RCC-09-11 – Make SSC a Rule Book Event

Forum for AMA Contest Board rules change proposal discussion

Moderator: hbartel

Lou Melancon
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2001 5:16 pm
Contact:

RCC-09-11 – Make SSC a Rule Book Event

Post by Lou Melancon »

<b>RCC-09-11 – Make RCCA SSC an AMA Rule Book Event for RC Combat.</b>

2007 RCCA Rules for Slow Survivable Combat (Provisional Class)
Effective 1 January 2007 for the 2007 Contest Season.

1. Contest
With the exception of the following restrictions, all RCCA A-class rules and scoring will be used. SSC combat rounds will be 5 minutes in duration.

2. Engine
.15 cid engine available from normal retail outlets for a non-sale retail price of $65 or less, excluding taxes or shipping. Engine must be classified by the manufacturer for use in R/C flying model aircraft. Engine must be complete with carburetor and muffler. Carburetor must be fully R/C functional as intended by the manufacturer and servo operated. The muffler must be expansion chamber type with no internal pipe (which would effectively increase its length and there allow “tuningâ€
rccrpilot
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 6:37 am
Location: USA

Post by rccrpilot »

I am all in favor of making SSC a rule book event but it would help if the rules were tightened up a bit by limiting wingspan to a small range, say 48" to 53". This would provide more even competition based on pilot skill rather than technical advantage and might keep more people in the sport if they didn't have to change planes all the time just to be competitive.
montague
Posts: 1639
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2002 3:24 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Post by montague »

Has there ever been a good performing SSC plane with such a short wingspan? You need about 550-650sqin just to get those planes to fly well. I have no idea why you'd want to limit the wingspan to something too short to fly well.

Now, if you want to limit the wingspan to 64", which is the most common wingspan anyway, sure.

Anyway, if you're in favor of the class in general, I hope you vote yes in the first round and put in a cross proposal if you want to limit the wingspan.
Hat Trick
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2001 6:58 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by Hat Trick »

I agree. A wing area limit is a good idea and I would suggest to make it the same as limited B so wings can be used for either event.
Lou Melancon
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2001 5:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Lou Melancon »

Like Kirk I am hoping this proposal makes it past the first stage so we can talk about it in more detail later.
montague
Posts: 1639
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2002 3:24 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Post by montague »

I'll be blunt:

please please please please please please please please please
vote for this one [:-)]

It can be cross-proposed to change it in this cycle, and if you really don't like it, you can vote no in the second round. But SSC is the most popular class in the country, so it makes sense to get it into the rule book and onto the AMA's radar if nothing else. And it really has been very stable over the last few years.
pinoy
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2003 7:09 am
Location: Philippines

Post by pinoy »

Strongly agree to vote for this one to pass and be finnaly in the rulebook. Such a nice class for everybody to participate in whether you're a veteran or just getting into RC combat.
Hat Trick
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2001 6:58 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by Hat Trick »

votes due 12-15!

With the problem of how to integrate electrics not solved yet, I'm not sure we want SSC in the rule books yet. With electric technology advancing at a very rapid pace I'm afraid it will be a serious problem. Not as bad as in the open classes but there are several possibilities that will really give electrics an advantage in SSC.

For example
Haveing the speed controller act as a RPM regulator. As you pull into a hard turn were a IC motor will normally slow down the electric just increases the power to keep RPM constant. Battery technology will continue to improve as well.
User avatar
Which_way_is_up
Posts: 1637
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2002 8:54 am
Location: Dallas, Texas

Post by Which_way_is_up »

Electrics are being nit picked to death and in the case of SSC with the prop and rpm requirements there's no reason that electrics have any more of an advantage then say using bladders and folks finally got over that one too.

I vote yes, the provisional class was not intended to be a permanent class and SSC has been provisional now for <b>4 years</b>!
Bobwrc
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 2:56 pm

Post by Bobwrc »

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Hat Trick</i>
<br />votes due 12-15!

With the problem of how to integrate electrics not solved yet, I'm not sure we want SSC in the rule books yet. With electric technology advancing at a very rapid pace I'm afraid it will be a serious problem. Not as bad as in the open classes but there are several possibilities that will really give electrics an advantage in SSC.

For example
Haveing the speed controller act as a RPM regulator. As you pull into a hard turn were a IC motor will normally slow down the electric just increases the power to keep RPM constant. Battery technology will continue to improve as well.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I agree with Mike's concerns regarding the fact that this event, popular as it is; may be seriously compromised in the next few years, with regard to the impact that electric power may (very likely) have upon it.
I think it wise to keep SSC as an RCCA event until the electric power factor can be accurately tested and evaluated, and the rules properly worded so as to permit parity between electric and glo power, and thereby avoid repeating past mistakes that have been made by our "fast tracking" events into the rule book.
User avatar
Which_way_is_up
Posts: 1637
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2002 8:54 am
Location: Dallas, Texas

Post by Which_way_is_up »

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Bobwrc</i>
<br /><blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Hat Trick</i>
<br />votes due 12-15!

