Contest Board representative for your AMA District & give your input.
....
Wayne Been there, done that. Hope everyone else has too!! I also hope that your opinions were something close to mine!  James |
|
| I gotta go to St. Somewhere.
Jimmy Buffett |
|
|
Silver Fox
MVP
Posts:2685
IMAC #: 1294
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 14 Mar 2010 21:47 |
|
Posted By james taylor on 14 Mar 2010 21:27
Posted By Wayne Matthews on 14 Mar 2010 12:34
Guys.... it seems it has not sunk in as yet.... Let me repeat... All the postings on this thread is irrelevant right now.
The option that a pilot/AMA member has now is to CALL or contact your AMA Scale Aerobatics Contest Board representative for your AMA District & give your input.
....
Wayne
Been there, done that. Hope everyone else has too!! I also hope that your opinions were something close to mine!
James
Whew... Hey Doc.... FINALLY....some action!!!  Wayne |
|
|
|
|
Jim Daly
Veteran
Posts:252
IMAC #: 3678
IMAC Region: NC
|
| 15 Mar 2010 1:42 |
|
Mike. I checked the MAAC Website and there are NO specicific Rules for Scale Aerobatics, published anywhere, let alonne Sound Specs. So I would guess that since there are NO AMA sanctions for our contest to begon with then we do not need to file a daviation for it. I even checked the General Safetey and Giant Scale Safety code and there is nothing about checking sound levels before contestt starts.
Posted By Mike Clemmens on 14 Mar 2010 20:07
To the best of my knowledge, there are no deviations permitted. If I am wrong, I stand to be corrected.
http://www.maac.ca/docs/2008/sanction_form_eventcomp_eng_copy1.pdf
"I the undersigned agree that, if sanctioned, the above event will be carried out in full accordance with all rules and regulations of the Model Aeronautics Association of Canada."
|
|
Jim
The "Yakov" one!
When you've got a YAK you have the Edge
and you don't need anything Extra! |
|
|
Mark Mcclellan
MVP
Posts:3690
IMAC #: 2711
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 15 Mar 2010 7:31 |
|
Well that sounds like there is no sound problem in Canada or they would have some type of rules about it ! |
|
| Was the Southeast RD 2009-2010 |
|
|
Silver Fox
MVP
Posts:2685
IMAC #: 1294
IMAC Region: SE
|
|
Peter Butschek
Rookie
Posts:29
IMAC #: 5290
IMAC Region: NW
|
| 15 Mar 2010 9:25 |
|
Hi, Sound is definitely an issue in BC, Canada and one which will take much work to resolve. I've been watching this IMAC site with interest and feel there are proposals with merit. Thus far I favor the increased K Factor (to reward/detract points for equipment setup and throttle control} or, take the matter out of the judges hands completely and let the CD or co-CD determine what is local venue acceptable. A standard for all......... Hmmm... That is a challenge. |
|
| Bunnyface Flies Da Plane..... Daddiekat Keeps It Together..... Most of the time !! |
|
|
Mike Clemmens
Pro
Posts:111
IMAC #: 2102
IMAC Region: NC
|
| 15 Mar 2010 15:08 |
|
Posted By Jim Daly on 15 Mar 2010 1:42
Mike.
I checked the MMAC Website and there are NO specicific Rules for Scale Aerobatics, published anywhere, let alonne Sound Specs.
So I would guess that since there are NO AMA sanctions for our contest to begon with then we do not need to file a daviation for it.
I even checked the General Safetey and Giant Scale Safety code and there is nothing about checking sound levels before contestt starts.
Posted By Mike Clemmens on 14 Mar 2010 20:07
To the best of my knowledge, there are no deviations permitted. If I am wrong, I stand to be corrected.
http://www.maac.ca/docs/2008/sanction_form_eventcomp_eng_copy1.pdf
"I the undersigned agree that, if sanctioned, the above event will be carried out in full accordance with all rules and regulations of the Model Aeronautics Association of Canada."
Jim, I too looked for them on the MAAC website, and could not find them either, but did recall seeing them in the past. I called the MAAC office, and was told that a number of items did not make it from the old website to the new one, when the change over was made. I was assured that the MAAC SA rules [the same ones as the AMA] would be added to the website again shortly. These rules can also be found on Scaleaerobaticscanada.com. |
|
| Mike Clemmens
MSC Props
http:www.mscprops.com |
|
|
Jason Hoyle
Rookie
Posts:17
IMAC #: 4760
IMAC Region: SC
|
| 15 Mar 2010 16:52 |
|
I've been a competitor in IMAC for 5 years. Just attended my second judging class here in Tulsa, OK. The "word" is that IMAC is considering a 1.5% points bonus for pilots using a carbon, 3 Blade Prop and another 1.5% points bonus for pilots using cans (no stock exhaust). So that would give a guy with deep pockets an additional 3% advantage in a competition that is supposedly about pilot skill.
IMAC has totally missed the point in regards to sound control. The sound score and ACS score were both born of an effort to reduce the noise during a contest. NOW for the real truth.
