CL Scale
SUNDAY July 29, 2001 at Willow Grove Naval Air Station (PA), the Philly Fliers club held its annual Control Line (CL) Aerobatics contest, which included, for the second year, the Sport, Profile, and Fun Scale events.
Willow Grove Naval Air Station was one of the great places that AMA used for the National Championships when it was rotated to different locations in the East, West, South, and North Central parts of the country.
It has been more than 30 years since the Nationals was held at Willow Grove.
Just the mention of Willow Grove brings back some great memories for me. In July 1965, AMA held the 34th National Championships at the station, and it was the first time that I had competed in a Nationals Scale event.
I flew a six-foot version of the Fairchild PT-19 in what was then called CL Flying Scale (known today as Precision Scale). The model was powered with a McCoy .60 engine and had operating throttle and flaps.
The event was sponsored by Dee Bee Engineering. The rule book that covered all AMA events in those days was only 62 pages, as compared to the 2001 book of 173 pages. Have we made progress?
Enough reminiscing; back to the report. Al Knight, a member of the Garden State Circle Burners (GSCB) in NJ, noted that considerable thanks had to be given to the base commander, Captain Blake, and Master Chief Mike Pitts for allowing this CL contest to be held at the base.
Bob Zambelli of the Philly Fliers was the Aerobatics contest director and coordinator of the overall contest, while George Kalinowski of the GSCB acted as contest director for Scale and was assisted by Carmine Scaperrotta (also a GSCB member).
The Scale events drew 15 entries, and although the weather wasn't the best that day, everyone managed to get in official flights.
Jerry Blaszczyk placed first in the Sport event, flying his well-proven de Havilland Twin Otter; Mel Mondschein placed first in Profile with a fine-looking de Havilland Beaver; and Roy Ward took the Fun Scale event, flying a North American P-51 Mustang.
This year a special "Navy's Choice Award" was presented. Master Chief Mike Pitts selected the North American P-51 Mustang by Joe Sroczyk of Philadelphia PA for the award. Joe's P-51 features flap and throttle operation, has a fine finish, and is powered with a Fox Eagle .60 engine.
Mary Knight concluded her report by again thanking the Philly Fliers and naval personnel for all their hard work and coordination in preparing the site for competition, and for bringing this contest to fruition once again at Willow Grove.
Mary said it was great hearing model-airplane engines again at the station, and they have high hopes of being back in 2002 with another contest.
Other Points of View: In the January 2002 column, considerable commentary was made on the subject of retractable gear in Profile Scale models, based on questions posed to experienced Scale modelers on both coasts and central states about how judging Profiles with retracts was done in their areas.
There was no clear-cut answer to how a Profile was judged for the lack of retracts when the prototype had them or how “Realism in Flight” was scored.
It appeared that if retracts were employed, they certainly were judged; however, if retracts were not used, penalties were generally overlooked.
It seems the only place the rules are strictly enforced is at the National Championships.
This month I have further comment from Art Weber, a designer and builder of multiengine Profiles and member of the CircleMasters Flying Club of Wisconsin; Chuck Holtzapple, a 20-year modeler and Expert Class Precision Aerobatics flier from York PA, who is a newcomer to Scale modeling; and George Kite, Scale judge and member of the Indy Sportliners club.
Art wrote that to require retracts in a Profile model when the prototype had them was against the basic reason the Profile Scale event was established.
Profile was meant to be an event to encourage newcomers and other experienced modelers to try their hand at Scale without all the complications associated with building a Sport or Precision model.
It was also meant to be an event that would provide a learning experience without making an investment in retract systems, electronic controls, or the expense of converting a costly RC (Radio Control) system to make them work.
Art noted that he doesn't believe retracts should be required in Profiles, and that the usual procedure at a CircleMasters contest is not to downgrade a Profile for lack of retracts.
He also said that if a contestant were to employ retracts in a Profile and calls for the retract option, the retracts would be judged.
If they don't perform properly, the contestant stands the chance of being downgraded in two areas: the retract option and “Realism in Flight,” giving him or her the possibility of a double penalty.
Chuck decided that after 20 years of Stunt flying and reaching the Expert Class that he no longer wanted the burden of the time required for Stunt practice, and that he would try his hand at building a CL Sport Scale model.
Based on correspondence with Chuck, I know he selected the TopFlite® P-47 and went through all the steps of gathering three-views, a color scheme, and other data for the model.
He even thought that with his 20 years of experience he would include retracting gear, and he purchased a system.
During construction, it didn't take long for Chuck to realize that considerable time and planning is required to build a successful Scale model. He ran into problems even though he is experienced—not insurmountable, but difficult nevertheless.
The main problem revolved around the installation of the retracts.
After considerable consultation with Fred Cornenwett, Keith Trostle, and myself, Chuck decided he would forego the retracts on this model, and he hoped that experience gained would allow him to use the system in a later model.
Some of the advice given to Chuck (which should apply to all Scale newcomers) was that he should not overburden himself in his first Scale endeavor.
It would be better to produce a great-looking and accurate model, have good documentation, and add as much external detail as possible.
Chuck decided that he would concentrate on getting this first project completed, and he hoped that if this detail work would overcome a “Realism in Flight” penalty, should it be imposed.
He also expressed the opinion that fixed landing gear on a model that should have retracts should not be penalized.
Instead, because of the work and skill required for retracting gear and operating wheel-well doors, a model should be given a bonus of two to four points. The extra points might encourage more Scale modelers to go the extra mile.
(Although a bonus system for employing retracts might be great, there is nothing in the present rules that would permit awarding extra points.)
Chuck concluded his comments with the following example of judging.
If a B-17 with fixed gear and a J-3 Cub compete against each other for “Realism of Flight,” and they put in equally good flights, the B-17 (which requires considerable multiengine coordination and has serviceable flaps) will suffer the adverse consequence of a lower score because of the fixed landing gear.
To Chuck, that is a real problem.
George reported that for local contests he has judged, he would expect to see gear retraction for any full-bodied aircraft that employed retraction, but he would not expect to see retracts on Profiles of the same aircraft.
He noted that he does not deduct points for Profiles without retracts. However, at national contests where he participated as a judge, he would deduct a point or two for full-bodied aircraft and “reluctantly” deduct a point for Profiles.
The bottom line is that the installation of retracts in any model is no simple task, even for an experienced modeler.
If you employ retracts in your model, whether full-bodied or Profile, you have to be prepared to suffer penalties for improper operation of the gear as well as a downgrade in “Realism in Flight.”
It is also apparent that to require retracts in a Profile is against the basic concept for why the Profile event was established. If you do install retracts, you must also consider how to control the system, a fourth line, an electronic system, a converted RC unit, and the ultimate cost.
The big question: Is it all worth the effort and cost for a Profile model?
Please send ideas, notice of upcoming CL Scale events, contest reports, and photos of CL Scale activity to me at the address at the top of this column. MA
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
