What to fly in 07. Member Poll


Moderator: hbartel

Lee Liddle
Posts: 3330
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 10:30 pm
Location: USA

Post by Lee Liddle »

SSC....5
3696...5
2548...5
OpenB..3
2610...1
LimB...1

My interest seems to be the same as what`s available in the area and large contests that I plan to attend. I would like to fly more Open B, but participation in my area is too low to support very many contests. I would fly Lim B if it was popular in the area.

As far as scale goes... I like 2548 better than 2610 because I think it is much more realistic. If the airframe specs for the two classes could be brought in line with each other, I would fly both classes. As it stands, the only 2610 contest that I will attend this year will be the NATS. I`m not sure if I will fly 2610 there or not.
User avatar
lightning
Posts: 1444
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2003 10:53 pm
Location: USA

Post by lightning »

Well, here's my list as 2007 looks to me......
SSC....3
3696...1
2548...2
OpenB..5
2610...2
LimB...5

Much as I like scale, until the two classes can be combined into a single scale class my participation will probably be Nats only, if at all for 2548. (Didn't repair my two Spits from last year yet!)

What happened to the discussions we had last year about a single scale class? Seemed we were leaning towards blending the 2610 rules into a "48 inch wingspan for all" but maybe without the plane and prop/engine retrictions of 2548. That would rekindle my interest (and a couple of other guys around here too). Unless that happens I doubt I will fly scale beyond 2007.

As for 3696, there is no way I am going to attempt to build a fleet for yet ANOTHER class, so that is not on my horizon at the moment.

There is a strong following within a reasonable drive from Detroit for the "B" classes, both Open and Limited. As that is where the competition is, that will be my focus with a little SSC thrown into the mix.

For fun I fly 1/2A, but interest in that seems to have waned a lot.
Just my 2¢ FWIW.

I have to make a comment on where I see the RCCA headed. With Michigan membership down to 3 (4 if Frommie changes his address from Ohio) I am concerned that interest is being lost. I feel very strongly that class proliferation is a major contributor. It used to be two classes and everyone knew what they needed to fly at a given event. Now I find it very difficult to keep the fleets up and ready to fly at an event, assuming the classes I fly will be there. I only fly SSC because it tends to be paired with Open/Lim B. There was a time when I didn't even bother with SSC but I'd rather fly than watch, so I keep a couple of SSC ships going just for the helluvit.
Would like to hear other folks perspectives on this. Then I'll go bend the ear of my district rep!
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 »

Since we're all giving our opinions.

my 2 cents,

1)2610 is dead, it will not be blended with 2548 because it is a rule book event and you'll never get rule changes pushed through the AMA committee to accomplish that. Why, because there really aren't enough people interested in scale to do the work necessary to get the changes made. The likes of Ed Kettler and a few others with all the hard work that they've put into promoting scale can't raise the Titanic(2610). So the only future for scale at present is 2548 or E3696 because that's were the activity is for those that do want to fly scale.

2)The number of classes has nothing to do with the decline of combat. What any individual flies is based on what the local group in the area is already flying or promoting. The only time the number of classes becomes a concern for anyone is if there's no combat activity in the area and a couple of guys want to start some combat and don't have any experience so they don't know what class to start with.
AIM
Posts: 801
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:22 am
Location: Montpelier, Ohio

Post by AIM »

which-way-is-up,,,
I'm curious if your statement of "the number of classes has NOTHING to do with the decline of combat" is entirely accurate. How do you know that it has NOTHING to do with it??? "NOTHING" seems to be an awefully strong term. Especially when more than one person feels differently.

I can't find the words tonight but my current thought is... We seem to be more intent on generating NEW members than keeping the vets. (Which is more important???) Lose 5 vets and gain 3 newcomers. Or lose 1 vet and gain 1 newcomer.

