BACKGROUND--1975 FAI MEETINGS
BY JOHN WORTH AMA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Each year committees of the Federation Aeronautique Internationale (FAI) meet to make decisions concerning world championships, other international competitions, and world records for model aircraft. The FAI's Committee for International Aeromodelling (CIAM — pronounced see-am) does this job and the 1975 meeting was held in Paris, France on December 4 and 5.
Some years ago, back in the sixties, AMA was able to send about a half dozen representatives to the annual CIAM meetings. This was possible because the National Aeronautic Association (NAA), the official U.S. representative to the FAI for all categories of sport aviation, had generous free transportation arrangements to get people across the ocean. The number of available seats per year for such transportation gradually declined and NAA had to reduce its sponsorship of various sport aviation representation at FAI meetings. AMA, as NAA's designated U.S. aeromodeling representative, got two or three seats in recent years for the annual Paris meeting (although NAA was still able to continue sending AMA world championship teams to Europe).
Because the reduced attendance coincided with changes in CIAM rules concerning representation at meetings — the loss of seats was not determinative — additional representatives would not have been permitted to participate anyway. But the rules got changed for the 1975 (and subsequent) meetings, so that having more representatives would be beneficial.
What happened was that the CIAM decided to allow its subcommittee members to vote at so-called technical meetings prior to the final voting plenary meeting. That meant subcommittee members would have a voice and influence they previously did not have. This change meant that U.S. AMA members on the subcommittees (Free Flight, Control Line, Scale, R/C Aerobatics, R/C Pylon, R/C Soaring, R/C Helicopters) would be very helpful to have in Paris.
However, with AMA's "free" transportation limited and the cost of commercial airfare prohibitive, the outlook for maximum U.S. participation in the CIAM meetings looked dim. But some imagination, luck, and cooperation from interested groups provided a solution.
Some previous study had noted that aside from chartered flights, the cheapest over-ocean transportation available was from Icelandic Airlines. For less than $400 each round trip, we could get people from New York to Luxembourg (between France and Germany) and back. Meanwhile, the basic U.S. delegation, traveling via NAA transportation, would land in Germany, rent a van (VW Microbus) and provide transportation to get everybody to Paris (by way of Luxembourg).
In this manner, transportation cost could be minimized. But there would also be considerable lodging costs involved, since about a week away from the U.S. would be necessary for those attending. The total package added up to more than AMA was budgeted for FAI activities to take on alone.
That's where cooperation came in. When apprised of the situation, and in which it was noted that AMA could cover half the cost, the National Miniature Pylon Racing Association (NMPRA), the National Society of R/C Aerobatics (NSRCA), and the National R/C Helicopter Association (NRCHA) agreed to contribute $300 to the cause. This would assure that the U.S. members of the CIAM Pylon, Pattern, and Helicopter subcommittees could attend the December meetings.
Some luck helped in two other situations. The U.S. R/C Soaring subcommittee member was an airline employee and could travel at low fares within the AMA-FAI budget so that the National Soaring Society (NSS) would not have to contribute. Also, the U.S. Free Flight subcommittee member was traveling in Europe (Continued on page 56)
AMA News
1975 FAI MEETINGS (Continued from page 55)
sites and 2 flight lines at each. Aerobatic flight patterns use up about 6,000 feet of runway length. And, because it would be too much for either Nylon or Aerobatics to operate for 12 hours each day, they each use separate crews for 6 hours of flight time per day and much planning goes into a quick and smooth switch from Fly-in to Pattern each day.
The planning must also allow for weather factors. Because of the possible shift of each morning's day from the flyers' point of view to the locals' point of view, the host cities must also accommodate part-time flyers and provide for rain interruptions — in a week of summer flying there are almost always several hours of rain problems.
With four Aerobatic classes (Novice, Advanced, Expert, and Masters), plus two of Pylon (quarter of Mile and Formula I), plus two classes of RC Scale (F4A and Scale), and with just about 100 competitors in each of the three main event groups, the problems of control are immense. Only by cooperation and long-range planning can the desired results be obtained.
The CIAM meetings are not all exactly the same. The smaller subcommittees have much easier decisions to make; the main plenary meetings and the larger subcommittees do the greater amount of detailed work. Basically, the idea of the changed meeting schedule was to allow the subcommittees to hold technical meetings prior to the plenary sessions so that the final plenary sessions could be simpler and smoother. The change worked well.
It is most important to attend the CIAM meeting when possible because many of the decisions made will affect the conduct of world championships and international competitions and the setting of world records. The meetings are also a chance to share ideas and information with our international colleagues.
I can contrast too many 2 or 3 day meets, when the subcommittees and ICs meet for long hours, and activities for the public are limited. By contrast, the 1975 meeting in Paris spanned several days and allowed for plenty of informal contacts and exchanges of opinion. The opportunity to work on rules and to coordinate our positions with other countries is invaluable.
Putting all this together, with problems of competing interests, electrical power (keeping generators going continuously), food and refreshments, field toilets, tents (which blow down when winds come), parking, crowd control, trash pickup, and many other details, involves extensive and expensive logistical arrangements. United in all this is coordination of numbers of volunteer officials, to make sure that enough help is available in the right place at the right time. That's the basic job; it is diffcult and often thankless, especially when the number of volunteers are a given hour of a day is less than needed, or if equipment breaks down, or weather interferes, it can be a very hard day. It would be a mess, if, for instance, a pilot in one event has an emergency and the other event people have to handle the problem.
