tower has noblers

was just at tower hobbies and they have noblers.
better be fast!!!!!

The Prop-shop in Warren Michigan has 3 on the shelf. Was down there Saturday and seen them for myself. BTW Nice shop. If you ever in the area check it out.
Jay
http://www.prop-shop.com/man/ZTOP.HTM

You would expect that at some point the demand would saturate and they would remain in stock. It will be interesting to see when this occurs!

I do not have the history of many on this forum and I realize that the Top Flite ARFs are selling big, some even with the hobbiy's regular old die hards. I also realize that the ARFs are good for control line modeling, too. Many today just don't seem to have the time to build or probably more true than not, the time to learn how to build. Having said all of that, "I still don't need no stinking plastic airplanes".

I told John Paris that I am "Anti ARF". Nothing against the plane itself, but don't see myself owning one for a long time.
Jay

Buying a neglected Nobler at a swap for low bucks, and not having to do much to it, is the ultimate ARF experience.

Jay,

When it comes to being "anti-ARF" I am and I'm not. If you want to fly an ARF, have a ball, I'll do it myself but haven't bauogh one yet. Where I think I differ from most is this, if you want to fly in a contest, build an airplane.

John, please don't take this as an offense, but you made a statement that is really an oxy-moron

"I also realize that the ARFs are good for control line modeling"

ARFs are not modeling and modeling is not ARFs. If I replicate something I have indeed modeled it. If I buy a replica of something, I have not modeled it. So, I see it as modelers and ARFers, they are not the same except as they appear to the uninitiated.

This may bring on a barrage of other interpretations, but they will not change my mind. Modelers may fly ARFs, but those that fly only ARFs are not modelers. Look it up in Websters: to creat by following a model.

In reality then, first offs of non-scale miniature aircraft are not models at all except for the fact that they are modeled or replicated in succeeding versions.

The short answer? Modelers build their models.

>ARFs are not modeling and modeling is not ARFs. If I
>replicate something I have indeed modeled it. If I buy a
>replica of something, I have not modeled it.

What????

A model is a model is a model, does not matter who built it. By definition any model is a model since it is a reduction of the original. If I own a model and I use it in practice I am a modeler.

Your definition does not agree with mine. I certinaly do not believe you would find many (in the whole of modeling) who accept your definition. Please feel free to go to the LHS and say that all the guys there buying $700 ARF's are not "modelers".

I would LOVE TO SEE THAT!!!

'Zilla,

Those that built the models are the modelers, those the buy them are merely the owners of the models. Modeling something has to do with its creation, owning something is not akin to that in any way. Equating $$ spent as modeling couldn't be further from the case.

And its OK if we disagree, I've found that as the years pass I have more and more to agree to disagree. That doesn't mean we can't have fun together or be friends, it just means we're individuals with different perspectives.

>Jay,
>
>When it comes to being "anti-ARF" I am and I'm not. If you
>want to fly an ARF, have a ball, I'll do it myself but
>haven't bauogh one yet. Where I think I differ from most is
>this, if you want to fly in a contest, build an airplane.
>
>John, please don't take this as an offense, but you made a
>statement that is really an oxy-moron
>
>"I also realize that the ARFs are good for control line
>modeling"
>
>ARFs are not modeling and modeling is not ARFs. If I
>replicate something I have indeed modeled it. If I buy a
>replica of something, I have not modeled it. So, I see it as
>modelers and ARFers, they are not the same except as they
>appear to the uninitiated.
>
>This may bring on a barrage of other interpretations, but
>they will not change my mind. Modelers may fly ARFs, but
>those that fly only ARFs are not modelers. Look it up in
>Websters: to creat by following a model.
>
>In reality then, first offs of non-scale miniature aircraft
>are not models at all except for the fact that they are
>modeled or replicated in succeeding versions.
>
>The short answer? Modelers build their models.
>
>Randy Ryan
>AMA 8500
>SAM 36
>I fly 'em all and love it!

Randy,
I am sure that the "competitor" in Jay will come around when there are events specific to the ARFs. The ARFs will be a welcomed thing for those who are not "builders" as it will allow them to fly with a minute amount of assembly and this is a good thing. The more people out there flying, the better for the individuals (beats sitting on the couch watching the tube) and a boost for the hobby/sport whether they compete or not.