With the problem of how to integrate electrics not solved yet, I'm not sure we want SSC in the rule books yet. With electric technology advancing at a very rapid pace I'm afraid it will be a serious problem. Not as bad as in the open classes but there are several possibilities that will really give electrics an advantage in SSC.

For example
Haveing the speed controller act as a RPM regulator. As you pull into a hard turn were a IC motor will normally slow down the electric just increases the power to keep RPM constant. Battery technology will continue to improve as well.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I agree with Mike's concerns regarding the fact that this event, popular as it is; may be seriously compromised in the next few years, with regard to the impact that electric power may (very likely) have upon it.
I think it wise to keep SSC as an RCCA event until the electric power factor can be accurately tested and evaluated, and the rules properly worded so as to permit parity between electric and glo power, and thereby avoid repeating past mistakes that have been made by our "fast tracking" events into the rule book.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">


<font size="2">I'm sorry but all I can do is shake my head in disbelief at this statement. What world do we live in that somehow in the future the laws of physics will be broken and that civilization as we know it will end. We have very specific rules that limit performance in SSC regardless if it's electric or glow. Max RPM, a specific prop size and a minimum weight. What voodoo in the world of electrics is going to make all that irrelevant?

And "fast tracking"? <b>Four years</b> of flying SSC is <b>FAST TRACKING</b>?

With all the problems the RCCA currently has as a SIG, we're worrying about some potential phantom problem of the future, protecting the dysfunctional status quo of the present.</font id="size2">
Bobwrc
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 2:56 pm

Post by Bobwrc »

[/quote]
<font size="2">I'm sorry but all I can do is shake my head in disbelief at this statement. What world do we live in that somehow in the future the laws of physics will be broken and that civilization as we know it will end. We have very specific rules that limit performance in SSC regardless if it's electric or glow. Max RPM, a specific prop size and a minimum weight. What voodoo in the world of electrics is going to make all that irrelevant?

And "fast tracking"? <b>Four years</b> of flying SSC is <b>FAST TRACKING</b>?

With all the problems the RCCA currently has as a SIG, we're worrying about some potential phantom problem of the future, protecting the dysfunctional status quo of the present.</font id="size2">
[/quote]

<font color="blue">I wonder how your comments will read a few years from now; that is, if "civilization as we know it still exists![:)]

You can call it "voodoo" if you like, but I think the potential for unanticipated technlogical advances with regard to electric power, is a very real possibility.
Perhaps the "very specific rules that limit performance in SCC" that you refer to, will be found to contain unanticipated, serious loopholes, and it is quite possible that all of the RC combat events will become almost all electric powered events in the next few years.

If the RCCA continues to excell in one catagory, it is in endlessly debating and tinkering with the rules, while failing to learn from past mistakes!
The sorry state of the present AMA Rule Book Combat events only mirrors this!
Have you ever considered the possibility that "most of the problems that the RCCA currently has as a SIG", have been self generated?</font id="blue">
User avatar
Which_way_is_up
Posts: 1637
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2002 8:54 am
Location: Dallas, Texas

Post by Which_way_is_up »

Bob, you're still avoiding the real situation here and that is we have specific rules in place to limit future performance problems that your gut feel is predicting. You're not showing any logic in your current position that <i>"the potential for unanticipated technlogical advances with regard to electric power, is a very real possibility"</i>.

We should base <b>all </b>our decisions on <b>the potential for unanticipated technological advances being a very real possibility</b> or is electricity just a special case?

You don't want to lock down the rules for SSC because of this "unanticipated future" and yet you make the statement <i>"If the RCCA continues to excell in one catagory, it is in endlessly debating and tinkering with the rules, while failing to learn from past mistakes!"</i> You can't have it both ways! The vote IS to lock down the rules!

I too am going to save this thread for posterity.

Until next time, Rattle them chicken bones! [:0][:)]
rccrpilot
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 6:37 am
Location: USA

Post by rccrpilot »

There is a simple solution to the electric power problem. Since glow powered SSC is still very popular and the electric power problem is just not likely to be solved in the near future. Why not make electric powered activities separate events. That would make everyone happy except those that see electric power as a way to get a competitive advantage. RCCA has a long history of members competing with "technology" and stretching the rules in any way possible to get a technological advantage. Since SSC was supposed to provide an economical, fun event with a level playing field for all any change that provides technical advantage tends to destroy the equality supposedly built into the event. The old wingspan race has invaded SSC which makes a serious dent in the level playing field and is typical of what happened to scale competition. I plan to vote yes in hopes that someone will make some alternate proposals this time around rather than just shutting down the whole rule making effort like last time.
Lou Melancon
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2001 5:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Lou Melancon »

Our vote on the 15th will either progress the SSC proposal to the next stage or stop it completely. There is a lot of good in it with very little that is bad. In fact the only problem anyone is mentioning is electric versus IC. I think we should move it to the next stage then hash out our arguments then.
Post Reply

Return to “AMA Contest Board”