It also works out because in the planning stages the volunteer teams involved learn to appreciate the common problems and how they interrelate. For example, the Control Line and Scale people work with each other so that each category gets a fair shake. They also learn to bend and modify their demands so that all are operating on the same basis. Most important
each day. That may seem to be a simple and obvious procedure, but it is not. The many events, operating for different hours, some on only a half-day, require a complicated distribution procedure to get the right trophies to the right place at the right time.
Throughout the Paris planning such common problems are thrashed out. Especially important is the sharing of equipment and supplies: spectator rails, scorer's tables, tape recorders, calculators, vehicles, water jugs, tents and many other items must be passed around in a coordinated sharing schedule. Otherwise the cost of these items would be prohibitive, far beyond the already great investment that has been made over the years for Nats materials.
In contrast to many 2 or 3 day meets, the sustained pace of Nats activity for 7 days strain facilities and facilities to the maximum. RC Aerobatics judging for 7 days in a row is a particular problem; it requires a lot of people during an incredibly concentrated time for many, many hours.
Trophy distribution is a major problem that needs close cooperation. Someone must be responsible to see that the right trophies are at the right places at the right times.
Somehow the Paris meeting showed us once again that cooperation by a host city and a host club, plus an efficient international organization of staff and volunteers, can produce a world meet of great quality and with good people working happily together. It also showed that the United States needs to be represented at CIAM and that steps should be taken to assure a proper U.S. presence at future meetings.
The reduction in NAA-supported seats made it imperative that the AMA find ways to send representatives. Through cooperation between the AMA and the various special interest groups, plus some fortunate circumstances involving airline employees and individuals already scheduled overseas, the U.S. was able to provide representation on those CIAM subcommittees where it was most needed.
(End of FAI report)
CLUB FCC LICENSES
An Illinois AMA Chartered Club/member reported to HQ that he understood no Club FCC Class C (C's) licenses would be issued after January 1, 1975. A check with Jeremiah Courtney, AMA FCC Legal Counsel, proved the rumor false — no change proposed FCC Club licenses. RC flyers — typical rumors can sweep the country about aspects of aeromodeling — most usually wrong either partly or entirely. Thanks Gerald Case, Aero Club of Chicago, for bringing to HQ attention a typically erroneous rumor could be dispelled.
BEHIND THE SCENES — '76 NATS PLANNING
The largest-ever all-AMA planning conference for the National Model Airplane Championships took place Jan. 24 at Dayton, Ohio. Approximately 30 key AMA leaders gathered at the Airport Inn to work out details of the week-long event scheduling, personnel staffing, logistics, facilities requirements — the critical item being budgeting. Represented were members of the AMA's Nationals Executive Committee, Dayton model club leaders, and officers of the following special interest organizations: NFFS (National Free Flight Society), NMPRA (National Miniature Pylon Racing Association), NSS (National Soaring Society), NSRCA (National Society of R/C Aerobatics), SAM (Society of Antique Modelers) and others.
1975 FAI MEETINGS (Continued from page 56)
BY JOHN BURK, JR., RC HELICOPTER SUBCOMMITTEE
My first trip to Paris and the plenary FAI meeting was not only enjoyable and interesting, it was not without surprises. I expected a large building with lecture halls and facilities for serving banquets, like any self-respecting Engineers' Club, but the great work apart of committees is governed by body and only a 20 x 30 foot meeting room on the top floor of the small building housing the Aero Club of France. I had a notion to start a pool on what table that creaky stairway would collapse.
Jokes aside, it was most satisfying to see 52 men from 27 nations get together and discuss in very polite English (thanks goodness) the rules and regulations for model aircraft contests. The rules of order work fairly well. Procedures of the ClAM kept things on the track and accomplished the most work in the short time available.
Actually the meetings started unofficially the night before in the corner pub just up the street from the hotel. Names were sort of the delegates were staying. As we were getting dinner they would come straggling in by two and three and be greeted enthusiastically. When they were seated, the lobbyboys would begin, each one speaking support for this or that proposal so the discussion was kept lively.
On Thursday all delegates, observers and contestants converged at 9:00 a.m. to be welcomed by Fernand Briet of the FAI, who was followed by CAA President, President of the Aero Club and various others and announced where the subcommittees meetings would be located with the final list of subcommittees sent out a day earlier in the largest room, with free flight, scale, control line, electric, RC pattern took still almost non-stop, with RC soaring from 1 to 3:30, RC pylon to 3:45, RC helicopter to 3:45, RC electric powered to 4:00. A good bit of time was wasted because of confusion over English meaning; poor translation into English, people not being able to follow the fast pace of the discussions, the confusion between parachute numbers in the aeromodelling and the FAI Sporting Code book, and even because of typographical errors. There was considerable debate about the "minor" obligation of voting. Countries which had not participated in a certain category or flight, such as RC pylon, were grouped to make them favor voting on that subject. On all the divisions votes must be determined by a show of hands. It was favored for what happened by John Worth's little pre-meeting in the hotel room. As expected, the German proposal for FAI electronic identification and rules for competition were again referred to the subcommittee for further study. Since the previous subcommittee chairman had been inactive due to ill health, a new chairman was needed. Since I was the only one there interested in helicopters and had decided my willingness to serve, the delegate from Canada, Warren Hitchcox, asked me if I would like for him to nominate me. As it meant writing a couple dozen letters, a lot of thought on helicopters and rules (which comes naturally with age) and another trip to Paris next year, I said "Why not."
