<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Dave:<br>
Not that it means a lot to anybody, but I dropped out of IMAC when the
airplanes went on steroids. A 35% airplane is now a less-than-standard
size plane, (40% seems to be the norm) and requires much more support
equipment and a change of lifestyle, (ground transportation, etc.) I
find that I'm not interested enough to make the required changes. And,
as a top competitor said a while back: "you know, I don't recall
having back problems until I started flying Giant Scale......"<br>
A 2 meter, plug-in wing airplane (maximum; I could get by cheerfully
with smaller) exactly suits my life style. <br>
Speaking for me, only, if pattern required a large size airplane, I
would probably go back to IMAC (or drop out entirely) because I like
many of the IMAC rules, and definitely prefer the annual sequence
changes, expressing sequences in Aresti, etc. As I say, just my
opinion, but you and I have discussed some of these things before.<br>
<br>
Bill Glaze<br>
<br>
David Lockhart wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid01a501c59323$105c25a0$6409a8c0@dog" type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; ">
<meta content="MSHTML 6.00.2737.800" name="GENERATOR">
<style></style>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">I can picture the optimized 3m plane
- it would be a wonderful flying machine.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">I'm having a harder time picturing
the RV or truck/trailer, and workshop/garage/house that would allow me
to have such a plane. Maybe I am the only one who would drop out of
pattern if the planes were 3 meters - but I think not - as I know
plenty that dropped out of pattern with each iterative escalation of
the rules for pattern since the late '80s.</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2"><br>
Dave</font></div>
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;"
dir="ltr">
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;">-----
Original Message ----- </div>
<div
style="background: rgb(228, 228, 228) none repeat scroll 0%; -moz-background-clip: initial; -moz-background-origin: initial; -moz-background-inline-policy: initial; font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"><b>From:</b>
<a title="joddino@socal.rr.com" href="mailto:joddino@socal.rr.com">J.Oddino</a>
</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"><b>To:</b>
<a title="discussion@nsrca.org" href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</a>
</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"><b>Sent:</b>
Tuesday, July 26, 2005 5:34 PM</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"><b>Subject:</b>
Does Pattern competition cost too much?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Thanks to all who responded.
There were many good thoughts on why IMAC seems to be more attractive
than pattern these days. I don't think either group has a lock on
being nicer guys and putting on a better contest, it has to be
something in the formula. I like IMAC from the standpoint there is no
weight limit resulting in more rugged airplanes that require less
maintenance. The gas engines are more user friendly and provide
excessive power without a lot of engineering and expensive fuel. No
one wins because they have a better engine. Less emphasis on the box
relaxes the pilots. But probably the biggest thing they have going for
them is the fact that the larger airplanes are better at doing what we
want to do. The 40%ers fly huge maneuvers at what seems a low constant
speed with constant radii on top and bottom of very straight vertical
lines. They are much less susceptible to wind.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Having said all this I plan to get
back into pattern and the reason is I believe the electric power system
will overcome many of my current complaints about pattern. I also
agree that the arrival of many ARFs will be good for pattern. It will
be interesting to watch but I think pattern will be making a comeback
without any major changes in the rules and specs for the airplanes.
I'd still like to see an unlimited aerobatic model airplane. Picture
an optimized 3 meter pattern plane with a DA 150. </font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2">Regards, Jim O</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="2"> </font></div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>