<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2523" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Ref. "some of the major publications - like Model
Aviation - pattern used to get more coverage - but it has dropped (probably
proportionate to the reduction in our numbers)". </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial> In actual fact what happened was that
about two years ago they took the demographics from the little "what are
you interested in" boxes that we fill in on the AMA membership application forms
and determined the popularity of all of the columns that way. Then they reduced
all of the columns to a maximum of 6 per year including a Nationals. Some
categories get less than six, BTW.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial> Since then Rob Kurek, the guy in charge
of Model Aviation, called me and also sent me a very exciting survey results
document. Model Aviation ran a professional reader survey and guess what?
the <FONT color=#0000ff><STRONG>Pattern column was number two to
Scale.</STRONG> </FONT><FONT color=#000000>Scale </FONT>was number one.
Even more encouraging was that in some categories the pattern
column took the lead.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>I don't know if I will ever get my 12 columns a year back,
but it made me feel it was all worthwhile.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial> The modeling community still looks to
pattern as a technology leader and really enjoys what we <U>all</U> achieve.
Please forgive me for tooting my own horn but good news is hard to find
these days and this was<EM> good</EM>!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Regards,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><BR>Eric.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=DaveL322@comcast.net
href="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net">DaveL322@comcast.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, February 09, 2005 11:22
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Rules don't grow
sports!</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Pete,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I'm familiar with the "claim" concept, and the dollar limit idea.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Questions I have -</DIV>
<DIV>-How does one deal with used equipment? Much of the top of the line
stuff from the top fliers gets recycled to flyers in the lower classes - I
know in the northeast alone that myself, Don Szczur, Eric Henderson, George
Asteris, Earl Vincent, and Joe Lachowski (to name a few) have all sold
planes were capable of flying at the highest levels to Sportsman and
Intermediate pilots - some of the planes were well used and bare bones
(relatively cheap) while some were backup planes that were close to new and
pretty much RTF (relatively expensive).</DIV>
<DIV>-How do you set the price limit - ie, no matter what price limit you set,
somebody will always want the number raised .5%, or 2%, or 10% because "your"
arbitrary price limit is "needlessly" shutting out some really good equipment
combinations that would otherwise allow more people into the event (gee,
sounds a lot like the discussion on weight limit).</DIV>
<DIV>-Do "professional" building fees get included in airplane cost?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>BTW - it might be harder than you think to get "face time" in some of the
major publications - like Model Aviation - pattern used to get more coverage -
but it has dropped (probably proportionate to the reduction in our numbers)
because the magazines view the pattern group as a small demographic and devote
what they consider to be an appropriate amount of coverage. Best way to
combat this is too support magazines that support pattern - like FM - aka Mike
Ramsey and Dean Pappas on this list.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards,</DIV>
<DIV><BR>Dave Lockhart</DIV>
<DIV><A href="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net">DaveL322@comcast.net</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">--------------
Original message -------------- <BR><BR>> From an outsiders point of view
Eric hit the nail on the head. If you don't <BR>> get some "Face Time"
the masses are not going to notice you. The NSRCA has a <BR>> website and
it would be easy enough to post some WMV files out there for <BR>>
download and make sure there are ads and articles in Model Aviation at the
<BR>> least and more mainstream magazines if possible. <BR>> <BR>>
As for the debate about rules changes, the biggest stumbling block you have
<BR>> is the perceived need for a full blown pattern ship to even compete
in <BR>> sportsman. I know....I went and bought one before I did any
homework on the <BR>> issue. If you want people to be more comfortable.
put a spending cap on the <BR>> gear you can use in sportsman like some
auto race organizations do with <BR>> "Claimer" classes. You can only
spend X amount and base it on list prices. <BR>> If you can only spend
$600 to $700 on a plane and engine you just knocked <BR>> most of the
high dollar stuff out of the running. Pick an ARF any ARF and a <BR>>
good engine and there is $600 +/-. <BR>> <BR>> Take it for what it is.
Just one guy's opinion. <BR>> <BR>> ----- Original Message -----
<BR>> From: "Grow Pattern" <PATTERN4U@COMCAST.NET><BR>> To:
<DISCUSSION@NSRCA.ORG><BR>> Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 10:01
<BR>> Subject: Rules don't grow sports! <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> >
It's not the "driving away" that is the problem. It may seem that way, but
<BR>> > attrition is normal in any sport. The really big problem is
"attraction". <BR>> > <BR>> > I keep a close eye on the ages of
the folks joining and the ages of the <BR>> > folks leaving. the
leaving is pretty normal. The joining age group is very <BR>> > sparse
in the below 20, and the 20-30 range. <BR>> > <BR>> > This tree
has no soil around its roots..... <BR>> > <BR>> > I would submit
to you all that what we debate over size, weight etc. has <BR>> > very
little to do with whether a new person joins or not. If you are new,
<BR>> > you tend to accept the rules as the challenge, and go fly. You
have no <BR>> > history so are not that concerned. There are much
brighter lights gaining <BR>> > your attention, not least of which is
the thrill of competing. <BR>> > <BR>> > What is more critical
than any rule is the complete lack of promotional <BR>> > material,
lack of tools for our VP's and members to use to promote our <BR>> >
sport. You don't even have a handout/brochure any more. No video to do a
<BR>> > "show and tell" at a club night. No formula for growth at all.