After the final meeting of all the delegates at 6:00 hours (4 p.m.) for non-organization of subcommittee chairmen and other general matters, many of the delegates announced to the corner pub for beer and cookies. I found myself sitting next to Charles Clason, RC equipment chair, and across from Warren Hitchcox. Warren asked me for my qualifications so he would know who we was nominating. I guess building "senior model helicopter in 1963," directing the first two national helicopter events in this country, having organized two world records and writing a monthly column encouraged him.
On Friday the plenary meeting was held with all delegates, etc.—in the big room. All items on the agenda were voted on with recommendations for or against or amendments by the subcommittees. Subcommittee chairmen were then voted on and finally sub-committee election ballots. Warren must have done a little lobbying because I was reelected by ten Nayes of the U.S. and conceded by Warren. No other nominations were offered, so my vote was requested.
There was the awful sort of rumor Old John Worth must have had it all figured out and planned that way before he even arrived here to go to Paris. It's a great opportunity for me to rewrite the German proposal, clarify many things, make the rules safer, give helicopters with overlapping rotors (coaxials), synchropters, tandem rotors an equal chance with single rotors, etc.
At the beginning of the meeting one or the delegates took the President of the FAI to task in no uncertain terms for passing on to the CIMA the ruling that no president of the CIMA could serve more than five years in succession. Our CIMA president, Sandy Pinerott had served five one-year consecutive terms. The FAI president could favor the decision but the decision to change this was made by the CIMA. Anyhow CIMA voted several nominations for their committee president, all candidates. Then the FAI president said that in the absence of a president the duty is assumed by the vice-president, so who gets nominated for first vice-president? Among others, cavalry? Fortunately, the others handled the train, etc. Some more changes were made.
With all the decisions to be made on which categories to elevate the world championship status and where to hold the world championship meets, etc., the meeting lasted late until 7 p.m. The president and others at the speaker's table must have been tired but they kept on functioning normally and calmly. The CIMA proposed FAI helicopter rules to be adopted for 1976 but someone raised the question that the new rules were so restrictive that they might be no longer representative of the American helicopter community. After much discussion the proposal was amended and adopted.
This particular subject subcommittee chairman may have to step aside to go out on the town that night.
BY DAVE LINSTRUM, FF SUBCOMMITTEE
To those unable to attend the FAI CIMA meeting in Paris, it often seems that the rules changes resulting from a plenary meeting are made by "the FAI" or "the Bureau" or in other words, by nonentities who are not attuned to the real world of model flying. This has often been the feeling in the past, particularly when rule changes involved major model specification changes or drastic modifications to flying rules.
In the 1975 CIMA meeting (the first which I have been privileged to attend) and I plan to go back again next year if my work schedule permits in a typical example, there were those feelings of dissatisfaction because some basic items seemed to be represented by a nation (there were 27 voting delegates) who were able and in many cases well-known flyers.
The two-day session is broken into the initial technical sections of the various subcommittees where proposals on the agenda are hashed out in detail by experts in the respective fields, with a lot of background information often available from the countries who made the proposals. The second day is devoted to brief discussions of the subcommittee consensus on the proposals and actual voting. The voting delegates from each country often got the advice from an expert observer in the special field under discussion. This observer may have been in the technical meeting the day before and have a special insight into the feelings of the experts who comprise his subcommittee. However, he is not bound to accept their opinion and indeed may advise his delegate to vote in opposition to the experts, who sometimes are split in their opinions. These is also a certain amount of politicking involved, and efforts are made on both days to lobby the delegates and put on pressure for particular issues. There is seldom total agreement but that is to be expected. Often model rules have been introduced as to how competition should be run—but has been ever thus.
A number of internationally famous free-flighters were present when we came in to the Free Flight Subcommittee session fresh from Free Flight Concours d'Elegance (later held on a slow note before arrival) and a flight from Los Angeles, where we had received congratulations from the SCAR club, a well-known Paris oriented group.
A round of the conference table we spotted old friends from America and Canada—Tom Lambros of Canada (later elected chairman of the Subcommittee), representing Luigi Bolognese (somebody?), and others. After four days of the CIMA representing new members of many countries (the England), USA, and others, we completed the French report and returned to the USA.
The work of the Free Flight Subcommittee was given a very big boost by the active interest of some of the European flyers and officials who had attended. A great amount was accomplished in ruling on duration and the technicalities of events.
BY DAN PRUSS, RC SOARING SUBCOMMITTEE
At the December CIMA the rules were studied and changes for RC soaring submitted that included one for the FAI team selection rule—the case when one person represents more than one nation, and whether that person should be allowed to compete. The situation was handled on a case-by-case basis and many proposals were made concerning team eligibility and scoring. A major item was the revision of sailplane rules to provide for new classes and a more equitable system for national championships.
The committee also dealt with the technical aspects of RC schedules and the running of events, with special attention given to safety and fairness. The suggestion that maximum winds limits be established for certain events was discussed and will be taken into consideration by the individual subcommittees.
The change which caused the most comment was the rule modification allowing subcommittee members to vote during the technical meeting prior to the final plenary. This change will give more weight to the technical experts in initial decisions and should result in fewer major reversals at the plenary.