Should we strive to KEEP vets or strive to GAIN newcomers????
Which is right I honestly can't say.
If class proliferation is burning out vets, is that a good trade off to enticing newcomers???
User avatar
lightning
Posts: 1444
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2003 10:53 pm
Location: USA

Post by lightning »

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Which_way_is_up</i>
<br />Since we're all giving our opinions.

my 2 cents,

2)The number of classes has nothing to do with the decline of combat. What any individual flies is based on what the local group in the area is already flying or promoting. The only time the number of classes becomes a concern for anyone is if there's no combat activity in the area and a couple of guys want to start some combat and don't have any experience so they don't know what class to start with. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Roy, from my point of view I respectfully disagree with that perspective. When I started flying combat 5 years ago I had two fleets to build - one for 2610 and one for Open B. I could then fly at pretty much any event I cared to attend. That is just not the case anymore. I do agree that 2610 is dead and 2548 is not far behind, but as 2610, (as you correctly state) is the ONLY scale AMA rulebook event, then that is probably what will be flown at the NATS if we can round up enough participants. So I have to keep some 2610 birds around for one event a year??

B has been split into Open and Limited. Yes, it is possible to change a prop and muffler to fly an Open ship in Limited but not all planes will fit this category (Mine happen to be heavy enough!).

SSC has certainly taken off. I am one of the people who detest the 15 engines and have had more than enough difficulty getting good consistent runs out of them. Can it be done? - obviously as others have proved, but there's something about the way the OS25FX delivers reliable and consistent performance that makes me ask if the extra fiddling with the 15s is worth it. So my enthusiasm and committment for this class is significantly less than the others.

I am not ready to jump into electrics at this time although I do not dismiss it as a future consideration. But that is yet another category and also not an AMA rulebook event. Perhaps if it grows to that status I will gain more interest.

Plus, relative to your observations, telling a newcomer what class to build for to gain access to the most competition has become more of a crap-shoot than it was before.

So, if we can agree to disagree, it is my personal experience that class proliferation has significantly impacted what I fly and where, plus my enthusiasm for doing so.
Lou Melancon
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2001 5:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Lou Melancon »

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">.... it is my personal experience that class proliferation has significantly impacted what I fly and where, plus my enthusiasm for doing so.

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

Keith,
I think combat, or any competitive event needs a constant influx of new participants to continue to survive. When the current crop of pilots is gone there needs to be a new crop to take their place.

What we are seeing right now is that when the veterans leave there are not as new pilots coming in, hence a decline in participation. Incidentally you can ask any veteran why they got out and you will come to some form of the same answer "burnout", and they seldom come back in.

I agree more with Roy on this issue, I don't think classes have much to do with the number of new folks trying combat. If anything the greater number of classes should attract more folks to the event.

Isn't it also strange that when Scale was the only class of Combat there were more participants than there are now by a considerable margin?
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">. . . . . . . . . it is my personal experience that class proliferation has significantly impacted what I fly and where, plus my enthusiasm for doing so.

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


Now that clarification of your position I can agree with. . . . that additional classes concern or frustrate <b>you</b>. The reason I can't be sure of. But if there are only three other combat pilots in your area then you probably have to travel to fly in any events. If that's the case and the events you do travel to are not flying the same one or two classes then that could in fact become a problem, at least for you.

Is "class proliferation" the demise of of the RCCA. . . . NO. Does it make it harder for those in isolated areas with little combat being held locally . . . Yes, it could make for harder decisions on what to build and fly. But in reality we are all just flying in small groups across the country and with few exceptions we stay within our own group's events. Only at the Nats do we see any number of folks from across the country get together to fly multiple events, that is more then two classes. And for that very reason I feel that multiple classes are a positive not a negative to the growth of combat. We have areas of activity for 1/2A, SSC, Limited B, Open B, 2548/2610, E3696 and only because we have a national organization are we able to bring together the experiences of these individuals and groups of individuals for the betterment of the whole. And I truly believe that the organization as a whole is all the better for the selection of classes that we currently have. We just don't have the skills to manage the resources and instead fall victim to the frustrations of organizing both locally and nationally the options we do have.