<BR>> > <BR>> > Imagine if all of the effort that we put into
debating a rule was used to <BR>> > put your teeth into something that
we could all use out there at the WRAM <BR>> > or Toledo show. Imagine
flight demo-tapes running in continuous loops, <BR>> > Aresti diagrams
hanging from the walls, THEN wake up to the reality of <BR>> > running
the judging tape at your booth.... <BR>> > <BR>> > I know and
acknowledge that there are some individual points of light out <BR>> >
there where great work has been done, but it is not a concerted effort or
<BR>> > coordinated NSRCA plan, or intent. <BR>> > <BR>> >
It really is time to get the NSRCA galvanized in to some real activities
<BR>> > for growth. <BR>> > <BR>> > In publishing we say
"Publish or perish!. In a sport it is "PROMOTE or <BR>> > PERISH!"
<BR>> > <BR>> > Regards, <BR>> > <BR>> > Eric.
<BR>> > <BR>> > ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> > From:
"Del K. Rykert" <DRYKERT2@ROCHESTER.RR.COM><BR>> > To:
<DISCUSSION@NSRCA.ORG><BR>> > Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 9:29
AM <BR>> > Subject: Re: *SPAM* Re: Rules Survey <BR>> > <BR>>
> <BR>> >> Show me the changes in last 20 years that hasn't also
turned some <BR>> >> away...? One of the reason not as many
participate as once did... Leave <BR>> >> it alone unless you want
to drive more away. <BR>> >> <BR>> >> del <BR>>
>> nsrca 473 <BR>> >> <BR>> >> ----- Original
Message ----- <BR>> >> From: "Wayne Galligan"
<WGALLIGAN@GOODSONACURA.COM><BR>> >> To:
<DISCUSSION@NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >> Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005
8:29 AM <BR>> >> Subject: Re: *SPAM* Re: Rules Survey <BR>>
>> <BR>> >> <BR>> >>> Nat, <BR>> >>>
<BR>> >>> Your right... look at the last three years at the Nats
and what took top <BR>> >>> honors in the masters class.....an
ARF that cost less then $600. <BR>> >>> <BR>> >>> WG
<BR>> >>> <BR>> >>> ----- Original Message -----
<BR>> >>> From: "Nat Penton" <NATPENTON@CENTURYTEL.NET><BR>>
>>> To: <DISCUSSION@NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >>> Sent: Tuesday,
February 08, 2005 7:21 PM <BR>> >>> Subject: Re: *SPAM* Re:
Rules Survey <BR>> >>> <BR>> >>> <BR>>
>>>> Some of you are over estimating the importance of the
airplane and <BR>> >>>> underestimating the potential of the
pilot. Nat <BR>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>>
>>>> From: "Bill Southwell" <BNBSOUTHWELL@BELLSOUTH.NET><BR>>
>>>> To: <DISCUSSION@NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >>>> Sent:
Tuesday, February 08, 2005 8:56 PM <BR>> >>>> Subject: Re:
*SPAM* Re: Rules Survey <BR>> >>>> <BR>> >>>>
<BR>> >>>> > Tom how so? If there are available engines
that actually hold up but <BR>> >>> are <BR>>
>>>> > a bit more porky....but also a lot cheaper to own both
in intial <BR>> >>> purchase <BR>> >>>> > and
in up keep how can it lead to a more expensive airplane. Cost of <BR>>
>>>> > the <BR>> >>>> > present designs are
due to the materials and mathods of production <BR>> >>>>
> required tokeep the weight down. A little more room would make more
<BR>> >>>> > pedestrian material like balsa , ply. and
foam to come back or at <BR>> >>>> > least <BR>>
>>>> > make the average builder have hope. <BR>>
>>>> > <BR>> >>>> > <BR>>
>>>> > <BR>> >>>> > <BR>>
>>>> > <BR>> >>>> > Tom Shaw wrote:
<BR>> >>>> > <BR>> >>>> >> You guys
need to leave well enough alone. With the unlimited <BR>>
>>>> >> engines a <BR>> >>>> >>
higher weight limit is just going to ecourage larger more expenseive
<BR>> >>>> >> airplanes. That will amount to fewer
flyers. <BR>> >>>> >> <BR>> >>>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >>>> >>
*From:* Gray E Fowler <MAILTO:GFOWLER@RAYTHEON.COM><BR>> >>>>
>> *To:* discussion@nsrca.org <MAILTO:DISCUSSION@NSRCA.ORG><BR>>
>>>> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 08, 2005 4:25 PM
<BR>> >>>> >> *Subject:* RE: *SPAM* Re: Rules Survey
<BR>> >>>> >> <BR>> >>>> >>
<BR>> >>>> >> Here comes the dreaded weight debate
again.... <BR>> >>>> >> <BR>> >>>>
>> Consider this-Anyone in the upper level classes would not be too
<BR>> >>>> >> smart to have a plane heavier than it
needs to be. But, lets <BR>> >>>> >> pretend there is a
hot new Sportsman named uh lets see..... <BR>> >>>> >>
Chuck. <BR>> >>>> >> Chuck tears up 401 after 3
contests, and he is flying his best <BR>> >>>> >>
airplane that most FAI guys would consider a toy (and I do not <BR>>
>>>> >> mean the "foamie toys" pictured in last months
Model Aviation <BR>> >>>> >> being held by a guy named
"Chuck") and so moving up to <BR>> >>>> >> Intermediate
halfway thru his first season, last 3 contests were <BR>>
>>>> >> quite a challenge, BUT he places in 402 anyway!