BY ADAM SATTLER, RC PYLON SUBCOMMITTEE
At the December meeting of the International Committee on Aeromodelling (CIMA) the United States was represented by several technical contributors in addition to the delegates. Mr. Clamen? and the Secretary were there. The three reports discussed were concerned with scale and speed events and the national committee asked that additional studies be made on safety and course design. One of the biggest problems seemed to be with the minimum distance between pylons and the effect on safety and fairness.
At the meeting there was also a proposal for reclassification of speed classes and introduction of a new "Formula 1" class. The committee agreed that further amendments would be desirable and a working group was established to draft new proposals to be presented at the next meeting. It was further felt that some people are more concerned in challenging a rule book or looking for a loophole than in bettering one's peers in head to head competition.
Because the U.S. has been only two? A1, contests under 1974-1975 rules in as many years some of our arguments are only partly supported. Meanwhile, the expert evidence of certain Europeans that holds as many F.A.I. contests a year as we hold over our type is more readily recognized and honored. 1976 could change all of that.
(End of 1975 FAI Meetings coverage)
CLUB FCC LICENSES
An Illinois AMA Chartered Club/member reported HQ understood no Club FCC Class C (C's) licenses would be issued after January 1, 1975. A check with Jeremiah Courtney, AMA FCC Legal Counsel, proved the rumor false — no change proposed. FCC Club licenses: RC flyers' typical rumors can sweep the country about aspects of aeromodeling — most usually wrong either partly or entirely. Thanks, Gerald Case, Aero Club of Chicago, for bringing to our attention a typically erroneous rumor which could be dispelled.
BEHIND THE SCENES — '76 NATS PLANNING
Largest-ever all-AMA planning conference for the National Model Airplane Championships took place Jan. 24, Dayton, Ohio. Approximately 30 key AMA leaders gathered at the Airport Inn to work out details on daily event scheduling, personnel, staffing, logistics, facilities requirements — a critical item: all-budgeting.
Represented were members of AMA's Nationals Executive Committee, Dayton model club leaders, officers and the following special interest organizations: NFFS (National Free Flight Society), NMPRA (National Miniature Pylon Racing Association), NSSCA (National Society RC Aerobatics), SAM.
TO THOSE WHO RECEIVE ONLY THE AMA NEWS REPRINT
Except for general interest items, information about AMA competition matters is contained in the Competition Newsletter section of Model Aviation magazine. Such information is, however, available upon request from AMA HQ, by sending a stamped self-addressed envelope. The following topics are contained in this month’s (April) issue: Report of current and future AMA World Championship Team Programs. More details on '76 AMA RC Aerobatics Rules. FF Contest Board Action re: FAI eliminations. Latest details re: 1976 Nats in Ohio, Aug. 1-8. FAI trial RC Helicopter rules (flight portion), FAI provisional RC Electric Power rules, FAI provisional Stand-Off Scale rules and the Contest Calendar.
NUISANCE/TRESPASS VS. FLYING SITES
As a result of action brought against the RC Club of Detroit by landowners adjacent to the club field resulted in the closing down of their flying operations.
Many have read the problems caused by neighboring landowners against the Detroit RC Club for nuisance (noise) and trespass to airspace (overflights of neighboring property). Although the action should not be considered precedent-setting as the legal rationale of the trial court's decision was not tested by appeal to any superior court, others throughout the country should act with caution and attempt to fly within the boundaries of their property whether owned, leased or borrowed.
The noise problem was handled by the Club voluntarily restricting flying hours. But as a result of the trespass (air-space charges), members of the RC Club of Detroit were forbidden to trespass (on foot or in the air) on neighboring property. Adjacent property owners began sitting right on the property line, logging and reporting (illegal) overflights to the court. Modelers were threatened with guns by neighboring landowners and a downed aircraft could not be retrieved from adjacent property.
As a result of the untenable situation with neighboring bordering their flying site, the club finally closed down their field and put their property on the market.
It shouldn't have happened but it did. Not only should cautious discretion be exercised by others in their flying activities but they should also try to maintain the best possible (public) relations with landowners and their families near flying sites. This is especially vital in cases where flying over neighboring property is involved, otherwise the severity (and acceptability in the courts) of nuisance complaints will be stronger and more difficult to overcome.
Nuisance laws are real and, as shown in the Detroit Club case, may invoke harsh trespass sanctions as a direct result of nuisance complaints. AMA HQ has a memo from its legal counsel, Jeremiah Courtney, concerning nuisance vs. trespass situations. Interested clubs may request a free copy.
DISTRICT REPORT
Cliff Piper Dist. I Vice-President 1841 Harvard Ave. Norwalk, CT 06851
THE REAL BIG NEWS IS THE DISTRICT ONE MEETING, SATURDAY, MARCH 20TH, 1976. This meeting, again to be hosted by the 495th Squadron, will be at the same location as last year, the Nashoba Valley Technical High School in Westford, Mass., which is near Lowell and Chelmsford. This year is our proud one and announces that our AMA President, Johnny Clemens, will be our speaker, mostly because he couldn't keep him away after the great meeting we had last year. John Worth is to be with us, and I hope to have all the appointed people in attendance who help us keep the AMA glued together here in New England. Another goal for this year is to have a sort of "clearing house" for setting up key contest dates for District One clubs. We will have a table at the meeting which you can check for your preferred date(s), and hopefully he can do an even better job of coordinating contests with little conflict. One fact will have to be considered, though, and that is that he will still have to clear some dates with District Two. The traditional contest dates for the big ones are already scheduled in many cases, and please remember that we are getting bigger every year, and there will be an increasing number of slight conflicts in some areas. We had some hard feelings last year when the New England RC champs were in conflict with a good sailplane RC meet in Pittsfield. Hope we can resolve problems of this type for 1976.