As before, my thoughts are not an attack on you or your position, just a different opinion.
User avatar
lightning
Posts: 1444
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2003 10:53 pm
Location: USA

Post by lightning »

Roy, OK, I can see that you believe more classes gives a beginner more opportunity to choose what he is going to fly (provided that class gets flown in his locality) but I still suggest this is a 2-edged sword (agree to disagree, remember??) as I believe it is that proliferation that is contributing to what you and others may well see as my burn-out. It is for this reason (with the possible exception of the Muncie NATS) I will probably limit myself to Open B, Limited B and a little SSC this year.
What is the answer - I'm not sure.
We have not even touched on the RCCA vs. non RCCA flyers yet. You see, while we only have three currently registered RCCA pilots in Michigan, there are at least seven pilots who fly at our club. The non-RCCA types are probably not interested in the travel associated with multiple events.
So should the question be adjusted somewhat to see what we can do to make the RCCA more attractive to the current non-members? NPS isn't doing it for them, NATS doesn't do it for them. I'm not sure what it would take, but I do know from some of their comments that the potential of trying to compete in perhaps seven, eight or more different classes of combat has turned them off.
Food for thought if nothing more.
jj
Posts: 729
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2002 11:45 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by jj »

Well, as much as I want to keep this more of a poll without comments, I guess we are an opinionated bunch and so comments will continue. Glad they are staying fairly positive.

I must be up past 50 cents by now, but another 2 cents worth.

In my experience class proliferation does cause problems. I've seen it in other hobbies and in RC Combat as well. The problem isn't having several stable classes to choose from, but rather having changing rules and interest levels. Many folks in Colorado have stayed with Open B because they know they can show up with Open B planes at any event and be able to fly. I've read on this thread that others fly SSC or other events, not because it is their favorite, but again, because that is what the majority of events in their area are. Part of why I want a good poll from the membership is so that CDs and organizers can ensure the events they plan for the year match up well to the local interest.

Back to class proliferation, I can say that 2548 has managed to kill off both 2610 and 2548 up here. Several people flew 2610 and a few new pilots are interested in 2610, but a few of us joined in on trying out 2548. 2548s don't fly well in CO. So there is not enough critical mass to have either a 2610 or 2548 contests and people who built either are frustrated. The only reason why anyone even considers flying 2548 or 2610 out here is to practice for the Nats. We do like scale and e3696 planes fly well up here so I expect that may be our last, best hope of any sort of scale combat to take hold above 5,000ft. It also has attracted interest from some "new" e-only combat pilots and fresh participants is always a good thing.

The key is to know what you, and the other locals _want_ to fly. Hence, this poll. Note, I say Want to fly, not will fly. A lot of people have posted what they Will fly because they have no choice and that is a recipe for potential burnout.

You can serve up great worm-meat Barbeque, but if the people don't want to come, you can't force em (legally). Unless you match the product to what the local market wants you are wastin' everyones time.

Regarding RCCA itself, you will always have a lot more participants than SIG members. I flew lots of C/L stunt and fly pylon occasionally, but I won't join PAMPA or NMPRA unless I feel I am going to be competitive for several years. Most people fly and compete for fun, but typically don't join a SIG unless they feel they want to contribute to the rules, or compete at the national level. That is true in most hobbies or sports.
User avatar
dirko
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 8:33 pm
Location: USA

Post by dirko »

As a new guy, the idea of sponsoring new memebers appeals to me. I did educational meetings at two of the local clubs. Now I will have two people that are building "B" ships. One is building one of Mike's Phencepost and another bought a Battle Axe. Not only will I have someone to practice with, but as others see how much fun we have, it just might grow. I will offer to sponsor them into the RCCA, if they agree to pay it forward. You never know maybe I'll get combat start in the Quad Cities.[:p]
Hat Trick
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2001 6:58 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by Hat Trick »

I agree that class proliferation and technology escalation seriously affects pilot burnout. A lot of guys get frustrated and just quit when they figure out that the planes they built are for the wrong class or just not competitive anymore. It's important to start them right!
jj
Posts: 729
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2002 11:45 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by jj »

Dirk,
Thanks for taking the effort to get people started in IA.

