Radio Control: Sport and Aerobatics
Ron Van Putte
AMA Frequency-Identification System (effective January 1988)
How many times have you heard the saying, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it?" That's the basis for comments I've been hearing about the AMA's new RC frequency-identification system, which is to go into effect January 1988. For details, see page 100 in the April 1987 issue of Model Aviation. The new frequency-identification system will replace virtually everything currently in use.
Key changes:
- All frequency channel-number tags will have to be replaced. The new system requires black numbers on a white background.
- A red streamer imprinted with "72 MHz AIRCRAFT USE ONLY" must be attached to the top of the transmitter antenna when operating in the 72 MHz band.
I question the need for these changes: what is wrong with the existing channel numbers and streamers? My prediction: winners of AMA‑sanctioned contests will be required to use the new system, and purchasers of new radios will receive the new streamers and channel numbers free. Most other pilots will likely continue to use the channel markers and streamers they already own, since those have been doing the job just fine.
AMA rationale for ribbons and number plates
- Number plaques that currently use colors assigned to frequencies will no longer be valid after December 20, 1987.
- The ribbons are to be imprinted with either "72 MHz AIRCRAFT USE ONLY" (red) or "75 MHz SURFACE USE ONLY" (yellow) to reinforce that different frequency allocations exist for aircraft and for surface models (boats, cars).
- The intent is to make the message prominent to prevent cross‑operation (e.g., a boat or car operating on aircraft frequencies), which could cause chaos. The new flags are intended to clarify the type of operation a transmitter is intended for.
Contest Board Procedures and rules cycle
The "Contest Board Procedures" document has evolved over a long period and is not static. It allows input for amendment by all members of the Academy; proposed changes must be addressed to the Executive Council and/or the Contest Boards and would be implemented by joint action of those groups. Headquarters administers the program, but the deliberations are carried out by volunteers.
Some points about the rules cycle and procedure:
- The one-year rule cycle was tried in the past but proved inadequate for developing rules, obtaining membership feedback, refining proposals, voting, and meeting publication schedules. It also left insufficient time to test proposals in the field.
- Currently, a proposer may be "in limbo" regarding whether Headquarters received a proposal and whether it will be placed on the ballot. Steps will be taken to acknowledge receipt by postcard; subsequent publication in the "Competition Newsletter" will confirm acceptance by the Board.
- Each rules-change cycle produces many submissions (well over 100 in the most recent cycle). A glance through the rule books shows small dots indicating new or revised rules from the previous cycle. Some proposals are submitted by Contest Board members in response to needs they observe.
On voting thresholds:
- The issue of a three-quarter (3/4) majority versus simple majority has been tried both ways. In May 1984 a joint Executive Council/Contest Board meeting returned to the 3/4-majority vote, based on the idea that it acts as a filter to select proposals with strong support.
- Experience indicated that only proposals obtaining a 3/4 vote in the Initial Vote survived the Final Vote in any case.
On face-to-face meetings:
- Having Contest Boards meet for the Final Vote would improve communication, but the cost of processing 100 rule changes by meeting in person has been estimated at $30,000–$40,000 — a difficult expense to justify for changes affecting perhaps no more than about 8% of the membership.
The rules system is not perfect, nor is it cast in concrete.
Dave Brown's Mix-A-Matic and Fast-Matic epoxy
I use Dave Brown's Mix-A-Matic and Fast-Matic epoxy systems. Occasionally Part A (the resin) clouds and becomes stiff in the bottle; I once had a container get almost rock-hard. Instead of returning it to the hobby shop, I removed the top and placed the bottle in my microwave oven for 20–30 seconds. Presto — Part A was clear and runny again. The restored Part A worked fine. Others use a pan of hot water to heat the bottle and achieve the same cure.
Editor's safety note: be cautious. Heating epoxies in a microwave can be dangerous. About eight years ago, a modeler who did this became disoriented, lost balance, nearly passed out, and later became violently ill with a severe headache. A doctor warned that certain types of epoxies, when heated this way, can give off highly toxic fumes similar to carbon monoxide, with little or no warning. John Preston reported this in the February 1987 "Safety Comes First" column. Heat epoxies only with full knowledge of the product's safety guidance and preferably use milder heat (hot water bath) or return the product for replacement.
Why tolerate occasional stiff containers? Because these products work well. I use Mix-A-Matic to apply glass cloth to wing skins. Unlike many competing brands, this cured epoxy is sandable and sands to a powder rather than gumming up the sandpaper the way many other epoxies and polyester resins do.
Mike Harrison on rules-making
Mike Harrison (Hot Springs, AR) is active in competition and in advocating changes he believes are needed. He was the driving force behind the new Pattern format at the Nats and is involved in many aspects of competition, including rules-making procedures. He recently wrote to the AMA Executive Council and the RC Aerobatics Contest Board; John Fuqua (RC Aerobatics Contest Board member, District V) shared a copy with me. A slightly edited version follows.
Summary of Mike Harrison's concerns and observations:
- Rules are on a two-year cycle: a proposal may take up to two years to be implemented.
- Passage requires both Initial and Final Votes, historically with a two‑thirds (or higher) majority requirement.
- Communication is poor: proposers often wait months with little or no status feedback.
- Even proposals that receive an apparent majority (for example, seven For, four Against) can fail because a two-thirds majority is required — an outcome Mike calls "minority rule."
- The delay and voting threshold can mean a proposal conceived, approved by a strong majority, and resubmitted may take four years to go into effect from conception, discouraging future submissions.
Obstacles Mike lists:
- Resistance to change: people prefer the familiar.
- The system is slow and provides little communication to the proposer.
- The Contest Board tends to be passive: it waits for proposals rather than proactively meeting and discussing issues.
- The two-thirds (or larger) majority requirement can defeat otherwise broadly supported proposals.
- An erroneous assumption that existing rules are immune to obsolescence despite technological and societal change.
- Together, these obstacles create an inflexible system unable to evolve easily.
Mike's primary recommendation:
- Let the majority rule. If a proposal gets a majority, let it pass. The two-thirds requirement is archaic and acts as an unnecessary impediment to legitimate change.
Mike concludes that the sport/hobby exists for the members now involved, many of whom want change; the current rules-making process makes it almost impossible. He speaks from personal experience of spending time, money, and effort only to see proposals with overwhelming majority support fail under current procedures.
Thanks to Mike for giving us a lot to think about.
Photos wanted
If there are photos with this column, it's because I was able to scrape some up at the last minute. I get very few photos from modelers around the country; most of the ones you see here are mine. I'd love to get pictures of sport or aerobatics flying from anyone — they make my job easier. Submitters receive $5 per photo plus printed credit.
Please send good black-and-white photos with negatives and suggested captions. Good-quality color prints can be converted to black-and-white if necessary. I can return materials if you prefer. (Good, clear Polaroid shots are acceptable.)
Send submissions to: Ron Van Putte 111 Sleepy Oaks Rd. Ft. Walton Beach, FL 32548
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
