Los Angeles P40 Contest

Last Sunday, (May 7 2006) the Valley Circle Burners held a stunt judging clinic and Profile 40 contest. Keith Trostle did a wonderful job, as he has for the last 3 years running his clinic and Lee Strickland held a bang-up P40 contest. I spent the day practice judging for an upcoming contest. Let me tell you, P40 Rules Baby!! There is something about a low cost profile and engine combo that makes cats fly like there is no tomorrow!!

My guess is that is Keith Trostle must have got everyone all pumped up with his judging\pattern seminar and they just cut loose! The placed looked like everyone had bootlegged a bunch of Han Ping videos. I got so excited judging the flights that when I got home, I cranked up my trusty AutoCAD and went back to work on my Saito 40A powered profile.

If there is one sure way to increase participation in stunt, Profile 40 surely has got to be at the forefront.

LAST EDITED ON May-15-06 AT 12:53 PM (CST)
 
x

Ty,
Never fear. We had separate categories for Sportsman (Beg & Int) and Competitor (Adv & Exp.)at that P-40 contest.
Interesting to note that Sten Tyler won Competitor with an ARF Flite Streak/OS25FP. This contest did not use the 25 point no flap bonus. Contests at Whittier Narrows usually do have that bonus. It would be nice if we could arrive at a common set of rules, say 20 pt bonus for no flaps.
Happy Landings

>Ty,
>Never fear. We had separate categories for Sportsman (Beg &
>Int) and Competitor (Adv & Exp.)at that P-40 contest.
>Interesting to note that Sten Tyler won Competitor with an
>ARF Flite Streak/OS25FP. This contest did not use the 25
>point no flap bonus. Contests at Whittier Narrows usually
>do have that bonus. It would be nice if we could arrive at
>a common set of rules, say 20 pt bonus for no flaps.
>Happy Landings

Why is there a bonus for no flaps?

At the Knights of the Round Circle, we felt that a no-flap bonus would drag the Ringmasters and similar models out of the closet when they had to fly against Cardinals and Pathfinders. It is an attempt to increase participation through "Flung whatcha brung" rather than requiring building an especially "Zoot" airplane.

Eventually, of course, there will develop some more killer non-flapped models and we will likely have to reduce the differential....or not. Perhaps is a good way to encourage development of much superior simple models.

"...there will develop some more killer non-flapped models..."
**************************************************************

Already exists. It's called "The Doctor".

>"...there will develop some more killer non-flapped
>models..."
>**************************************************************
>
>Already exists. It's called "The Doctor".
>

Or the Skyray 35, or the Medic, or the Flite Streak, or the Ringmaster, or....

It's the ENGINE that matters - once you have that right you don't give up much if anything by not having flaps.

It's the ENGINE that matters - once you have that right
>you don't give up much if anything by not having flaps.
>
>Brett

Brett, trust me on this. The guy who won it, Stan Tyler, had an engine run to die for. He had his little 25 running like a turbine. In fact, the way all these guys had their motors running, you'd swear it was Expert at the Golden State Stunt Championships.

>It's the ENGINE that matters - once you have that right
>>you don't give up much if anything by not having flaps.
>>
>>Brett
>
>Brett, trust me on this. The guy who won it, Stan Tyler, had
>an engine run to die for. He had his little 25 running like
>a turbine. In fact, the way all these guys had their motors
>running, you'd swear it was Expert at the Golden State Stunt
>Championships.

Brett/Milton,

As we all know, it's a pleasure to fly a pattern with a motor that runs well and that you don't have to fight with. The FP20/25 or LA 25 package in a Ringmaster, Flite Streak, Skyray, Super Clown, or anything in the 400 sq. in size is an underrated combination.
If you think my motor run was good, you should see Derek Moran fly his Skyray with the FP20 (or is it a FP25?). Very impressive, runs like a watch.

And yes, it's the BBTU package.

Regards,
Stan Tyler

>Brett/Milton,
>
>If you think my motor run was good, you should see Derek
>Moran fly his Skyray with the FP20 (or is it a FP25?). Very
>impressive, runs like a watch.
>
>And yes, it's the BBTU package.
>
>Regards,
>Stan Tyler

I flew Derek Moran's FP20 Skyray. It took care of business!!

