Letters to the Editor
5161 E. Memorial Dr., Muncie IN 47302
Focal Point Correction
Edward L. Martin's (Asheville, NC) Piper J-3 Cub featured in the April Model Aviation has a scale of two inches = one foot — not two inches = one inch, as published.
Our apologies for the error.
MA staff
Park Flyers
I have to take issue with the letter published in the February 2001 issue of Model Aviation entitled "Park Flier Frequencies."
While I agree with Mr. Singleton on his basic point regarding uncoordinated frequency use, I have to take issue with him when he states, referring to park flyers, that, "The fact that they are Electric hides their existence from serious modelers." (My italics, not Mr. Singleton's.)
It takes me to mean that Mr. Singleton considers anyone who flies Electrics to be less than serious about the sport than those who fly wet airplanes. I'll be the first to admit that I am just getting back into this sport after a long hiatus, and that I have less experience and skill than some who have been around for a while.
I fly Electrics because they are more convenient, because I didn't want to get into the mess and expense of wet airplanes, the fuel and accessories, and because battery and motor technology have come quite a long way since I was last involved in this sport.
There are folks in our club who fly everything from warbirds to Ultra Stiks to Butterflies, .40- and .60-size airplanes, and much, much larger. Some of them also have Electrics in their inventory of aircraft.
To make the leap of logic that simply because they fly Electric rather than wet airplanes, that these people are somehow less serious about the sport is an unfortunate, inaccurate, and myopic generalization.
Every hobby seems to have an "elitist" faction, willing to berate others over what might seem to be the smallest of differences or missteps. I would hope that Mr. Singleton would see situations such as the one that he described as opportunities to expand his experience and the knowledge of himself and those around him.
Was the park flier remiss in not checking to see if his frequency was in use with a field so near to him? Probably so.
Was the group at the field less than observant in not seeing other aircraft less than 200 yards away (certainly within normal flying distance)? Also, probably so.
I would hope that the next time Mr. Singleton finds himself in a similar situation, that he remembers a time when he was also new to the sport. A time when he was lucky to get it back on the ground with the wheels pointed down, and grasp the opportunity to mentor someone who may not have the benefit of his experience. We all could benefit from that philosophy.
Bernie Ortmann Peachtree City, Georgia
While Mr. Singleton has a valid point ("Letters to the Editor," 2/01 issue), I worry that his view of the hobby may scare off potential new converts to the field of model aeronautics. His offhand comment that "The fact that they are Electric hides their existence from serious modelers," speaks volumes to me.
As a former "serious modeler" turned Electric modeler I recall encountering such people throughout my life. Their "there can be only one true power source," "there can be only one true method of flying," or "there can be only one true method of covering" attitude never made any sense to me and only serves to unnecessarily divide an already too-small community.
I wonder in what way the park flier was "questioned" and what his subsequent opinion of "serious modelers" is now. Further, will said flier still fly? Will he/she feel motivated to learn more? Join a club and the AMA? Buy more aircraft and equipment and help support our hobby? We can only hope so.
I agree with Mr. Singleton about radio awareness. However, while educating the large influx of new blood is indeed necessary, let us be careful in how we go about it.
Andrew Bennett Belmont, Massachusetts
I would like to respond to Mr. Singleton's letter in the Feb. '01 issue addressing the issue of aircraft lost due to a park flyer in the area of a sanctioned site he recently visited ("Park Flier Frequencies").
Number one: As someone who flies park flyers and also scratch-builds ducted fans, I resent the idea that park flyer pilots are not "serious modelers." The amount of money spent does not a modeler make.
Number two, a question: When the offending pilot was found, how was he treated? Was he cursed for being the devil and chased out of the area (and most likely the hobby) forever or was he brought to the field, given an AMA pamphlet, and educated?
Mr. Singleton states that, "The AMA, of all people, should be watching very closely what the industry is doing." I would submit to Mr. Singleton, and all the others at the scene, that being AMA members, the AMA was watching, and while it was too late for the aircraft already lost, future disasters could be averted and new friends found.
Mr. Singleton also states that "Hobby shops do not inform potential buyers of the hazards ... " There is an easy way around this. Have all the clubs in your area get together and create a map showing where your flying sites are. Include on the map an invitation to "Come fly with us," and a short paragraph educating the future aviator on radio range and interference. Make copies and take them to every hobby shop in the area and ask that they include a copy with each slow flyer and trainer sold. Remember to go back every few months to resupply the stock.
Mr. Singleton is correct that the potential for disaster is great, and I am sorry that three airplanes were lost at the site in question. I can think of nothing worse than losing an airplane to radio problems.
However, the potential for new friends and a growing membership is just as great. Today's park flier could be tomorrow's world champion, given the opportunity.
David Reynolds Tucson, Arizona
Spirit of St. Louis Memories
Since I have recently renewed my interest in model aircraft building and flying after a layoff of 55 years, I found a local AMA-affiliated club in my area (Lassen County Radio Control) and joined it and AMA.
I received my first copy of Model Aviation, February 2001 issue. Of course I read through it from cover to cover to try to play catch-up on this long-forgotten hobby. In the story on page 102 ("RC Giants" column), Mr. de Vries states he went through the San Diego Aerospace Museum.
In his article, among other things, he states he saw the replica of Charles Lindbergh's Spirit of St. Louis — the Ryan M1/M2 hybrid monoplane that was used in Lindbergh's historic flight to Paris.
Without stepping on any toes, I believe what he saw was a replica of the replica. The original Spirit replica was lost in a disastrous fire in the late seventies or early eighties that destroyed the original museum in the old exposition building in Balboa Park.
The reason I have a somewhat more-than-average interest in the Spirit is personal. My father lived in Five Points — an area in early San Diego that overlooked the "Mudflats," as East San Diego Bay was called in the 1920s. Lindbergh Field, San Diego Airport, now sits on that site. He lived over a harbor shop in an apartment along with other young bachelors who worked in the area.
One day one of the other tenants, who worked for B. Franklin Mahoney and Claude Ryan at Dutch Flats (the Mudflats), said he would take dad to look at a Ryan airplane that he was working on that some crazy guy was going to fly across the Atlantic. My dad always remembered this experience and often told the story to my brother and me.
In dad's later years, one of my cousins was married to an ex-naval officer who worked for T. Claude Ryan. When Claude Ryan's autobiography was published, he gave dad an autographed copy signed by Ryan and William W. Wagner, the biographer. The book is titled Ryan, The Aviation, and is a very detailed story of early aviation in Southern California and Ryan Aeronautical, which later became Ryan Teledyne company.
I believe the "original replica" was used in some of the scenes of the Jimmy Stewart film. And as a young kid I remember seeing it many times in the old building.
Wayne McGaughy Susanville, California
June 2001 9
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