At a planning meeting on Jan. 4, there were a dozen members of the 495th, and I must comment on their willingness and enthusiasm toward what is going to be a lot of work for them. Many facets of the responsibilities of the meeting have already been assigned. A letter of invitation will go out from the club, and I shall be glad to attend the meeting to make sure that chartered clubs are aware of this opportunity to attend a fun-type of get-together. We don't have any great major or permanent site problems this year, and with a membership such as the one projected for the coming year, we all look for much success for 1976. If you haven't heard my good friend Johnny Clemens, please don't miss the meeting. If you've met him and have heard him before, I know you'll be there. John Worth will bring us the latest on our headquarters operation, and there will be adequate time for everyone to express their views and to ask questions. No films are planned at this time, though Johnny will bring a few slides of which he is particularly proud, from the Internats and other big events that he has attended. I'd like to see some shots from those big-money meets out west at Circus-Circus, just to prove that they don't have any more fun than we do at a contest. The formal meeting is to begin at 7 p.m. on Saturday, March 20, 1976. Displays and a raffle will be offered by the 495th. All displays will be in the hallways, under adequate protection this year, in order to allow room for seating in the meeting room. We can probably seat 400 to 500, so be early to be sure of a good seat. Thanks again to the great group of the 495th for their willingness to help us with our District One annual meeting.
Roy Hytinger, as usual, has done his great job in putting together all the preliminary planning and work for his BIG BIG BIG District One Regional Control Line Championships to be held in Middletown, R.I., on September 3, 4, 5, 1976. The "RL-76" meet has the sanction number of 1776. Roy started working on this angle way back last March.
By the time this hits the stands, I'll be at a Council meeting, slated for Feb. 14. Don't know where yet, but I sure wish there were more inputs from out in the membership ranks. If I help make a decision on a controversial issue and haven't heard from you on your thinking, then don't write to me and all the magazines later on to complain about the action of the Council.
Still looking for more flying site locations for a directory for the District — so far, only 5 sites have come to me.
DISTRICT REPORT
John Byrne Dist. II Vice-President 36-29 213th Street Bayside, NY 11361
[District II report and contact information as printed.]
AMA News
BACKGROUND — 1975 FAI MEETINGS
BY JOHN WORTH, AMA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Federation Aeronautique Internationale (FAI) meetings make decisions concerning world championships, other international competitions, world records and model aircraft. FAI's Committee for International Aeromodelling (CIAM, pronounced "see-am") does the job. The 1975 meeting was held in Paris, France, December 4-5.
Some years ago, back in the sixties, AMA was able to send about half a dozen representatives to the annual CIAM meetings. This was possible because the National Aeronautic Association (NAA), the official U.S. representative to FAI categories and sport aviation, provided generous free transportation arrangements to get people across the ocean. The number of available seats per year on such transportation gradually declined as NAA reduced its sponsorship of various sport aviation representation to FAI meetings. As NAA's designated U.S. aeromodeling representative to CIAM, AMA got 2-3 seats in recent years' annual Paris meetings, although NAA still was able to continue sending AMA world championship teams to Europe.
Because of reduced attendance and coincident changes in CIAM rules concerning representation at meetings, the loss of seats was detrimental—additional representatives would have been permitted to participate anyway. The rules got changed in 1975 so subsequent meetings would have representatives; this would be beneficial. What happened was CIAM decided to allow its subcommittee members to vote in so-called technical meetings prior to the final voting plenary meeting. This meant subcommittee members would have a voice and influence they previously didn't have. Because U.S. AMA members serve on several subcommittees—Free Flight, Control Line, Scale, RC Aerobatics, RC Pylon, Soaring and RC Helicopters—U.S. presence on these subcommittees would have been very helpful at the Paris meeting.
However, AMA's free transportation was limited and the cost of commercial airfare made the outlook for maximum U.S. participation at CIAM meetings rather dim. Some imagination, luck and cooperation among interested groups provided a solution. Some previous study had noted that, aside from chartered flights, the cheapest over-ocean transportation available was Icelandic Airlines—less than $400 round trip could get people from New York to Luxembourg and back to France or Germany. Meanwhile, the basic U.S. delegation traveling via NAA transportation would land in Germany; a rented VW microbus could provide local transportation to get everybody to Paris via Luxembourg. In this manner transportation cost could be minimized. There would also be considerable lodging costs involved since about a week's stay would be necessary. The total package added up; AMA budgeted for FAI activities alone. That's when cooperation came in.
AMA apprised interested groups of the situation and noted AMA could cover half the cost. The National Miniature Pylon Racing Association (NMPRA), National Society of RC Aerobatics (NSRCA) and National RC Helicopter Association (NRCHA) agreed to contribute $300 apiece, because it would assure U.S. members on the CIAM Pylon, Pattern and Helicopter subcommittees could attend the December meetings. Some luck helped: one U.S. RC Soaring subcommittee member was an airline employee and could travel at low rates within the AMA/FAI budget; the National Soaring Society (NSS) would contribute. Also, one U.S. Free Flight subcommittee member was traveling in Europe...
