AMA CL Special Interest Groups

... another view related to the long 'General CL Organization' thread?

Len N offered his view on a general CL publication. Consider, there must be a time delay compiling input from each 'discipline' to put out a combined newsletter. Some material will not be used, or we'd wind up with something the size of an RCM, but without ads. The SIGs do a great job of getting word out to their members quickly, and several already have excellent newsletters and websites devoted to their specialties. In the Internet age, would the delay be acceptable?

The CL SIGs listed on the AMA website are:

MACA: Combat
NCLRA: Racing
NCS: Carrier (I misstated that in a recent post, sorry Bill C.)
NASS: Speed
PAMPA: (guess what)

and NASA (North American Scale Association) includes CL scale.

Like PAMPA, and as Bill Lee points out in the 'General CL' thread, these SIGs came into being as a result of long and serious effort by those most interested in preserving their sector of our hobby. And, there is still a need to press onward...

The gains made by each are real. All of us who fly CL have benefited in several ways from every one of the active CL SIGs.

Yes, we have specialized, and separated more than would be ideal...

Yes, we bottle up writing talent within the SIG publications, newsletters and e-sites -- not much goes to the national magazine. Timeliness, again?

Yes, if we fly several event types, we can join the SIGs that specialize in supporting them -- for a few tens of dollars a year.

But, if we are fully absorbed in one 'type,' we get the direct, undiluted word fast -- usefully current and up to date -- from the SIG dedicated to it.

I agree with John T.: ideally it would be great to have a Super-SIG unified body as a main source of shared info. With the thoughts I've tried to offer, above (how'd I do Tom B and BigIron?) I still feel it wouldn't improve on what we have now. It isn't quite as bad as Doc Jackson faced 15-20 years ago -- he was deeply into FAI as well as "domestic" activity -- but many of the same factors still apply.

May I try a zinger, here? I'm concerned how the other SIGs (other than PAMPA) will view a move to absorb them. Claim-jumping? Moving in on their established and hard-won turf? Or welcoming a group with no prior interest as it takes over?

Should we propose changing PAMPA to CLAMPA (Control Line Airplane Model Pilot's Association)? I'd have been happier with our President's stated goal if he had first contacted the existing SIGs about a unifying CL organization. He may have, but I haven't heard of it.

LAST EDITED ON Nov-17-04 AT 02:24 PM (CST)
 
Well stated. There are some but not many tips, tricks and techniques from each discipine or interest that are transferable to the other. They are all control line but that's it. I don't read the Combat, Speed, etc. articles and columns in Flying Models because I'm not interested. Myabe I'm narrow minded.

Given this, why would I want to join "Generic" controline organization. I prefer to pick and choose specific, focused groups that meet my individual needs. Don't make me watch NASCAR when I like NHRA.

LAST EDITED ON Nov-17-04 AT 03:09 PM (CST)
 
Lou:

Your reasoning makes good sense.

It does seem to me that a real problem exists now, and will be compounded if C/L in general grow's substantially with the new technologies. There is no coordinated, unified voice speaking for the combined broad interests of the C/L, both with each other and with AMA. Right no each group speaks for it's own discipline and that's all. Fine as far as it goes, but we need to do better.

Rather than combining organizations, let's consider a structure of representitives from each SIG working to present a unified voice on the broad issues needing collective resolution. An alliance (not a marriage) of C/L SIGs to speak to the broad issues without giving up the integrity of the individual SIGs.

Like everything it would not be perfect, but carefully set up it could give C/L a stronger voice with AMA and allow AMA a clearer picture of the strength and needs of C/L in general. That would benefit ALL of us!

Just food for thought.

>
>Rather than combining organizations, let's consider a
>structure of representitives from each SIG working to
>present a unified voice on the broad issues needing
>collective resolution. An alliance (not a marriage) of C/L
>SIGs to speak to the broad issues without giving up the
>integrity of the individual SIGs.
>

That one sounds like a great idea!

Really thoughtful idea Jeff. Why not expand it a bit and send it in for Stunt News. I am sure our Pampa president would be interested in pursuing it too.

Lou,

This is a very open and diplomatic suggestion you've made. I hope it receives a lot of good ideas.

I won't relate my personal story of trying to fly my control line airplanes - I'm sure everyone has experienced the pitfalls in the modern RC environment. Instead, the thing that astonished me recently was e-bay.

I bought a Fox 35 with a tongue muffler. As it turns out, the gentleman who sold it was not too far from my house. It was a little bit of a drive, but manageable enough that we worked a deal so that I wouldn't have to pay shipping. Meanwhile, he mentioned that he had some other stuff I might want to buy.

Well, as it turns out, he had a SkyRay with a Royal 25 sans muffler, a Brodak adjustable handle, and some .015x60 lines. I bought them at a fair price - the SkyRay looked very nice - he had glassed the entire fuselage and tail! Curious, though, I knew there wasn't a club for miles - and miles. "How did you do all of this?" I asked. "Was someone flying CL around here, did you get a How-To video, or what?" His answer was that he and his son just poked around on the Internet until they figured out how to do it! I was actually disappointed - I thought I might have discovered some CL hotbed I didn't know about.

Sure enough, there were some funny things about the plane. Some items were contradictory and didn't make sense - as if "hot topic" info was easy to incorporate, but fundamentals were absent. I am still astonished at the idea that he and his son might have been able to fly the plane without crashing it (the fuselage was immaculate).

That got me to thinking - what is there available for someone trying to learn? How does anyone learn how to fuel and start an engine, how to wind and unwind cables, how to fly without getting dizzy, and land the plane without smashing it? How did he know what size lines, engine, handle, prop, fuel tank, etc., etc. to get? I'm sure the kit had plenty of instructions, but man, oh man - that's a lot to do successfully on your own. I'm thinking he and his son are lucky they didn't kill each other!

(He did say he had watched Bob Dixon do CL pattern demos down at the Perry Swap Meet. Maybe that's what got them motivated! Yay, Bob!)

So, the "Sport Aviator" could meet a real need - if it included Control Line. A general organization could do the same. Or, without reducing the emphasis on competition, perhaps PAMPA could "assume" the responsibility as the open door to Control Line. I don't know which would be better, but someone needs to increase the tension on the slack lines out there. There may be more interest than we know about.

Tom,

Thanks!

What 'we'* (the Tucson Cholla Choppers) do is have a few trainers at the field, and circulate info about them, the field and our offer for assist in trying it from the handle. We have picked up a few new guys this way.
(* - I live 70 miles out of Tucson)

I think a picture of our 'trainer fleet' turned up in SN within the past year or so. They're TESTORS-type plank wing, upright .35 models. They're big enough and rugged enough to survive 'most' trainee dual flights. Repairs, when needed, are relatively straightforward.

These models also give us the opportunity to chat up interested spectators... Flyers with contact info, a photo of the trainers, and directions to the field are at all LHS.

We're also trying to arrange other demos to make us more visible. There are other ideas being discussed, too. It's a start...

Lou, As I said off forum, I am not going to respond to anymore of this type of BLATHER!!! For an explanation, you did well.
I was in MACA (A charter member) when they started to try to merge with PAMPA. I voiced a big NO at that time and would still vote NO.

Bigiron (don't tweak my feathers)