Make sure you emphasize that the planes are durable and you don't need to be an expert pilot to fly them and have fun.

Even with 2 or 3 pilots you can fly Fox & Hound (one guy pulls a streamer and wins if he can avoid being cut by the others). This is a fun event and great practice, especially if there are only a few people.

As you can see SSC is the most popular event nationwide, but by building a B plane with a 64" span you can fly either limited B or Open B by just by changing props and mufflers.

No matter how much bickering or debate you see on the RCCA site, we all agree R/C combat is a LOT of fun, challenging and rewarding. Thanks again for encouraging some newbys to get the combat bug.
Vapor52
Posts: 211
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 10:56 am

Post by Vapor52 »

Mike hit the nail on the head! Technology has kept me out, I would come back if I could fly Limited B on a Sa* * * *ay & go home. I'm beyond spending my whole weekend traveling to fly combat. I long for the days when I could fly once a month in Richmond & once a month in Lafayette. My vote would be for Limited B, But I would fly SSC if it were consistent and 1 day event-------rick
Captain America
Posts: 1009
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 2:33 pm
Location: Middle of f'n nowhere

Post by Captain America »

I love to fly combat, dont really enjoy the building process as much. I have re built my fleet this winter to use the same wing and fuse for ssc, limited and openB. I would prefer not to mess with ssc just 'cause it requires different motormounts, engine etc... but I have it down to a managable build.

I have a lot of opinions on classes and # of planes, but Im going to keep them to myself today.
sgilkey
Posts: 2351
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2001 8:26 am

Post by sgilkey »

I really struggle with the "class proliferation" argument. As a district rep i get way more complaints about (i.e. "opposed to") class proliferation than I do in favor of it. I don't like it personally, either. But I do like to fly combat and it's much better when there's somebody to fly it with, and if someone comes up with a class, and starts flying it, I (and many others) want to be involved. Most of the active fliers in my district were die hard scale 2610 fliers, that event withered and then 2548 mostly killed it. We all tried 2548, built the planes for it, flew it and liked it but other than the NATS, it has not caught on at all in our area. We considered holding events for it, like we used to do twice or thrice a year for 2610. We tried it once and the same guys who flew 2610 flew 2548, and that wasn't enough to make it a worthwhile contest. So scale has mostly died. We all have fleets that we take to NATS and that's it, for now. We all took on SSC because it was very popular in other areas but most of the folks in my area don't really like it and prefer the B classes. Open B is a favorite for active combat fliers, but the performance is so high, and the pilot talent at the meets in our area is strong enough that noobs are pretty much slaughtered and get discouraged. So we have tried LimB and it has gotten a fair amount of interest, though the performance and damage are still higher than we would prefer. Lim 1/2A got a fair amount of initial interest but nobody has organized a formal meet, we usually tack it on at the end of other classes, time permitting. Curiously, some of the strongest opponents of "class proliferation" built Lim 1/2As and love them, which does not help my confusion.

I have active fleets for 6 combat classes and don't like it. Yet I see the excitement of 3696 and am having a hard time resisting building some. If someone's gonna fly them near me, I'm going to want to play along. HOwever, everyone I've talked to in my area says "enough" and is not building one. Yet.

I, and apparently most folks in my district, wish we could get our combat fix with one or two classes. That seems to be pretty universal. But the problem is getting everyone to agree on what those two classes ought to be. Eliminate something and you will likely lose some pilots, and losing pilots is the last thing we want to do right now.

I really don't believe we will grow the RCCA with Open B. I love the class, but it is just too difficult for noobs. Combat will continue to be a boutique event with a small pilot pool if we emphasize that class. Performance-limited classes are our best shot at attracting more pilots.
Post Reply

Return to “Trends in Participation”