CLUB FCC LICENSES
An Illinois AMA chartered club member reported HQ had understood no Club FCC Class C licenses would be issued after January 1, 1975. A check with Jeremiah Courtney, AMA FCC Legal Counsel, proved the rumor false—no change proposed in FCC club licenses. RC flyers—typical rumors can sweep the country about aspects of aeromodeling—most usually wrong, either partly or entirely. Thanks to Gerald Case, Aero Club of Chicago, for bringing this typically erroneous rumor to HQ attention so it could be dispelled.
BEHIND THE SCENES—76 NATS PLANNING
The largest-ever all-AMA planning conference for the National Model Airplane Championships took place Jan. 24, Dayton, Ohio. Approximately 30 key AMA leaders gathered at the Airport Inn to work out details of the daily event scheduling, personnel staffing, logistics, facilities requirements and critical items such as budgeting. Represented were members of AMA's Nationals Executive Committee, Dayton model club leaders and officers, and the following special interest organizations: NFFS (National Free Flight Society), NMPRA (National Miniature Pylon Racing Association), NSRCA (National Society of RC Aerobatics), SAM
AMA News
are largely responsive and do not initiate rules changes (although obviously board members may write rules proposals as individuals if they wish). The present system appears a bit chaotic in that boards are faced with a very difficult task of trying to mesh often conflicting proposals.
It seems to me that contest boards should be charged with initiating rules changes with inputs from all possible responsible sources. If further seems likely that the special interest groups should be the primary source of expertise and should be so chartered by the AMA.
OK—I have fanned the flames a little bit. I have not outlined a definitive procedure but suggested an approach. What do you think?
Other Issues:
Let me fan another flame a little bit. Your governing body devotes much effort and money to the competitor. We invest significantly in all manners of domestic as well as international competition. Personally I feel that competition is the life blood of the hobby and that it would die without it. There is absolutely no question in my mind that it would be a far different thing without the incentive for development fostered by competition. But, how much do we invest in this aspect of the hobby? Should we invest more in community relations and grass-roots support for more and better flying sites? Should we continue a substantial investment in international competition with the ever increasing costs? Should we support competitive events in proportion to the evident national interest?
How about hearing from you out there in modeldom? What kind of burning issue is bothering you? Or, maybe, you're just happy to go along with the crowd, griping when some knucklehead in AMA sticks you with a rule that doesn't make sense (to you), but never taking the time to get involved.
I will try to represent you if I know what you want, otherwise it'll all be "my" rules and you will have to intelligently (ha!) evaluate conflicting ideas to reach a reasonable position on the various issues; so, let's have it.
BACKGROUND—1975 FAI MEETINGS
by John Worth, AMA Executive Director
Federation Aeronautique Internationale (FAI) meetings make decisions concerning world championships, other international competitions, world records and model aircraft. CIAM (Comite International d'Aero-Modélisme — pronounced "see-am") does the job. The 1975 meeting was held in Paris, France, December 4-5.
Some years ago, back in the sixties, AMA was able to send about half a dozen representatives to the annual CIAM meetings. This was possible because the National Aeronautic Association (NAA), official U.S. representative to CIAM in the sport aviation categories, provided generous free transportation arrangements to get people across the ocean. The number of available seats per year for such transportation gradually declined. NAA reduced its sponsorship of various sport aviation representation at FAI meetings. AMA, as NAA's designated U.S. aeromodeling representative to CIAM, got 2-3 seats in recent years at the annual Paris meeting, although NAA was still able to continue sending AMA world championship teams to Europe.
Because reduced attendance coincided with changes in CIAM rules concerning representation at meetings, the loss of seats was detrimental. Additional representatives would have been permitted to participate under the new rules. What happened was CIAM decided to allow its subcommittee members to vote at the so-called technical meetings prior to the final voting at the plenary meeting. This meant subcommittee members would have a voice and influence previously not permitted. For the U.S., AMA members of the Free Flight, Control Line, Scale, RC Aerobatics, Pylon, Soaring and RC Helicopter subcommittees would be very helpful to have at the Paris meeting.
However, AMA's free transportation was limited and the cost of commercial airfare was prohibitive. The outlook for maximum U.S. participation in CIAM meetings looked dim. Some imagination, luck and cooperation of interested groups provided a solution.
Some previous study noted that aside from chartered flights the cheapest over-ocean transportation available was Icelandic Airlines — less than $400 round trip could get people from New York to Luxembourg and between France and Germany and back. Meanwhile the basic U.S. delegation traveling via NAA transportation would land in Germany; a rented VW microbus could provide transportation to get everybody to Paris via Luxembourg. In that manner transportation costs could be minimized. There would also be considerable lodging costs involved since the trip was about a week. With the necessary people the total package added up; AMA budgeted FAI activities could not take the cost alone.
That's where cooperation came in. The National Miniature Pylon Racing Association (NMPRA), National Society of RC Aerobatics (NSRCA) and National RC Helicopter Association (NRCHA) agreed to contribute $300 because it would assure U.S. members of the CIAM Pylon, Pattern and Helicopter subcommittees could attend the December meetings.
Some luck helped in two other situations: a U.S. RC Soaring subcommittee member was an airline employee and could travel at very low rates; the National Soaring Society (NSS) was willing to contribute. Also a U.S. Free Flight subcommittee member was traveling in Europe.