As for me, I own both offerings from Top Flite to cure my curiosity and to support what I think is a good thing. I still plan on building airplanes for competition and enjoyment. Now if I could get someone to finish them for me......color coordinationally impaired that I am.

No doubt John. Myself, still being and "old school" proponent, have come to the unfortunate conclusion that things are going to change in a way that doesn't make me happy. Simple enough, those that want to buy their toys and pretend they're doing what I do are allowed to do that, but its still a fact that I'm a modeler and those that buy ARFs are not, thats a simple dictionary fact. Doesn't make me better or them worse, it just makes it something that I nolonger would enjoy. In the meantime, I'll enjoy what I do.

No doubt John. Myself, still being and "old school"
>proponent, have come to the conclusion unfortunate that
>things are going to change in a way that doesn't make me
>happy. Simple enough, those that want to buy their toys and
>pretend they're doing what I do are allowed to do that, but
>its still a fact that I'm a modeler and those that buy ARFs
>are not, that's a simple dictionary fact. Doesn't make me
>better or them worse, it just makes it something that I
>no longer would enjoy. In the meantime, I'll enjoy what I do.
>
>Randy Ryan
>AMA 8500
>SAM 36
>I fly 'em all and love it!

Randy,

Perhaps I can make you feel a little better.

I have both the Flite Streak and Nobler ARF (they look great under the Christmas tree). For me, they are tools. I am a life-long modeler. The X-acto will be pried from my cold, dead hand. But the realities of my life are such that I will never have the time to build the number of airplanes that will be destroyed learning the pattern any time soon. The ARFs will allow me to concentrate on *flying*, something I do not get to do nearly enough, and I'm not getting any younger. The pious hope is that after destroying enough pre-fabbed airplanes to have confidence in my piloting skills, I will then commit seriously to *building* some better stunt airplanes. My ultimate goals are personal--I simply want to be able to fly a decent pattern for my own satisfaction, a childhood goal not yet realized. I'm not focused on competition per-se, but if I can achieve an adequate level of proficiency, then entering contests will be part of the program, simply because they represent a way to have *fun* flying with others and offer a chance to further improve my skills.

The ARF models are the key link in the chain, the low rung on the ladder. Without them, the airplanes represent more investment than I can make right now. But with them, I can look ahead to building better ships in the future knowing that I can make my mistakes on good machines that did not cost me much *time*.

For the past decade I've always told myself that if I wanted to fly sport RC, I could, since I could buy very nice generic models to fly that did not require my time. That way, what building time I had could be spent on "real" models, like contest Free Flight ships. I never had enough interest in sport RC to bother. But sport CL, that's something I have wanted to get back to for a long time. Now I can begin to participate and establish the habit of *flying* as much as possible, again without having to invest much time in the airplanes. This is good for me, and will ultimately make me a better modeler. At the very least I will become a better CL pilot, and probably, I will build airplanes I would not have otherwise, making me a better modeler in every sense.

You'll be further pleased to hear that I actually got the engine mounted in my UKEY-35 this past weekend. Even managed to get 4 bolt holes in the right places! A little urethane varnish, a little 15 minute epoxy, and I'll be ready to break expensive props!

FWIW,

Thanks Andy,

Feel better doesn't really fit, I can face reality and the fact that in some time futher Stunt will become to me as Wakefield has, an event that is foreign to me. An event of participants in a game, just like golf or bowling nither of which hold any facination for me at all. The events I fly and grew up with and love were events of the craftsman/pilot, not purchaser/participant.

Do ARFs have a place? Absolutely! Will I buy and fly one? Absolutely!
Will I compete with one? Absolutely NOT!

Hey Randy,

I think you are quite correct. I mis-spoke in using the phrase "control line modeling". I really do think there will be positve results if the ARFs create an interest that lasts. The question is will it last? That's because as much as I hate to lose one my "models" it's putting a little bit of myself in each one that makes it all the more satisfying. Whether I am just looking at it or out flying it. Putting a little bit of your own ideas into it whether it's a new finish, a new motor, a new building technique or whatever. That's what keeps my interest up in this hobby and makes it last.

