Three view stuff and more.

[Mel Santmyers]

Its been over a year now since I last posted to you guys. I hope you found it interesting. To update things I spoke with three outline judges. Two this year and one last year after the events. The last being at the Masters in Fresno. I asked two questions. No.1. How much did you use the three views. 80% 85% and 100%. The Masters judge being the last one at 80%. Question No.2. What did you think of the three views submitted. Answer ranged frome terrible to horrible. Now what do you think this did to their scores? SO! if you are interested in being serious you may think of drawing your own. [legal as per the rule book] OR you can think about the model versus the full size photos per my suggestion in previous post. Think about this and let your new officials know what you think. Should a line drawing really help determine your score instead of plane to model?
While I am at here  The 30 % rule needs to be looked at.[ Next.] What if we qualified one year and flew in the Masters the next year so clubs can pick a suittable weather date? Not to mention all the rest of the good stuff that could take place.
Finally I want to mention there was not ONE mention of the recent Masters on RC UNIVERSE. under scale. Are we that dead guys?
These new Scale Masters officials really need to hear from everyone. Lets help them make the Masters the event we all want to see.

[Mitchell Baker]

Hi Mel,

I'm only going to respond to the RC Universe comment.  Why would no comment on RCU mean anything about the how well USSMA is doing.  I very seldom visit RCU simply because over the last several years it has become an ad in your face site , where the signal to noise ratio is very low.  The few times I have been over there was to dispel rumors being started about USSMA or just plain wrong information being given. I posted info about the Champs on RC Scale Builder site, which still has 99% top quality posts and has not sold out to the vendors IMHO. If interested, www.rcscalebuilder.com.

It was good seeing you at the champs...OK so I will post more about your comments..  Not sure what you mean about the 30% rule, please explain more... 

Last, does the guide say 3-views are mandatory?  If not, then it is up the to builder to use them or not?  Right?  You just have to have something to prove your outline? 

See-ya
Mitch

[Mel Santmyers]

Hi Mtch.   To help answer your comments,I said RC Universe because that is what I use and I assummed that is what a lot of beginners and people interested in other areas of our sport may use. I did [NOT] say that someone would or would not mention how  the scale masters was doing as a matter of fact that was the the furthest thing from my mind. I simply thought someone would post pictures or comments from someone that was there just like many other events on there are covered.    NEXT. The 30% rule Thats fine but would it be beneficial to invite the next person in line to attend if the person qualified cannot attend for some reason and continue down to the third person or something?    I thought about this being a way to add to the numbers and to keep more people coming back.
NEXT. Three views not mandatory. I think we visited this area before. Sure you are correct I know this as well. BUT!! try to get by without one, you saw the percentages used. Remember 80,85 and 100%
Mitch I am trying to help not hinder.Example. If the experts and team guys want to use three views they draw thats fine however the rest of the classes should not not be required to have them.. Yes i originally said no three views because i feel lines on a sheet of paper simply do not equal that of the model to the full size especially when anyone can draw them.   I do not understand why this is so difficult to understand. Am I wrong ?? Of course all of this is up to our new officials and what ever course they decide on. My goal here is to get people involved especially the old guard, to help them make decisions in what i think is a very critical time in our future.
Keep trying to prove me wrong young man. Regardless you are a hard worker for the organization and I appreciate that.       Mel.

[Mitchell Baker]

Try RC Scale Builder.. you will find a lot more help there... and fewer ads...  

Ok, I understand what you are saying... So how far down the list do you want to go?  Where would be a good place to stop?  The championships are suppose to be the "Best of the Best"... if you "invite" down the line, don't you dilute that a bit?  I want numbers up as well, but I don't want to sacrifice quantity for quality. 

Not trying to prove anyone wrong, I just want to make sure the problem is well defined before we start down the road to fix anything.  I don't there is a good answer that covers it all. Yes you can draw three views, and it is just as easy to doctor a picture to what you want, colors, lines, etc.  I do think things should evolve with the times, but lets make sure we put something in place that is effective for the long term and not just a band-aid.  Is there really a problem?  How does AMA handle this? FAI?  If we want more people to participate, really we need to be as close to AMA and/or FAI as possible.  75% of all the east coast qualifiers and 2 of the biggest in the country are AMA rule based events that we let in as qualifiers. 

I enjoy the thought process... and the only way we can grow is with open discussion... 

See-ya
Mitch

[waconut]

Finally! a discussion has ensued!!!
/waconut

[Mitchell Baker]

HAHAHA.. What do you mean, there have been lots of discussions....  Many of them started by me.. and most have died.. hehehe... 

