ANOTHER MONTH has flown by. By
the time you read this, the new Competition
Regulations will be available on the AMA
Web site. Remember that this is the
“official” version of the rule book.
The new Rules Change Cycle has also
started; this means we are now accepting
Rules Change Proposals for the new cycle.
This process will be continuous until
September 30, 2005. No proposals will be
accepted after that postmark date.
Please do take the time to read through
the new Contest Board Procedures. They
are available on the AMA Web site at
www.modelaircraft.org/comp/Contest%20
Board%20Procedures%20Changes_v2final.
pdf.
AMA Leader Member Robert Spahr sent
me a concern he has about the manner in
which pull tests are done, especially in
Control Line Speed, which has some very
high pull tests.
According to him, “The way Control Line
Speed fliers are performing the pull test
[could prove to be] extremely dangerous,
possibly fatal.”
Mr. Spahr references a picture from Speed
Times (the North American Speed Society
SIG newsletter), showing a flier “pulling” the
aircraft with the aircraft and all the rest of the
apparatus in front of him. He wrote:
“If the line/lines, thong, handle, or scale
should fail, the wing or part of the model
would [could] impale the modeler in the gut,
chest, and heart with disastrous results. I
would recommend the modeler positions
inside or between the model and pull test
scale, thus pushing the model away from his
body while performing the test. I personally
use this position and find it much safer and
also easier.”
Even though I’m not a Speed flier, what
Mr. Spahr states certainly makes sense to me.
The only disadvantage I can see is that if you
did have a failure, you’d likely fall on the
model. I guess that’s better than it sticking
you in the chest, however!
Speed, Carrier, and some Scale models
can have some pretty high pull test loads.
What do you think? If this seems like a better,
safer way of doing a pull test, how about
someone authoring a Rules Change Proposal?
AMA has been taken to task recently
about the requirements (maybe lack of
requirements is a better phrase) for being
a member of, or trying out for, a spot on a
US Aeromodeling team.
AMA currently follows FAI policy,
which, in its simplest representation,
means that you do not have to be a citizen
of the country you are competing for in
an FAI sanctioned event. You must,
however, not have competed for another
country for three years and must reside in
that country for at least 185 days/year.
AMA has followed this policy for years.
Some feel that a team member should
be required to be a citizen of the country
they are competing for. This would throw
a bit of a wrench into some things, as we
have already had others compete for the
US who do not meet the citizenship
requirement. Changing the policy now
could/would make them no longer
eligible to compete on one of our teams—
which they have already been on. I can
certainly also see the citizenship
argument.
Interestingly, from a small amount of
research I’ve been able to do, I’ve found
that the Olympics do require citizenship,
but in most sports associated with the
Olympics at world championships or
world cup events do not require
citizenship.
So what do you think about this? Let
me know your thoughts on the topic.
’Til next time ... MA
Edition: Model Aviation - 2005/01
Page Numbers: 185