Letters to the Editor
5161 E. Memorial Dr., Muncie IN 47302
Correction
In the review of the HobbyZone Sky Surfer (February 2002 issue), the example shown was a Graupner model. Since that time we have learned that Horizon Hobby has secured exclusive distribution of the Sky Surfer and that its version looks slightly different (as shown above).
We apologize for any confusion this may have caused.
MA staff
Congratulations
My congratulations on your excellent coverage of the 2001 National Model Airplane meet. For some of us here on the left Coast, who will probably never get to Muncie for the Nats, your photographs and coverage is the next best thing to being right there.
Thank you for your column on the passing of William E. Good. I was acquainted with Dr. Good not through our common model airplane interests, but through our technical interests.
Dr. Good at General Electric Company was the co-developer of a revolutionary color TV projection system using a "light valve" vacuum tube. His partner in this development was Tom True.
I was in a position to purchase three of these color TV projection units from General Electric. During our meetings at GE, I addressed these gentlemen as "Good and True." It got a big laugh from the audience at the time. It now doesn't seem very funny.
Floyd Carter Los Altos, California
Silicone Adhesives
In the article on Wing Ding II (in the January 2002 issue), Mr. Garber advises that, on pages 33 and 34, one should use "silicone adhesive" to attach electronic equipment (servos), the motor assembly, and other parts.
Apparently, neither Mr. Garber nor anyone who reviewed his article was aware that you should never use silicone adhesives around electronic materials.
Silicone adhesives emit acetic acid when they cure and have been known to corrode electronic materials to the point of destruction.
Ed McCollough Portland, Oregon
Thanks from a Nominee
It was a great honor and privilege to have been nominated as a candidate for the position of District IX VP. The results of the election are now known, and the incumbent has been reelected.
I would like to thank the members of the district who supported me with their hard work, encouragement, and their votes. In addition, I would like to congratulate Russ Miller on his reelection.
Let's now all get on with our enjoyment of this great hobby.
P. M. McGuigan, M.D. Rapid City, South Dakota
Nats Issue/Competition
Mr. Novak is entitled to his opinion in the Feb. 2002 issue of MA about "losing" an issue once a year to the competition issue. I am much like Mr. Novak; I don't have much inclination to compete, but I look forward to the Nationals issue like Christmas.
It's great to see what the competitors are flying, what new technology is being used; it inspires my own airplane designs. I'm really just a sport flier, but I greatly appreciate the issues that show me what the "hot shots" are flying.
I really don't think that Mr. Novak's estimation of the membership numbers of 90% or more not being interested in that issue of the magazine is accurate. I consider myself to be an average guy in this hobby, and the Nats issue is great; keep up the good work. Show us the hot new technology that is driving the different disciplines of our hobby, so we can be creative on our own level, inspired by what we see them flying.
I have been in this hobby in one degree or another since 1966 (I was 11) when my dad and I started flying Control Line. I've never built a kit; I've always designed my own airplanes and I'm sure that I am not the exception to the rule.
I guess there will always be people who don't like something. I appreciate Mr. Novak's honesty, but he'll just have to put up with "losing" an issue every year because I believe he's more of a minority than he thinks.
What I would like to see as articles in MA would be articles about some of the competitors' airplanes. They don't have to be "how to build this one" articles, but it would be really cool to see these airplanes up close. Shots of the engines, with the cowl off, inside the airplanes with the wings off, radio installations, how the retracts work, the innovative ways these guys solve some of the same problems we "noncompetitors" run into.
I believe these kind of articles would not only be appreciated by the general membership, they would broaden our "noncompetitive" design horizons.
Bob Hunt's article in that same issue was one I read with much interest. Because I choose to design my own airplanes and not build kits, I can sympathize with what Bob and Don Typond were lamenting about the proliferation of ARFs and the seeming loss of ground on the issue of "model builders."
Maybe if there were articles about some of these competitors' airplanes, it would spark that interest to be "intimately" involved with their models by building them, in more of our members! Couldn't hurt!
I would look forward to my issue even more if I was going to get to "see" how the "hot shots" do it. I am very happy with the job you all do on the magazine, keep up the good work, and keep those competition articles coming; they are inspiring.
Mike Kilmovitch Greenville, Ohio
I agree with Lance Novak from Studio City, California completely. I don't do that very often. Competition is everything? Bull!
Karl Reines Gooding, Idaho
I've noticed, over the years, that "flying buddies"—regardless of age—are instantly on a first-name basis. Mr. Novak has as much right to air his opinions as I do mine. I enjoy, but soon find boring, most "sport" flying.
Where's the challenge once basics are learned? How do I rate how well I'm flying? What does that say to help me when there's no standard? What of those who do their own thing and want to suppress everything else? (I'll gladly abide their freely chosen preferences—until they move to shut me down. Then I'd suggest they adopt a more tolerant view. What if some other sector wants to ban their favorite activity?)
I've had good times over many years and have never seen ugly, hateful conduct in any of them. Orphan and Zonk must fly somewhere else. Though not "driven" (who said, "or good enough"?), to be a top winner, I find that contests offer pleasant opportunities to display skills, talents, and achievements:
- Safety, under enforced standards; e.g., frequency control, pull tests, DT (thermoplastic) snuffers, etc.