>>It's the ENGINE that matters - once you have that right
>>>you don't give up much if anything by not having flaps.
>>>
>>>Brett
>>
>>Brett, trust me on this. The guy who won it, Stan Tyler, had
>>an engine run to die for. He had his little 25 running like
>>a turbine. In fact, the way all these guys had their motors
>>running, you'd swear it was Expert at the Golden State Stunt
>>Championships.
>
>Brett/Milton,
>
>As we all know, it's a pleasure to fly a pattern with a
>motor that runs well and that you don't have to fight with.
>The FP20/25 or LA 25 package in a Ringmaster, Flite Streak,
>Skyray, Super Clown, or anything in the 400 sq. in size is
>an underrated combination.

I guess my point was that going from a Fox to a 20FP or similar improves the cornering vastly more than going from a non-flapped airplane to a flapped airplane. Even the relatively lowly Skyray 35 will corner about as well as you ever need in any competition environment at any level - as long as you have the right engine.

LAST EDITED ON May-10-06 AT 06:10 PM (CST)
 
My thought about the P-40 class was that it was set up to give the average sport flyer a place to compete . Fly what you got,Twister,Challenger,Cardinal,Banshee,Pathfinder,Shameless , plus all the profile ARF's . Most of them with a 35 to 40 motor . Some of them rough to look at but there are no appearance points . A place to get your feet wet in stunt competition without the big investment in building time .
As far as the no flap rule the guy who won competitor class had no flaps !
Anyway it was a fun contest with great weather and good people .

Bill

Bill Barber

>I'll second that as to getting folks back into CLPA. Now to
>keep the Advanced and Expert flyers out of it and give us
>lowly Intermediates a chance to compete against our own.
>Nuff said.

I'll agree to the extent that separated classes would be a good idea. What I think you want to avoid is actively militating against having experts and advanced guys at the field. It's been my experience in a lot of competitive areas that the presence of excellence is a much better motivator for skill improvement than is "apparent" success in the absence of a measure for what it is one is trying to achieve.

Of course, you then get into the problem of too many events which becomes an administrative problem. Perhaps during a "full spectrum contest" where better flyers will be there anyhow to compete in the "normal" events of OTS, Classic, and PAMPA Skill Classes, it would be appropriate to limit the P40 event to skill levels acceptable to the majority of flyers.

LAST EDITED ON May-15-06 AT 12:54 PM (CST)
 
x

Hi Milt, it was great to see and talk with you. WE all had a good time. I think Profile 40 is great, but it was my first contest to fly in. I'm not sure flap bonus or not matters much after all everyone deals withe the same rules. For me I would like to win but for all intents and purposes we are flying against our selves. If I get abetter score next time swell, if not it ain't Ted's fault (or whoever) unless they're throwing rocks or something. I can miss turns all by myself, thank you. The object should be trying to get the pattern as good as YOU can. P-40 seems to be a good fun event with room for everyone. As an intermediate type dude I know I can learn something from watching everyone fly. Stan Tyler sure does a nice pattern with a Flite Steak and John Wright Impresses me with anything I've seen him fly. It would be a mistake to eliminate the "teachers" from the mix. So you Know I was the Pit Boss (white Cardinal)

Smoothie Bill

I saw the "no flap bonus" for the first time in Polk City last week. But only 10 points.

I like the idea. It goes along with the profile body and smaller engine. It helps make the event different from "real" stunt and Classic.

I count five stunts with sharp corners, a total of 200 points, plenty of opportunity to earn back the bonus if the flaps really help.

Whatever the result, the P-40 event is relativly new, and subject to modification and change. Let's go with the flow in the various locations and see what works out.

I don't think we even have a really firm goal for the event as we do for beginner/intermediate/advanced/expert series.

It certainly is popular, so let's take it easy on trying to nail it down too firmly yet. Perhaps varied rules in different locations make it interesting.

It would be interesting to start collecting information on the top performing models throughout the country in various contests. That along with what the average modeler is competing with might give some worthwhile insight into where to go with the event.

If you have 2 flapped models coming in 1st and 2nd, and 8 more unflapped as also-rans, you might conclude that the no-flap bonus is worthwhile. If the results are as they were at the Valley Circle Burners contest, maybe it doesn't matter. Time will tell. We need not be in a hurry.

LAST EDITED ON May-13-06 AT 01:31 PM (CST)
 
I've always enjoyed the P-40 event, but I can see where there may be some tweaking needed now that it's catching on all over the country.

As originally percieved, I believe the idea was to give those moving into stunt a place to competitivly fly those profiles that are so common when learning the pattern. Limiting the engine size, profile style, (no hybrid profiles such as the Imitation.) and open class only style of competition, was to keep it simple and easy to administer.

It's still may be the best way to go when included in a whole array of stunt events, such as OT, Classic, P-40, PAMPA classes, at one weekend contest.

I believe the popularity of the event is getting to the point that we may be seeing profile only stunt as a complete specialty contest.