AMA News
Wolfinger, Dan Kilgore Sr., Mike Laughlin, Chuck Slater, Allen Honey, Kevin Smith, Jim Sanders. (seated L-R) Dick Kelso, Cliff McCallum, Bill Hiscock, Fred McCallum.
So great has Dr. John's impact on indoor modelers been, he was recruited to help run the 1975 NATS INDOOR at Lake Charles.
I was there folks, I saw 'em in action when nobody was looking. They help each other. They stress teamwork and training to help Juniors and Seniors, and share their skills.
In 1974 it was Dick McGraw who was MAN of the YEAR for his tireless work on the "Jim Kirkland Memorial" and well deserved; in 1975 it was Dr. John Martin. Who will it be in '76? Maybe you or even you will win? Maybe a woman will win? Who can say? We can only speculate as to the murky future. (Special acknowledgements to Jerry Wagner who aided immeasurably, to Fokker who supplied the yummy breakfast, to Jim Stett who drove me all over...)
These 3 lovely ladies L to R, Margaret Gill, Patty Suss, Ruth Brocious. Margaret is stepping down as Pres. of WINGS, Women in National Glider Soaring. If you ladies in Dist. 5 want to join an organization exclusively for women write to the new Pres., Barbara Robinson, 5941 Sherber Rd., Lansing, Mich., 48910. Tell them I sent you. Patty and Art Sark had their picture in last Oct. Ruth was a Newsletter Editor in Tampa in '74 and a good one. Ain't they cute?
Did you read what Dave Mayor, Club President in his Daytona Beach RC Assoc. Newsletter the other day said? "Don't dress down at night to change what you don't like; keep your hat on; there's more than one way to clean up." (You're right, Dave...)
Bob and Sue Crysler sent a beautiful little book Sue wrote called "Christmas Tide," all about a remade Xmas. Sue illustrated it. GRC people.
George Batiuk, President of MACH in Huntsville is plenty mad cuz I didn't mention his recent contest. OK, OK, George, don't get mad — a peachy fling was enjoyed. Be there next year, guys...
CLUB FCC LICENSES
An Illinois AMA Chartered Club/member reported HQ understood no Club FCC Class C licenses would be issued after January 1, 1975. A check with Jeremiah Courtney, AMA FCC Legal Counsel, proved the rumor false—no change proposed in FCC Club licenses. RC flyers: typical rumors can sweep the country about aspects of aeromodeling—most usually wrong, either partly or entirely. Thanks Gerald Case, Aero Club of Chicago, for bringing HQ attention to this typically erroneous rumor; it was dispelled.
BEHIND THE SCENES — '76 NATS PLANNING
The largest ever all-AMA planning conference for the National Model Airplane Championships took place Jan. 24 at Dayton, Ohio. Approximately 30 key AMA leaders gathered at the Airport Inn to work out details — daily event scheduling, personnel staffing, logistics, facilities requirements and the critical item of budgeting. Represented were members of AMA's Nationals Executive Committee, Dayton model club leaders and officers, and the following special interest organizations: NFFS (National Free Flight Society), NMPRA (National Miniature Pylon Racing Association), NSSCA (National Society RC Aerobatics), SAM.
BACKGROUND—1975 FAI MEETINGS
BY JOHN WORTH AMA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Every year committees of the Federation Aeronautique Internationale (FAI) meet to make decisions concerning world championships, other international competitions and world records for model aircraft. The FAI Committee, International Aeromodelling (CIAM, pronounced see-am) does this job. The 1975 meeting was held in Paris, France, December 4-5.
Some years ago, back in the sixties, AMA was able to send about half dozen representatives to the annual CIAM meetings, possible because the National Aeronautic Association (NAA), official U.S. representative to FAI categories in sport aviation, made generous free transportation arrangements to get people across the ocean. The number of available seats per year for such transportation gradually declined as NAA reduced its sponsorship of various sport aviation representation at FAI meetings. AMA, NAA's designated U.S. aeromodeling representative to CIAM, got 2-3 seats in recent years for the annual Paris meeting, although NAA still was able to continue sending AMA world championship teams to Europe. Because reduced attendance coincided with changes in CIAM rules concerning representation at meetings, the loss of seats was detrimental—additional representatives would have permitted participation anyway. The rules got changed in 1975 so subsequent meetings having representatives would be beneficial.
What happened? CIAM decided to allow its subcommittee members to vote in so-called technical meetings prior to the final voting plenary meeting. This meant subcommittee members would have a voice and influence previously denied. That meant U.S. AMA members on the subcommittees (Free Flight, Control Line, Scale, R/C Aerobatics, R/C Pylon, R/C Soaring, R/C Helicopters) would be very helpful to have in Paris. However, AMA's free transportation was limited and the cost of commercial airfare prohibitive; the outlook for maximum U.S. participation in CIAM meetings looked dim. Some imagination, luck and cooperation of interested groups provided a solution.
Some previous study noted that aside from chartered flights, the cheapest over-ocean transportation available was Icelandic Airlines—less than $400 round trip—which could get people N.Y. to Luxembourg between France and Germany. Meanwhile the basic U.S. delegation traveling via NAA transportation would land in Germany; a rented VW microbus could provide transportation to get everybody to Paris via Luxembourg. In this way transportation costs could be minimized; there would also be considerable lodging costs involved since about a week away in Europe would be necessary. The total package added up and AMA budgeted FAI activities alone.