- Among supportive friends—modelers with like interests.
Letters
Sure, some guys seem preoccupied while preparing to do their best—that's their thing. Where did the vicious myth of the-to-death competition get started? There's no gory mound of butchered "enemies," no bloody-fanged beast roaring and pounding his chest in jungle triumph. I hope Mr. Novak has never actually met such people. I hope that is not his own attitude when he competes at anything.
Call model aviation sport or hobby; we do it for our unique, personal satisfactions. If not, why bother? My joy differs from that even of others who fly the same events. But there is common ground: event rules, good people, and the contest occasion, etc.
Contests are just as important to our mutual activity, in my view, as any other part. AMA's publication, per bylaws and standing rules, serves all members. Destroy or abandon any one facet, and we are all made smaller.
As to percentages, if more than 10% of us compete, and only one of 12 issues is dedicated to Nats competition, that's 8.33%. We are also under-represented. With dedicated columns for the various ways to fly, content for each of us—contest fliers or not—is but a small fraction of each issue. Advertising replaces content, and is welcome, in part, to help pay for the "relevant content" we do find.
Nowadays, I fly exclusively CL but have dabbled (at least) with most of the rest. I read for, and find interesting, useful content in coverage of other "disciplines." We'd all be cheated if a column, or word of certain activities, was dropped at the insistence of people who don't do that type of flying. And if the appeal of my main interest ever fades, it's nice to have a complete index to other areas.
Lou Crane Sierra Vista, Arizona
When I read Lance Novak's letter several weeks ago (Feb. '02 issue, page 9, "No to the Nats issue"), I knew I had to add my own comments.
Although I no longer fly competitively, I have flown a variety of CL events on a local and regional level many years ago (and twice at the Nats). I now fly sport RC and occasional CL, but I really appreciate and enjoy the Nats issue. In it I see names and photos of modelers I have met over the years, including some from my own and other local clubs.
I have never heard my fellow modelers and fliers criticize the Nats issue, and I hope Mr. Novak's opinion is in the minority. All I can say to him is: "Get a grip. Try to look at the big picture. Get out and visit some local and/or regional events and see for yourself there is a whole lot more to competition than trying to beat the other guy."
I hope you get a lot of mail on this subject and find out the majority enjoy and appreciate the Nats issue. Keep up the good work.
Dave Trahert Richboro, Pennsylvania
Like Lance Novak, I don't like to read competition reports that are blow by blow chronicles of everything that happened during culminating with a large table of all entrants, their airplanes, and standings. I agree, this is a waste of paper to me—especially if I happen to be reading a report of an event I attended.
With the lag time of the modeling press, the "newsworthy" content of the standings is very stale news indeed by the time it reaches my doorstep, and I've known for many months who has won and is winning in the areas of competition that I care about via other avenues (i.e. the Web, Special Interest Group publications, or word of mouth). But most importantly, this is a poor style choice for keeping reader attention.
However, unlike Lance, I did enjoy the December Nats issue very much, because it seemed to have a goal of exposition of all forms of our aeromodeling hobby. Unlike most modeling magazines, Model Aviation always gives us the full spectrum of our hobby, from rubber power to turbines.
I know most folks barely get a chance to read the columns that interest them. It's a shame, but a reality in a world where household chores, kids' soccer practice, work, and play all have to fight for time slots.
The Nats issue was chock-full of beautiful large color photos and plenty of interesting inside stories of the competitors. Granted, I knew only very few of them personally, but it is the goal of the writer to bring the story to us in a way that makes it interesting, and therefore personal to us.
I'm sorry Lance Novak considers it such a waste, because I've seen real improvements here—especially in the last few years. It was obvious to me that the Model Aviation staff tried very hard to make the spectacle of the Nats interesting to everyone—not just to folks who traveled hundreds of miles to be there.
I think the goal of a writer who covers a competition event should be to bring us stories of exactly how the competitors excel—the hows and whys of equipment selection, winning strategies, the understanding behind important rule developments, and, of course, the camaraderie of "good clean" competition.
These are the jewels that the truly best among us strive to possess and then give away (often far more easily than gained) to those who would ask to learn. If you think about this goal in journalism, it's very similar to what we like to read monthly. Duane Gall, Mike Garton, and many others have done this issue by issue.
Perhaps my greatest confusion with Lance's view on this subject is why he seems to like to read the "1 in '11" "noncompetition" issues yearly.
Organized competition is definitely not for everyone, as it requires dedication, time, and desire. You're wasting energy if you lack any of these and you set out to win. When Lance Novak writes, "most modelers have absolutely no interest in competition of any kind," I'd like to ask him the question, "What do you consider to be competition?"
Perhaps he did not have time to consider the implications of his statement, but my challenge remains. Why fly at all if you don't like to challenge yourself? Are gatherings at the flying field simply picnics with model airplanes in attendance? I doubt very much that Lance Novak is a nonflier; in fact, he states that he enjoys helping other fliers, so I believe him to be skilled and knowledgeable. However, the desire to compete may present itself in many ways.
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