If this is happening, or will soon happen, perhaps some agreement on rules and venues should be considered by the stunt community as a whole. Something to make the rules more universal. I for one like it when the rules for an event are the same wherever you may go.

I would support, and propose, the following changes be incorporated into an event called Profile Stunt.

Two classes, "Profile 40" would remain as it usually is flown. It would be restricted to Beginner and Intermediate skill levels.

The second class would simply be "Profile EX". This class would have a redifined definition of what is a profile, that would allow the hybrid profiles, and no restriction on engine size or type. Expert, and Advanced pilots would compete in this class, but those normally flying in a lower class would not be excluded. They would, in fact, be incouraged to move to this class as their skills dictate.

A no flap bonus could be used in one, or both classes, though I personally believe that there are non-flapped designs that are more than capable of holding their own, without a bonus.

This change, should it be tried, would set up a two-tiered system that would allow new pilots a chance to fly and compete with others close to their own ability, and move up when they are ready. I believe this would add and encourage pilots, such as the skill classes have done for PAMPA stunt.

Additionally, One or both classes could be flown at a contest. For instance, at a contest such as is now flown. When specifying P-40 only, it would automatically restrict the entrants to the lower classes.

When both classes are flown,it should not increase the workload significantly because the classes could both compete at the same time and circles, before the same judges. The class standings would be seperated out at the tabulating table.

I particularly like the idea of a less restrictive, as to engine, and profile style for the higher class. I believe this would encourage some design inovations, as well as further the art. The Tuscon group as pioneered the idea of Profile stunt, as far as no resrtiction on engines. I wonder how this has worked out for them?

Well, what do you think?

I'm wondering why everything is spinning around?

Where's the pictures?

I started competing in CLPA last year in the LA area; me and my spiffed up ARC Cardinal and OS 40. I really enjoy the P-40 event. Although I was in the Beginner class last year and could not fly all the maneuvers, the P-40 rules used in the LA area allow the flyer to inform the judges of any maneuver(s) to be left out and not be penalized by losing pattern points in addition to losing the maneuver scores. This made competing in the event as a Beginner a little less painful. One advantage of competing in the P-40 event as a Beginner is that you can add maneuvers to your flight schedule as you learn them. Not something you can do in any other event. I found this to be very beneficial to my learning process. I did not worry about the fact that I was flying with a 4 or 5 maneuver handicap. I would simply fly every maneuver I could in front of the judges as soon as I could do it safely. Finally, I got over the hurdle of the dreaded outside squares and discovered that I was no longer a Beginner.

I endorse Ted Fancher's remark about lower class flyers flying against higher class flyers in some events. I have found that flying against those with superior skill tends to elicit a somewhat better performance from me than I would otherwise give. I experienced this in my 25 years fighting the RC Pattern wars and I believe it will be true in CLPA. I don't know the psychological reasons for this, but I know it happens. Now that I can fly all maneuvers and have moved up to Intermediate, I am trying to refurbish an old nearly finished Nobler that's been in the attic for 25 years so I can fly Classic. There I will be flying against the top tier of pilots, but I believe the experience will help me improve faster than I would otherwise. Plus it gives me an additional event to fly which adds up to more flying time in front of the judges.

> Although I was in the Beginner class last year
>and could not fly all the maneuvers, the P-40 rules used in
>the LA area allow the flyer to inform the judges of any
>maneuver(s) to be left out and not be penalized by losing
>pattern points in addition to losing the maneuver scores.
>This made competing in the event as a Beginner a little less
>painful. One advantage of competing in the P-40 event as a
>Beginner is that you can add maneuvers to your flight
>schedule as you learn them. Not something you can do in any
>other event.

That USED to be a feature of the PAMPA Classes. Beginner flew the same pattern as everyone else, so you added maneuvers and those who could to them all beat those who hadn't quite mastered the hourglass, etc. The change to the PAMPA Beginner pattern lost that feature, and overall I thought it was better the original way.

That change had another unintentional side-effect. It effectively compressed the skill classes into only 3, instead of 4. So now what would previously had been considered beginners are now intermediates, which sort of pushed the rest up, too. That was at least on factor led to the very wide skill range in Expert.

>
>I endorse Ted Fancher's remark about lower class flyers
>flying against higher class flyers in some events. I have
>found that flying against those with superior skill tends to
>elicit a somewhat better performance from me than I would
>otherwise give. I experienced this in my 25 years fighting
>the RC Pattern wars and I believe it will be true in CLPA.
>I don't know the psychological reasons for this, but I know
>it happens. Now that I can fly all maneuvers and have moved
>up to Intermediate, I am trying to refurbish an old nearly
>finished Nobler that's been in the attic for 25 years so I
>can fly Classic. There I will be flying against the top
>tier of pilots, but I believe the experience will help me
>improve faster than I would otherwise. Plus it gives me an
>additional event to fly which adds up to more flying time in
>front of the judges.