See-ya
Mitch

[Mel Santmyers]

Hi Mitch. Please read again. I said down to the THIRD person or something and it was just a thought.  You are right we need to get more people posting and it seems us three are the only ones currently willing to be the bad guys or so it seems. I do not think any one should feel looked upon differently just because they have an opinion as a matter of fact we all need to know how most people feel especially our new leadership.      By the way I have had as a favorite Rc Scale modeler for a long time however I do not belong.
I guess because I do not understand why. However I can access part of it.                                Mel.

[Roly]

I like the 3 view from the Photo Documentation, Currently photo documentation for outline takes precidence over 3 view drawings.

3 views MUST be from a published or approved scource; descrepencies from the 3 views need to be pointed out to the documentation to the judges. Need to do this for better scores.

A unapproved 3 view drawn by a competitor would be dissallowed and if 3 views could not be shown through photos the competitor would be downgraded with a potential 0 score for outline.

Roly Worsfold
NorthWest Scale Aero-Modellers

[waconut]

The following is an excerpt from my initial comments on "The rise and Fall of Scale Masters,
Mon, 04/19/10, 02:24 PM" Forum Flightline topic:
"Let's regress abit and talk about three-views; now there's a paradox if ever there was one. Show me a documentation 3-view and I'll show you what PhotoShop can do. One can also say that about photographs, but let's not go there. 3-views should be used for what they are: a drawing by a draftsman and his interpretation of what the particular aircraft (not necessarily your prototype) he used for his drawing looked like and not as what one's modeled aircraft outline looks like. Not one of my five Scale Master Waco's (all were of existing aircraft) 3-views were correct. Each prototype airplane had variants and deviations from existing available drawings. One gets tired of inserting on the drawings, exceptions and differences that were incorporated in the model's construction (based on photos) but not shown on the drawings. I now use actual photographs of the prototype airplane rather than someone's drawing of say a typical 1929 Waco CTO. And still I sometimes forget to incorporate some detail a Static Judge is just waiting to pounce on."
Pertaining to this discussion on 3-views, I, at the 2011 Championships, used actual photographs of my prototype Waco YMF-5 aircraft  (also at th2 2011 Qualifiers) and guess what – I scored from 3 9's to a 10/9.5/9.5.  Previous 3-view scoring of this particular Waco ranged from overall scores of 24 to 27 when I used Paul Matt drawings.  Those drawings were of NC14031, a 1934 Waco YMF5 while my prototype airplane is a 1987 Waco YMF5 Classic.  Try and find adequate 3-4 views of that aircraft!
Most everyone knows what my views (sic) are on the worth and scoring weight given to 3-4 view documentation, and if one reads between the lines of the above comments, Scale Masters had best recognize the second decade of the 21st century as it relates to scale model competition, and the aircraft that are modeled; all the way from scratch built to RTFs.
so I'll just conclude by saying until the rules are changed, modified or clarified, I do my darndest to present 3-4 view outlines (currently, I use photos as I will with my new Waco for the 2012 season) that truly reflect the particular aircraft that I have modeled and not just some generalized outline drawings of a Waco F5 or in the case of my new airplane, a Waco 10.
/chuck

[Mitchell Baker]

So, I'm really trying to understand what the issue is??? If you want to use photos, do so.. if you want to use 3 views do so.. both are just as easy to doctor or fabricate so it does not matter...  Build to what you have to build to... no problem....  right??? --Mitch

[waconut]

Mitch,
What do you use, Mitch? Drawings? Photographs? a combination of both?

Your comment "Build to what you have to build to... no problem....  right??? " begs the question:
What does one build to? the 3-4 views? (seems like a plan if one builds from his own plans or modifies
a kit so as to mirror the drawings). And then if building from photographs, doesn't one more than likely,
mirror the true outline of the prototype?  I won't get into your contention that we (builders) doctor outline
documentation to match "the build".

Over my shoulder I hear comments coming, like, "what if no photos exist, or existing 3-views are at most
bare ouline drawings?".  This kinda answers your question "what is the issue?"
The issue is "should outline documentation be visited by the new USSMA officers and come to some resolution
as to worth, weight and just plain usefullness.  Maybe, as Mel suggests, there are other ways to identify outlines
of your modeled airplane.  So, why not start a dialog at the top?
/chuck

[Mitchell Baker]

Will you not always have that problem?  If you can't come up with sufficient documentation,  it's going to be hard to prove outline no mater how you weigh it... To that extent there are just going to be some aircraft or versions of an aircraft that just don't make good competition models.. Not to say they will not be a good looking well built detailed model.. just not good for competition...

I didn't say anything about builders doctoring outline doc's to match the build... You opened that can of worms...

"Show me a documentation 3-view and I'll show you what PhotoShop can do. One can also say that about photographs, but let's not go there."

I was just mentioning you can do the same with photos as you can with 3-views.. just a statement of fact.. nothing more...