<BR>> >>>> >> In the off season, he saves his pennies,
keeps his wife happy <BR>> >>>> >> and <BR>>
>>>> >> gets a used REAL pattern plane, built by someone
who has a <BR>> >>>> >> slight <BR>>
>>>> >> heavy hand, and alas it weighs 11.5 lbs. Now this
here Chuck is <BR>> >>>> >> good and pumped up and I
would place money that this theoretical <BR>> >>>> >>
person could place at the NATS, but his plane is over <BR>>
>>>> >> weight!!!!! <BR>> >>>> >> one
more ! <BR>> >>>> >> <BR>> >>>> >>
Sorry Chuck, even though you are flying at a disadvantage, we <BR>>
>>>> >> will <BR>> >>>> >> not let
you play at the NATS........Oh unless you can spend $2k <BR>>
>>>> >> more on another plane. <BR>> >>>>
>> <BR>> >>>> >> The story you have just read is
about to be true, once we do not <BR>> >>>> >> let
Chuck fly at this years NATS. But at least the French FAI <BR>>
>>>> >> rule <BR>> >>>> >> makers are
happy. <BR>> >>>> >> <BR>> >>>> >>
Consider a weight change. It does not need to be across the <BR>>
>>>> >> board <BR>> >>>> >> and for
the life of me I cannot imagine why it needs to align <BR>>
>>>> >> with <BR>> >>>> >> FAI. Chuck
will have a 5Kg plane *BY THE TIME HE REACHES <BR>> >>>>
>> FAI-*and <BR>> >>>> >> the French can be happy
then*.* <BR>> >>>> >> <BR>> >>>>
>> <BR>> >>>> >> <BR>> >>>>
>> <BR>> >>>> >> <BR>> >>>> >
<BR>> >>>> >
================================================= <BR>> >>>>
> To access the email archives for this list, go to <BR>>
>>>> > http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
<BR>> >>>> > To be removed from this list, go to <BR>>
>>>> > http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm <BR>>
>>>> > and follow the instructions. <BR>> >>>>
> <BR>> >>>> > <BR>> >>>> > <BR>>
>>>> > <BR>> >>>> > -- <BR>>
>>>> > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. <BR>>
>>>> > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. <BR>> >>>>
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.0 - Release Date: 1/17/2005
<BR>> >>>> > <BR>> >>>> > <BR>>
>>>> <BR>> >>>> <BR>> >>>>
<BR>> >>>> -- <BR>> >>>> Internal Virus
Database is out-of-date. <BR>> >>>> Checked by AVG
Anti-Virus. <BR>> >>>> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database:
265.7.0 - Release Date: 1/17/2005 <BR>> >>>> <BR>>
>>>> ================================================= <BR>>
>>>> To access the email archives for this list, go to <BR>>
>>>> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/ <BR>>
>>>> To be removed from this list, go to <BR>>
>>>> http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm <BR>>
>>>> and follow the instructions. <BR>> >>>>
<BR>> >>>> <BR>> >>> <BR>> >>>
<BR>> >>> =================================================
<BR>> >>> To access the email archives for this list, go to
<BR>> >>> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
<BR>> >>> To be removed from this list, go to
http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm <BR>> >>> and follow the
instructions. <BR>> >>> <BR>> >>> <BR>> >>
<BR>> >> ================================================= <BR>>
>> To access the email archives for this list, go to <BR>> >>
http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/ <BR>> >> To be
removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm <BR>>
>> and follow the instructions. <BR>> >> <BR>> >
<BR>> > ================================================= <BR>>
> To access the email archives for this list, go to <BR>> >
http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/ <BR>> > To be removed
from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm <BR>> > and
follow the instructions. <BR>> > <BR>> <BR>>
================================================= <BR>> To access the
email archives for this list, go to <BR>>
http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/ <BR>> To be removed from
this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm <BR>> and follow
the instructions. <BR>>
</BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></MAILTO:DISCUSSION@NSRCA.ORG></MAILTO:GFOWLER@RAYTHEON.COM></BODY></HTML>