I think you figured out one of the big secrets to stunt in skill classes - jump up to the next class at the first hint of mastering the class you are in. I know people who grind away for years in Advanced trying to win that last big trophy, and they just stagnate. The purpose is to move through the classes as quickly as possible, so you will continue to have a challenge to drive you to better flying.

>>The purpose is to move through the classes as quickly as possible, so you will continue to have a challenge to drive you to better flying. <<

Which brings up discussions we have at just about every big contest. The need for Expert to split into 2 classes with the bottom dwellers like me in a sort of Expert-Lite class and hotshots like you, Paul and Ted in the new Master Class. I suspect if this doesn't happen at some point, we will end up with 5 guys in Intermediate, 5 in Advanced and 35 in Expert at a contest. Sort of defeats the purpose of skill classes. Might as well be Junior/Senior/Open. By my lights, not a particularly bad thing as at most contests I'm really just flying against the guys that are scoring 10 points ahead of me.

>>>The purpose is to move through the classes as quickly as possible, so you will continue to have a challenge to drive you to better flying. <<
>
>Which brings up discussions we have at just about every big
>contest. The need for Expert to split into 2 classes with
>the bottom dwellers like me in a sort of Expert-Lite class
>and hotshots like you, Paul and Ted in the new Master Class.
>I suspect if this doesn't happen at some point, we will end
>up with 5 guys in Intermediate, 5 in Advanced and 35 in
>Expert at a contest. Sort of defeats the purpose of skill
>classes.

See, that's where I would disagree - the purpose of skill classes is not to generate more opportunities for trophies, it's to help people develop skills to get to the top class. In that, it seems to be working. You can still do the contest within a contest thing, it just doesn't happen to come with a trophy any more.

Having said that, I wouldn't overly object to having a Masters class. I don't think it will really help anything much in the long run, but it would change thing in the short run.

But I strenuously object to the original concept of Masters (as discussed by Rich Peabody). Rich's idea was to have qualification to move *up* to Masters from expert. The idea was that you had to finish in the Top 5 at the NATs in teh past 5 years or be on a FAI team, or top 10 at the Team trials, or something like that. Problem being that there were and are so few people who qualified that it didn't really solve the "problem" you are discussing. Even locally in California, with as many top competitive fliers as any region, only 2 people qualified at the time. So, Ted and David had their own contest, and RJ Whitely, Keith Trostle, Bart K, and I would all be duking it out amonst ourselves in expert - STILL making it certain that nobody else ever got a trophy. In most places Masters would be completely uncontested, with only one person in driving range that qualified.

Make it open to anyone who elects to enter, it you feel it must be done. But I can guarantee that it will only work in the short term. In 5-10 years everything will have just shifted up one class from the way it is now, because when the above situation occurs, the top local expert will get severe pressure to "move up".

My alternative, it you think something needs to be done, is to get rid of PAMPA beginner pattern, have them fly the same pattern as everyone else (just like it was originally), and allow a one-time amnesty for people to decide for themselves what class to enter. That way, if someone didn't feel they could fly in expert, they could move back to advanced. Functionally, it's only a semantic difference from sticking on a Masters class.

Overall, the fiddling with the classes is just a show. Unless and until you can somehow come up with a more definitive and fair standard for determining advancement (and I haven't seen or thought of anything that would work worth a spit) it's sort of a pointless exercise.

LAST EDITED ON May-18-06 AT 09:53 PM (CST)
 
As I mentioned in my previous post, I spent a substantial length of time in RC Pattern. The same conditions exist there as in CLPA concerning the skill classes and an individual's pursuit of being a top placer. What it really boils down to is, regardless of the class you are flying in, when you find yourself "stuck" (i.e. finishing consistently out of the money) you have to make a decision. There are three choices: 1. Expend the effort it takes to learn to fly well enough to finish higher; 2. Be happy with where you are; 3. If you can't do either 1. or 2., relieve the stress on yourself and try something else where you can be happy. As Brett has artilculated, tinkering with the class structure will not eliminate the fundamental issue.

In case anyone is wondering, this is not why I chose to stop flying RC Pattern. I enjoy the "hunt" too much. Life got in the way of modeling for several years and when I decided to return I chose to pursue CLPA instead of RC.