Again, I do believe there are some subjects that make good competition builds because you can support your build.. and some that don't because you can't.. 

I believe in dialog, you should know that..

So, someone give a definitive solution to propose?  Something that would prove outline of the subject build is correct... 

See-ya
Mitch

See-ya
Mitch

[waconut]

Agree totally with your last comment:
"So, someone give a definitive solution to propose?  Something that would prove outline of the subject build is correct.."  That is, one assumes that ouline of the subject build is a necesssry part of Static judging.

to repeat a previous question... What do you use, Drawings? Photographs? a combination of both?

/chuck

[Roly]

Hello Chuck,

You use a combination of both drawings and photos - photos overrule the drawings and be sure to point this out in your documentation or your scores may not be as good as they could have been.

Roly

[waconut]

Roly,
I do use a combination of photos and drawings for my Waco YMF5 Classic.  The drawing used is a top view of the aircraft.  All other views (front-left side-right side-rear) are photographs of NC 14081.  And as you point out, I also point out to the outline judge that my documentation consists of 4 photograhs of the actual modeled airplane and one drawing.  No matter, as I have found that judges impart subjective as well as objective assessments (all judges - color/outline and especially craftsmanship).  I just do my thing, judges do theirs and then we all move on to the flying portion of the event. 
/chuck

[jlovitt]

Under current scoring system, points are allotted for outline.  Those points must be earned by proving the outline.  The contestant has photographs, published line drawings or self drawn line drawings (suitably approved by contest board member) at their disposal to PROVE their work. 

It's still not clear to me what the suggested change is.  Is it to outlaw three views as a method of proving outline or is it to stop judging outline altogether?

Jeff Lovitt

[waconut]

I've always wondered why kit manufacturers of "scale" airplanes never make available to the buyer, His drawings that he manufactured to.  seems like if I build his kit he would provide his 3-4--5- views that the kit was developed from and produced.  Anyway, i guess that proving outline is part of scale masters (and others) static judging requirements and I don't have a poblem with that - it's just that for non-scratch (or from plans) builders, 3-views are for the most part difficult to find for one's model of a particular aircraft.  See one P47, you've seen 'em all - just different color schemes, markings etc.  That statement is somewhat over simplification, but that's the way I see it.  Fo a kit basher, usually one or two 3-views are available, and they usually are drawn for a particular aircraft, not the mod or version one is building.  There in lies the rub. Out come the inserts to the used 3-views, small pictures, comments,  arrows here, there, all over the document, making the 3-views a judges' nightmare to evaluate outline.   I think the disccusion of 3-views is not to outlaw or stop (same-same?) proving outline, but to see if there is a more fair way or a modification of the current method of ouline verification.  If there isn't any consensus so be it.  Change has always been hard to do, (especially for most  old f...s)., discussion is healthy, as is change, but if the last word is leave it alone, then that's the bottom line.  Static has always been an experience one has to get used to, so you youngsters out there, do your thing and just enjoy the total experience of competition.
/chuck

[Mel Santmyers]

i'm Backkk. Thanks for commenting guys. I will try again to explain why I am suggesting this stuff.
No. 1     Nope. We still want to judge outline. ONLY difference is we would use photos to do so. NOTHING would change EXCEPT the elimination of three views to be replaced with the revolving judges stand as described earlier.
No. 2     I actually would not mind keeping the three views HOWEVER ONLY to perhaps [CLARIFY] some item if necessary. BUT! photos would rule period. Of course I say this with reluctance.
No  3    NOW!  Why do i say this. You have all read my past comments,if not please do so word for word. If you still do not understand please bring it up on this forum.
No. 4    Gentlemen I have been aroud this stuff for some 35 years in the beginning it all woked well however over time it has served to do nothing more than confuse modeler after modeler NOT to mention judge after judge. Some of you have figured out over time what to do such as one small sentence in a rule book of almost 50 pages. but that does not serve to continue to bring new people in especially in todays very busy world.  After 35 years at the recent Masters I spoke with our ex treasurer about the scale masters paid membership. That number was UNDER 100 after 35 years. You guys should not need me to tell you that something is wrong.     
No. 5.   NOW. lets get to the real meat of this issue.  OUR famous JUDGES. Bless them. Volunteers for the most part.  We have as mentioned confused the crap out of them. You all saw the figures. NOT MINE but theirs. The new judges stand makes it easier for everyone involved. In essance to simplify things as they are now find a straight line on the model,draw a straight line and have it approved by a guy that knows every line on every plane and then the full size is not even considered to get your points. You guys stop me when I am wrong .
No.6.    Mine has been one suggestion. I submitted this over a year ago formally to our person responsible for changes. NOTHING happrened NOT even a return phone call.. That is why I chose to use this forum. This is not about me. This is about our beloved Scale Masters. . If  you feel the same way tell the new guys NOW.