Both of these scoring systems are faulty and misguided. We also only need ONE measure to encourage PROPER throttle management. I purpose that IMAC first eliminate ACS as they have not defined what constitutes a 10 a 0 or anything else concrete in between. ACS as it stands now, is an indefinable measure of how well the pilot compressed all ten maneuvers into a chunk of three dimensional space. The problem here is that IMAC has NOT defined that space. It’s all based upon the preconception of YOUR judges. The problem here, without definable criteria a pilot could receive a 10 from one judge and a 3 from the other....scores simply based upon what the that particular judge thought was a "compressed" chunk of airspace. ACS has NOTHING to do with how the maneuvers are presented, linked or organized, only how well the pilot compressed the airspace needed to fly their sequence. Based upon that logic it would be to our advantage to fly the smallest scale airplanes available to achieve the highest ACS.
Now I will get to the point, if IMAC will change the criteria for judging "sound" so that a pilot is graded upon throttle management and award a ZERO for ripping the prop, it would not matter how big the pattern was flown and ACS becomes a moot point. An even better idea might be to have a DB meter (available on any IPHONE for .99 cents) and could be set up at the judges station and record the highest DB for a given flight. Simply set a DB limit and if it is exceeded during a sequence the pilot would be given an automatic 0 for sound.
Moreover, any airplane with a carbon three blade prop and cans is very capable of making a tremendous amount of noise if the pilot leaves the power up. Even electric airplanes can break the noise barrier. Also, on ground noise tests mean nothing because the noise generated on the ground is not the problem....it’s the noise generated airborne that is most likely to offend.
The solution is smaller airplanes. The smaller the airplane the less noise they generate. This will also serve to help IMAC membership to grow. Many pilots can afford 30% gassers but very few can afford 43%'ers. I know how discouraging it is to be in basic class or even sportsman and have to compete against guys with bigger airplanes. The carbon/can 3% point increase will only serve to give advantage to those pilots that can financially afford it. That is not what IMAC is supposed to be about. I would like to see a cap of 35% placed on all classes except unlimited. This will greatly reduce the cost associated to compete in IMAC events as well as reduce the noise. IMAC needs to work on reducing the cost to participate and eliminating as much subjectivity in the judging process as possible.
I agree also that if any region or club field has "special" needs that should be addressed locally....not by IMAC on a national scale.
|
|
|
|
|
Silver Fox
MVP
Posts:2685
IMAC #: 1294
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 15 Mar 2010 16:58 |
|
Hi Jason... I think you are COMPLETELY mistaken regarding your statements on the proposed sound rules that IMAC has sent to the AMA under RCP 005. You need to check your facts again.... Here is a link to the RCP that the IMAC BOD sent in to AMA: www.modelaircraft.org/files/RCSA11-05.doc Wayne M IMAC Secretary |
|
|
|
|
Curtis Cozier
MVP
Posts:2211
IMAC #: 4686
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 15 Mar 2010 17:07 |
|
Sorry to pile on.... and I appreciate your passion. but .scores simply based upon what the that particular judge thought was a "compressed" chunk of airspace. ACS has NOTHING to do with how the maneuvers are presented, linked or organized, only how well the pilot compressed the airspace This also is not correct and you might want to read the criteria. |
|
| SE Regional Director/Judging Instructor/IMAC Sequence committee/Team Futaba/Extreme Flight R/C
|
|
|
Jack Bowell
Rookie
Posts:32
IMAC #: 5508
IMAC Region: SC
|
| 15 Mar 2010 21:40 |
|
Isn't it true that a proposal for the 1.5% bonus for 3 blade and cans/pipes has been submitted by someone in the AMA that, if passed, will be an IMAC rule? |
|
|
|
|
Silver Fox
MVP
Posts:2685
IMAC #: 1294
IMAC Region: SE
|
| 15 Mar 2010 21:49 |
|
Hi Jack.... There are two proposals before the AMA now regarding sound rules for IMAC. One from the IMAC BOD and one from an individual. AMA members have until March 31st to make any more proposals on rules.
Depending on how the SACB votes, that rule will become the rule.
What was indicated above, was that IMAC had submitted the 1.5% bonus RCP...which in effect is not so.
But to directly answer your question, if the SACB votes the 1.5% bonus rule in, then yes, it will be an IMAC rule.
regards,
Wayne |
|
|
|
|
Rick Byrd
All Star
Posts:512
IMAC #: 3770
IMAC Region: SC
|
| 15 Mar 2010 23:30 |
|
Posted By Wayne Matthews on 15 Mar 2010 21:49
Hi Jack.... There are two proposals before the AMA now regarding sound rules for IMAC. One from the IMAC BOD and one from an individual. AMA members have until March 31st to make any more proposals on rules.
Depending on how the SACB votes, that rule will become the rule.
What was indicated above, was that IMAC had submitted the 1.5% bonus RCP...which in effect is not so.
But to directly answer your question, if the SACB votes the 1.5% bonus rule in, then yes, it will be an IMAC rule.
regards,
Wayne
And to follow up on Wayne's comment. This is very important to contact your SACB member. Rick |
|
| Rick
Team Futaba, Hobbico, Desert Aircraft, Carden Aircraft, DurantDirectDrive.com, Smart Fly, J&J Tailwheels, B&E Graphics, Grasshoppper Built, FlightPower Batteries
|
|
|