There is a certain type, like professional race car drivers, and others where their job is only to go out and drive, etc. They become very very good at what they do and they have the very best equipment that money can buy. But....I really don't think that is going to happen in "control line stunt" or as it's called today, "Precision aerobatics". For one, there isn't enough money in it. And, that's one very good reason why I don't think the ARF equipment will ever be up to challenging the hand built planes built by those who just love to build and fly these model airplanes. It ain't going to happen. So I don't think ARFs are going to take over this hobby and they will be good for those that start out this way and develope a more detailed interest in building and flying. And, in that regard, it will be good for the hobby. "BUT I still don't need no stinking plastic airplanes!"

ARFs do have good things to them, especially when you are just starting out. This past summer I had a period of about 3 weeks where I was going to be without a plane: I managed to crash both of my good planes and my new plane not been completed. Nobler came just in time. I was able to continue practicing and perform relatively well at the Northampton contest. Has it not been for the Noblarf, I would not have done as well as I did. I took second in Intermediate flying the Banshee.

Steve,

At least for my part the arguement, rather, dicussion has nothing to do with the "good" or "bad" of ARFs. only with where they lie within the definition of "modeling" as it applies to the "modeler". I intend to buy an ARFs Nobler and fly it, but I'll only be the owner of that model. All my others built by me are my "creations" making me the "modeler". I really thing they're pretty cool, I'm impressed. However, owning a model does not make one a modeler anymore then owning a gun makes one a gunsmith.

> However, owning a model does not make one a
>modeler anymore then owning a gun makes one a gunsmith.
>
>Randy Ryan
>AMA 8500
>SAM 36
>I fly 'em all and love it!

Randy,
So while you, Randy Ryan, are flying your ARF Nobler you, Randy Ryan, are no longer a modeler. You're just a model owner flying your model.

You didn't use any of the basic MODELING skills it requires to ASSEMBLE the Nobler ARF? Cutting, glueing, making sure it's in alignment, mounting the engine, plumbing the tank, modifying the cowl, not to mention all the modeling you might choose to do on things such as new leadouts, adjustable leadouts, installing a weight box... but because this is classified as an ARF all this still doesn't even make you a beginner modeller?...sounds like elitist B.S. to me I know your not Randy, but that's what it sounds like.

Surely you might agree that ARF's fall at the lower end of basic modelling?

Rick,

Correct, if I am flying my ARF Nobler I am not a the modeler, just the owner of the model.

I would say at the extreme lower end of the basic skill level. Assembling a group of prefabricated components does not comprize the creation of a model, only the assembly of its major components. This can be an excellent starting point for some people, please don't get the impression that I'm completely negating the value of these products. I am stating that I feel a certain way about them at the competitive level and that it effects my desire to compete.

I don't mean to sound elitest and I'm glad you realize I'm not really. I'm just trying to state the difference to me, and some others too I think, between "old modeling" and new "model airplane flying". In my feable old brain building and flying are inseperable when it reaches the competitive level, I can't help it, thats the way I am. I get real tired of hearing some imply that since we both hold a handle and fly the same pattern that we must be doing the same thing. We're not, if I built mine and the other individual bought his ready or almost ready to fly, we are not doing the same thing, the concept is different.

>Rick,
>
>Correct, if I am flying my ARF Nobler I am not a the
>modeler, just the owner of the model.
>
>I would say at the extreme lower end of the basic skill
>level. Assembling a group of prefabricated components does
>not comprize the creation of a model, only the assembly of
>its major components. This can be an excellent starting
>point for some people, please don't get the impression that
>I'm completely negating the value of these products. I am
>stating that I feel a certain way about them at the
>competitive level and that it effects my desire to compete.
>
>I don't mean to sound elitest and I'm glad you realize I'm
>not really. I'm just trying to state the difference to me,
>and some others too I think, between "old modeling" and new
>"model airplane flying". In my feable old brain building and
>flying are inseperable when it reaches the competitive
>level, I can't help it, thats the way I am. I get real tired
>of hearing some imply that since we both hold a handle and
>fly the same pattern that we must be doing the same thing.
>We're not, if I built mine and the other individual bought
>his ready or almost ready to fly, we are not doing the same
>thing, the concept is different.
>
>Randy Ryan
>AMA 8500
>SAM 36
>I fly 'em all and love it!
I have always been a "Modeler". Once I slipped, in 1979, and bought a Ringmaster that was hanging in Huston's Hobby Shop, San Jose.
I was between airplanes, crashing my Gee Bee and nothing else was past framing. I felt like I was cheating, flying that plane!
Nevertheless, I was 'modeling', in a sense: Every move was Pre-Choreographed, as the guys from the San Jose Aeromodelers were watching my steps. "That's the bozo that totalled that big Gee Bee last week. Let's watch what he does to that Ringmaster!"
Wife Joey crashed the Ringmaster, and I re-configured it into a Biplane, with a "Twin-Jr.Satans" kit. It was 'Re-Modelled', hence, I was a Modeller once again!