That's where cooperation came in. The National Miniature Pylon Racing Association (NMPRA), the National Society R/C Aerobatics (NSSCA) and the National R/C Helicopter Association (NRCHA) agreed to contribute $300 each because this would assure U.S. members on the CIAM Pylon, Pattern (Aerobatics) and Helicopter subcommittees could attend the December meetings. Some luck helped two other situations: a U.S. R/C Soaring subcommittee member who is an airline employee could travel at low rates, within AMA/FAI budget, and the National Soaring Society would contribute. Also a U.S. Free Flight subcommittee member was traveling in Europe about the time of the meetings and could attend without extra travel cost.
The end result was that U.S. representation at the 1975 CIAM meeting was much better than expected and U.S. subcommittee members were able to participate in the important technical meetings prior to the plenary session. This increased U.S. influence in decisions affecting international competition rules and procedures for the coming years. The cooperative effort of the special interest groups and the willingness of individual subcommittee members to find economical travel arrangements made the difference.
Conversation with Johnny Clemens at Dayton broached the idea of a District VII meeting, which apparently has not happened in previous years in any large scale. He would personally attend, probably with John Worth. This sounds like a good way to begin a term of office, and I invite the district to look around for facilities and an occasion when some of you might otherwise be together for a meeting. Lansing? Milwaukee? Agenda: how about (1) flying sites and (2) why do I need the AMA?
BACKGROUND — 1975 FAI MEETINGS
BY JOHN WORTH, AMA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Each year the committees of the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale (FAI) meet to make decisions concerning world championships, other international competitions, world records, model aircraft, etc. The FAI Committee for International Aeromodelling (CIAM — pronounced "see-am") does this job. The 1975 meeting was held in Paris, France, December 4-5.
Some years ago, back in the sixties, AMA was able to send about half a dozen representatives to the annual CIAM meetings. That was possible because the National Aeronautic Association (NAA), as the official U.S. representative to the FAI in the aviation categories, provided free transportation to get people across the ocean. The number of available seats per year on such transportation gradually declined as the NAA reduced its sponsorship of various sport aviation representation at FAI meetings. AMA, as NAA's designated U.S. aeromodeling representative to CIAM, got only two or three seats at recent annual Paris meetings, although NAA was still able to continue sending AMA world championship teams to Europe.
Because the reduced attendance coincided with changes in CIAM rules concerning representation at meetings, the loss of seats was detrimental. Additional representatives would have been permitted to participate under the new rules, so changes made for 1975 to allow subcommittee members to vote at so-called technical meetings prior to the final voting plenary meeting were beneficial. This meant subcommittee members would have a voice and influence previously not available. That was important because U.S. AMA members of the subcommittees — Free Flight, Control Line, Scale, R/C Aerobatics, R/C Pylon, R/C Soaring, and R/C Helicopters — would find it very helpful to be present in Paris.
However, AMA's free transportation was limited and commercial airfares were prohibitive. The outlook for maximum U.S. participation at CIAM meetings looked dim. Some imagination, luck and cooperation from interested groups provided a solution.
Some previous study had noted that, aside from chartered flights, the cheapest over-ocean transportation available was Icelandic Airlines — less than $400 round trip — which could get people New York–Luxembourg or between France and Germany and back. Meanwhile, the basic U.S. delegation traveling via NAA transportation would land in Germany. A rented Volkswagen microbus could provide transportation to get everybody to Paris via Luxembourg. In that manner transportation costs could be minimized. There would also be considerable lodging costs involved since the meetings lasted about a week. The necessary overall package added up to more than the AMA had budgeted for FAI activities alone.
When apprised of the situation, cooperation was forthcoming. AMA agreed to cover half the cost. The National Miniature Pylon Racing Association (NMPRA), the National Society R/C Aerobatics (NSRCA), and the National R/C Helicopter Association (NRCHA) agreed to contribute $300 each because it would assure U.S. members of the CIAM Pylon, Pattern and Helicopter subcommittees could attend the December meetings.
Some luck helped. A U.S. R/C Soaring subcommittee member was an airline employee and could travel at low rates within the AMA/FAI budget; the National Soaring Society (NSS) would contribute. Also, a U.S. Free Flight subcommittee member was traveling in Europe about the time of the meetings and could attend without extra travel cost.
CLUB FCC LICENSES
An Illinois AMA Chartered Club/member reported HQ understood no Club FCC Class C licenses would be issued after January 1, 1975. A check with Jeremiah Courtney, AMA FCC Legal Counsel, proved the rumor false — no change proposed in FCC club licenses. RC flyers know that typical rumors can sweep the country about aspects of aeromodeling — most usually wrong, either partly or entirely. Thanks to Gerald Case, Aero Club of Chicago, for bringing HQ attention to this typically erroneous rumor so it could be dispelled.
BEHIND THE SCENES — '76 NATS PLANNING
The largest-ever all-AMA planning conference for the National Model Airplane Championships took place Jan. 24 in Dayton, Ohio. Approximately 30 key AMA leaders gathered at the Airport Inn to work out details of daily event scheduling, personnel staffing, logistics, facilities requirements and the critical item — the all-important budgeting. Represented were members of AMA's Nationals Executive Committee, Dayton model club leaders and officers, and the following special-interest organizations: NFFS (National Free Flight Society), NMPRA (National Miniature Pylon Racing Association), NSRCA (National Society R/C Aerobatics) and SAM.
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
