Control Line: Scale
Bill Boss 77-06 269th St., New Hyde Park, NY 11040
Well, it didn't take long. A series of scale rules proposals for modifying the new supplemental Profile Scale event has been made. In addition, among the 37 proposals submitted in the current cycle, a couple for scale could affect the CL events.
Scale rules proposals affecting CL
- SC-94-2 and SC-94-3 suggest adding wording to Scale General, item 2, page 117, stating that a contestant can be listed only once as a winner in a scale event, or enter only one model in a scale event. While this is covered under General rule 10 on page 7, redundancy might not hurt.
- SC-94-22, SC-94-23, and SC-94-24 deal with modification or elimination of Section 4.6, the builder's declaration of parts not made by him. Proposals SC-94-22 and SC-94-23 note that the 4.6 rule has not been effective and that the builder-of-the-model (BOM) rule is all that is required. While the reasoning behind the 4.6 rule is sound, enforcement is difficult. If a modeler states he made all of his model, how do we prove him wrong on the field? SC-94-24 would exempt the new Profile Scale event from the 4.6 rule. Perhaps the best course would be to delete the rule for all scale events.
- SC-94-25 through SC-94-29 and SC-94-37 address documentation, scoring, and dummy pilot requirements for the new Profile event:
- SC-94-25 suggests reducing documentation from a maximum of eight pages to four pages.
- SC-94-26, SC-94-27, and SC-94-28 suggest lowering static judging points as follows: Accuracy of Outline, 40 to 25; Craftsmanship, 30 to 25; Finish, Color, and Markings, 30 to 20. The reason given is that fewer documentation pages and lower static scoring will encourage beginners to attempt the event.
- SC-94-29 suggests a score sheet modification should proposals -25 to -28 pass.
- SC-94-37 would exempt the Profile event from the dummy pilot requirement.
Will reducing the maximum number of documentation pages or lowering static scoring entice beginners? There is no requirement that eight pages must be produced—the present rule states the maximum. What difference does it make if the total static score is 100 or 70? Does the real beginner care?
What we need is for the event to be designated as a true beginner's event. This can be accomplished by eliminating anyone who has previously competed in sport or precision events. If a person has competed in other scale events, how could he or she possibly be called a beginner?
The only exception I would make is for the Junior contestant, who would be allowed to compete regardless of whether he has tried any Sport or Precision events. We might even be able to involve Juniors who have built their own models. Isn't the real purpose of establishing the Profile Scale event to get the nonscale modeler and Junior into the scale events?
Profile Scale is already shaping up as an event like Profile Carrier—dominated by those already building and flying scale events. The true beginner doesn't stand a chance at entering the winner's circle. Who are we encouraging anyway?
Because of the thickness of most profile fuselages, and because we are trying to attract beginners, I see no problem with SC-94-37 exempting Profile from the dummy pilot requirement. However, if a modeler made the effort to install a plastic canopy and pilot figure, he should be rewarded in the craftsmanship scoring.
I hope I have given you something to think about with regard to the new Profile event, and that some Contest Directors of upcoming contests will consider making this new event available only to the true beginner or Junior. If it must be offered to pros, then let the pros compete only with one another, not with the Junior or beginner.
Please let the Scale Contest Board member in your district know your feelings about these rules changes. It's better to let him know now, rather than complain after the proposals become the rule.
I thank Jim MacDonald, District 10 Scale Board member, for providing me with a summary of the scale proposals in the current rules cycle. Many thanks for your efforts, Jim.
Contest report — Garden State Circle Burners (GSCB) meet
The Garden State Circle Burners (GSCB) MAC did it again. Once more, George Gaydos and the GSCB scale contest crew put on a great scale meet on September 20, 1992, at the Bendix parking lot adjacent to Teterboro Airport in New Jersey. The weatherman cooperated by providing great flying weather with little wind.
The contestant turnout was strong: 16 contestants with 19 event entries. Event entries:
- Sport Scale: 8 entries
- Profile: 6 entries
- Precision: 5 entries
This was a great showing of support for the GSCB's continuing promotion of CL scale activities on the East Coast.
Profile event results:
- George Gaydos — B-26B (181.50)
- Pete Herman — F-82 Twin Mustang (179.85) (National-winning)
- Roy Ward — Sterling kit-based P-51 Mustang
Sport Scale results:
- Ed Rhoads — Skyraider (183.85)
- Tom Hampshire — Waco SRE (178.35) (fourth at the '92 Nationals)
- Joseph Sroczyns — P-51 Mustang (163.85)
Precision results:
- George Gaydos — Grumman Skyrocket
- Ralph Robinson — Sopwith Camel (fourth in the '92 Nationals)
- Joseph Sroczyns — P-47 Thunderbolt
Best Junior awards:
- Kevin Gilchrist (13) — profile Hellcat in Sport event
- Tom Ward (11) — profile P-51 Mustang in Profile event
- Robert Gaydos (10) — Monocoupe 90A (Eagle kit) in Precision event
If you missed competing in GSCB's 1992 scale meet, you will have another opportunity in September 1993. This meet offers trophies and merchandise awards to fifth place and allows you to fly scale on a fully paved surface. Don't miss it in '93.
Please send ideas, notices of upcoming CL scale events, contest reports, and especially photos of CL scale activity to me at the address at the very top of this column.
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