Randy, I was replying to Jays and Curell's remarks. I didn't get a chance to read your remarks when I wrote mine. Sorry for the confusion.

As for your statement that when someone builds an ARF model is not a modeler. Respectfully, I don't think is a valid statement. Let me ask you something: at which point does a stack of wood and a plan becomes an ARF? One could argue that when one pre-cuts the parts is the point where a builder is not a modeler anymore but an assembler. Buy that would not be a valid answer either!

Definition of the word modeler is such(from dictionary.com):

modeler

n : a person who creates models

The definition is very simple: if you create a model, you are a modeller. There is absolutely nothing there that states what state the model has to be in, before one is considered a modeler. As long as a 'kit with more than one part, making a model out of it is modelling and the person who puts the parts together is a modeler. Heck, even putting stickers on a complete Noblarf can be considered modeling.

That said, I don't think the above argument is valid either. I beleive arguing this kind of issue is pointless mainly because it has little value at best and alienate newcomers at worst. As long as someone gets interested in our sport and sticks with it, I consider them a modeler.

Steven Yampolsky

P.S. I hope I didn't start another 'BOM rule' type of thread...

I say at some point "Who cares" what people think? This thread started as a simple announcement that the Nobler's are back in stock.

You're right Alan, let's leave it at that. Sorry guys for going off on a tangent.

Dang, Alan said it before I got to the thread.

I am really tired of anytime someone says anything about one of these or the airplanes coming somebody else feels obligated to just render their heart fealt objections.

Suck it up and Stuff it, Kay? Don't got nothing nice to say, keep it zipped.

I had enough of the elitest garbage when I worked for Cessna. There was a small group of Born again fanatics with an absolutely weird version of Christ that made your average parsons skin crawl. You didn't follow lockstep, you were sub-human. Don't need any of that garbage in a hobby.

Oh, they were seeing demons and speakin in tounges and just a whole bunch of psycho babble that had more to do with their experiences with acid than anything else. You guys 10 years older than me really shouldn't have put so much of that stuff on your tounges, eash.

Now, if I could just find the needle valve to my B-40 that I took off to mount my ARF Noblers cowl. It should be sitting right under the nose of the thing along with the cowl screws, then again, I only found 3 of the 4 of those.

Clean,

I always enjoy your post, you always seem to say what I feel but am too intimidated by "moderators" to say (moderators, that is another subject).

Being a SPADer and a Nobler ARFer seems to place me in a totally different catagory when I arrive at the field. Well, don't care what they think about my SPAD or my Nobler ARF. I am going to fly and have fun.

Oh by the way, I may not have built the subassemblies but I do consider myself the builder/modeler of my Nobler ARF.

>
>Being a SPADer and a Nobler ARFer seems to place me in a
>totally different catagory when I arrive at the field.
>Well, don't care what they think about my SPAD or my Nobler
>ARF. I am going to fly and have fun.
>

Louis,

Have you developed any good SPAD CL ships? Care to share some photos?

The Nobler looks *sweet* in the pre war yellow and blue!

Yes, built this one for the "SPADs Over Memphis" Control Line Free Style. Unfortunately while training a new flyer, it met it's demise. It was a little heavy for pattern stunting. It would loop, lazy eight, wing over, and fly inverted well. It made a very good trainer and I trained 5 people how to fly with it. I will have to make another come Spring time.