[Mel Santmyers]

While I seem to have the floor here guys.   How about this one?  Change the Scale Masters name.  Easy now guys. Call it the Scale Masters program.    US SCALE MASTERS PROGRAM.   Within that program we have numerous events such as the Mint Julip etc etc.
I have thought that the name Scale Masters may intimidate some new potential fliers. Now we or most all know that is what we have however Mr. NEW GUY does not.
If you guys think NOW is the time to renew,upgrade or what ever this event tell your new officers. A new season is about to begin SO now is the time.
Remember. Please stop me when I am wrong.

[Roly]

Hello Mel,

Your point #2 is in effect and clearly explained in the guidelines.

Point #4The SM guidelines is where one place tells all. May be worth suggesting having hyperlinks in the table of contents where you click on what you want to learn about and it goes to the page, this would narrow it down. Might be able to have the section you are interested in on a one button print. Mitch should be able to answer this one.

Basically "Got to know the rules before you play the game" that responsibility is the competitors.

Point #5 The judges stand is great, submitt your drawings and maybe it can be published on the website. Send me one and we will put it on our websites in the North West making them available to those hosting Scale Events. We have to rely on the judges to make sure they are current with the USSMA guidelines.

Point #6 Yes you diserve a responst to your suggestion, you have recieved lots of responses from this forum and one more here.

Good to see your are contributing to "Keeping the Dream Alive" through this forum.

All the Best,
                Roly

.

[Mitchell Baker]

No need to submit the drawing anywhere here.. just post them yourself..... That is the whole idea of the forums... Also member file upload...

Create a new topic, attach the drawings to the topic post... simple as that...

See-ya
Mitch

[Mel Santmyers]

Roly.    I just had the sketch of the stand e mailed to you from the UPS store. Let me know if you received it. Maybe you know how to e mail it to Mitch  Thanks I would appreciate that.  Needless to say this computer stuff I do not know very well.   Mel.

[Mel Santmyers]

Roly.    With regard to #2. I don't want to see the THREE VIEWS used in anyway shape or form for the judging process. They would be used for information as they are now for the building process. Perhaps I did not explain #2 enough. What I mean is to allow the three views some where. Perhaps in the history section I am not sure HOWEVER [NEVER FOR THE JUDGING PROCESS].
The judging would be between the model and the full size ONLY using the rotating judging stand. As Mitch mentions We have given the competitor an option for the judge to use and we know what option they have chosen over the years as you see in my past posts.. We have simply confused everyone including the most important at an event. THE JUDGE..
Roly I have tried to explain this change in the way we do judging for many months now. There is a total of over 1000 hits on this forum from the various times I have posted. I do not plan to submit any formal proposal again. The guys either like this or not  The officers either like this or not. Everyone knows how to get ahold of me. It is time for them to join in for the future of the Scale Masters or we can continue down the old confusing past. 
It seems as though there are are only a hand full of us willing to verbally use this forum, Our leaders need to know what people think in order to plan for the future and Mitch has given us the oportunity through this site to speak up .So I hope more people take advantage soon.                         

[Mitchell Baker]

Roly.    I just had the sketch of the stand e mailed to you from the UPS store. Let me know if you received it. Maybe you know how to e mail it to Mitch  Thanks I would appreciate that.  Needless to say this computer stuff I do not know very well.   Mel.

Mel, you should be able to attach a copy of the drawing to a post.  If you have it on your computer.  Click on the reply button.  Below and left of the reply window, you should see a link "Additional Options"  Click on that. It will expand with more options for messages.  There should see "Attach" below and a box then a button "Browse" to the right of the input box.  Click on the "Browse" button. They will bring up a local window where you can find the file to attach.  When found on your PC, click on the file then on the "Open" button.  That should close the window an the path to the fill will fill in the input box.  Finish your post, click "Post" as you normally would. This should attach the file to the post.  Let me know if you have any problems with this. 

See-ya
Mitch

[Mel Santmyers]

I will try again Mitch. This is a cleaned up version.
                                                                          JUDGING STAND
           Materials list
   1 pc 1/2" x 4" x 8 feet. Pine base
   1 pc 3/16 x 1" x 8 feet Pine sides           
   1 pc 2" dia  x 6"          Plastic pipe
   1 pc 1/2" x 4" x 4 feet Pine cross bar base
   1 Hula hoop                                                                        This stand is designed to sit on a hula hoop that can be purchased
                                                                                               at Wal Mart,K Mart etc.
                                                                                               The table used is approximately 29" high card table or preferably an
                                                                                               umbrella table that alrady has an existing hole in the center.