Bill Little · May 21, 2004 08:01 AM
#0 sourceI would like to reply to Ted's comment.
I have been one of the staunchest, most vocal, respondents FOR the " " rule.
Ted is a multiple winner of the Walker Trophy, and deservedly so. His workmanship is also impeccable.
I have said that we need to drop the unmentionable rule because the original rule is no longer enforced, or enforcable.
That is my position based on observance of the previous threads, and the contests I have attended.
Let's please NOT argue this thread, if Leonard doesn't remove it, since I am only clarifying the position that several others share.
i.e.: That there has been SO much interpretation of what is allowable, that the original rule, in the original form, only exists for a very few.
And yes, we are fully aware that the rule only excludes flying in age classes at the NATS, but it does impact other areas of the event's rules.
I have been one of the staunchest, most vocal, respondents FOR the " " rule.
Ted is a multiple winner of the Walker Trophy, and deservedly so. His workmanship is also impeccable.
I have said that we need to drop the unmentionable rule because the original rule is no longer enforced, or enforcable.
That is my position based on observance of the previous threads, and the contests I have attended.
Let's please NOT argue this thread, if Leonard doesn't remove it, since I am only clarifying the position that several others share.
i.e.: That there has been SO much interpretation of what is allowable, that the original rule, in the original form, only exists for a very few.
And yes, we are fully aware that the rule only excludes flying in age classes at the NATS, but it does impact other areas of the event's rules.
Leonard, this is a topic that cannot be overlooked. Mature, non-emotional, discussion MUST take place BEFORE a true rules proposal, if needed, can be determined.
Respectfully,
Bill Little <><
When the character of a man is not clear to you, look at his friends.
Japanese Proverb