Large Model Association Forum

I have been reading the letter from Terry Lee in the current journal (Spring 2010). I've not met Terry or seen his models.

Although I don't agree with all of his comments, and wasn't at the Rufforth Show, I feel this raises some interesting points that need addressing.

My thoughts and questions:

There is no (obvious) progression path from club pilot / fly in pilot to show pilot. There is the LMA proficiency requirement (I'll come back to that later) to check safety but this does not address the question of if the public will enjoy watching you or your model!

Not everybody has the resources, time, skill or desire to build "giant" models. However, you can't enter a GoKart in a Formula 1 race!

Do smaller (relative term) models make a worthwhile spectacle at public shows at all (particularly when interspersed with much bigger ones)? There are strong views both ways on this.

Should the emphasis change putting a much higher requirement on pilot skill? A well flown smaller model flown close in (obviously still at the legal distance) could be more appealing than a mediocre performance from a giant in the distance.

Should the Association consider making pilot training as much an important consideration as model inspection?

And finally (although this conflicts with much of the above) should we make a clear decision one way or the other about the rule that allows those without a LMA certificate but with a BMFA B to fly under 7KG at shows? Currently this is missed off every pilots application form and hidden in the small print as if it is hoped nobody will notice!

Very few models likely to be flown at any show are under 7KG so this has prevented some very talented youngsters from flying even a modest 50cc model at shows as they cannot join the LMA until they are 18.

Food for thought.

Chris

Personally I was sympathetic to the letter of Terry Lee.
His letter was about alleged preferential treatment in the allocation of flying slots, was it not?
While having no way of knowing if his protest/complaint is valid I did take it at face value and in doing so assumed his model(s) are over 7kg. (never ASSUME it can make an ASS of U & ME)!

Personally I have been out of the show circuit for many years but preferential treatment never used to be the case but perhaps single slot flying was not then as well established, if indeed it is now?
I do however well remember people trying to bring pressure on organisers for single slot flying and trying to call the shots on who they fly with hence my sympathy for Terry, but I am talking of LMA’s formative years here.
Is Terry right, have the prima donnas won the day?
I don’t see a problem here that pre-entry and pre allocation of slots would not sort, don’t they do that?

As far as under 7kg is concerned they have never been banned or discouraged but this is the Large Model Association after all so surely over 7kg should take precedence in all matters not least on the LMA show circuit.
On the other hand it could be argued (and I am) that by reducing fees to the current level LMA are now ‘actively pursuing’ membership from people who they must be fully aware are only interested in the cheap insurance aspect.
If so then how long will it be before these under 7kg members outnumber genuine large modeller and ‘demand’ recognition in a form not envisaged when LMA was formed?

It’s a long time since I read the LMA rule book and it may well be covered but with the potential of an enormous influx of ‘insurance members’, nothing can be considered to be set in stone.

This is going to be lengthy. please get a cuppa before reading, you may get thirsty...


I have followed this thread with interest.

I can understand that people could/Are getting upset with regards to certain people getting solo slots ( Me included i believe).
I can view this issue from 2 sides as i once had to fly with 4 or 5 other aircraft and different flying styles ( i fly 3d and the others did mild aerobatics to the best of their abilities, and i did enjoy it when i had a smaller model too.)

I personally cant see a reason why under 7kg models are not allowed to fly at the shows, i dont beleive that there is a any notes on the pilots application stating NO UNDER 7KG models. I think that the problem lyes within what is expected at shows from a spectators point of view and because of this, people with under 7 kg models do not apply although they are more than welcome to fly.

The reason solo slots are given in my opinion is that the association deems that the pilot and his model put on a show which is both brilliant to watch and also demonstrates what the models can do. ( at the end of the day, people pay to come through the door and want to see a good show, other wise they will not come again, its the same at music gigs, wouldnt you be upset if the band put on a cd through the P.A and pretended to play)

Another reason why solo slots are given is the size of the model, my self and dave johnson are building 2 different types of model. dave ( 20% vulcan) and me (60% yak 54), now would you expect me or dave to take our joint 30k + models in the air together, bearing in mind that i fly very low and slow, and dave flies scale....its an accident waiting to happen.. or even with other models which are alot smaller ( larger model eat the sky, and before you know it, your ontop of another model, even with young fingers!!!), No. The CAA would have something very serious to say on the matter,

I had an incident at weston park 2 years ago, where i was slotted to go up with 7 other model 70inch sized and i had a 3.1 meter aircraft. Because of this, i refuse to fly at weston park now as i felt that it was unsafe!!!!.

It's hard to judge what is right and wrong to be honest, and there are always people who will think that someone is wrong, thats life!!
------------------------------------------

A part of the letter in question also mentioned under 18's flying at the shows.

Im my personal opinion, The answer is simply no. My reason is thus.

As probabley the youngest members of the LMA ( stand to be corrected), i can understand the desire to fly at the shows and show off... However, it has only since i became 18/19 and had responsibilities ( Driving ect ect) that i realised the shire danger the sport can be. before i was 18, all i wanted to do was be the lad ( ego to boot), but unfortunatly i grew up very fast as probabley 98% of my friends are over 40 and in the lma ( But i dont regret it, its made me what i am today)

There are alot of kids aged 13 to 17 who can fly brilliantly, and these people are what i call the future of the sport, But i would not trust them at public shows such as the LMA one, because of how i was at that age.

I am only voicing what i believe to be true here, and maybe a senior ( not the old sort ) lma member could comment too. I do not wish to start a rant, as i beleive this is going to turn in to and to be honest, it should be done in private ( email ect ect) not on a public forum, However a conclusion to this matter would be nice to be read by all.

Best Regards

Robbie

Sorry Double Posted

Having had the daunting task of organising flying slots at many public shows over the years the old saying that 'you can never please all of the people all of the time' has never been more appropriate. . Spectators pay to see 'special' features at shows, this means models that you won't see at your average club field and this is the very reason that priority should be given to flyers who have invested vast amounts of time and money to provide spectacular models for shows. The models are not built with a 'look how clever I am' attitude but are creations of someones overwhelming devotion to their particular branch of the hobby.
To get back to the reason for this post, solo slots are very necessary for some aircraft for a variety of reasons, the main one of course is safety but also the basic fact that display flying is restricted to a very small amount of sky and the larger the model the easier it is to encroach on each others airspace unless the models are very well matched. There are only so many minutes in a day and this fact sets out the schedule for models that are going to fly The method of making sure everyone gets into the air at sometime is to shorten the time for each solo slot by just a few minutes and the time gained will allow for more flyers. The usual 10 minute slot is often too long anyway and providing the aircraft is ready to go promptly then 6 or 7 minutes in the air is ample before people start yawning!
Obviously there will be some 'ordinary' size models to display where several will fly together. Our hobby has many facets and part of any public display should reflect this but don't forget, you may think your model is the business and you can't wait to show how well you can fly it but you are there, with many flyers all thinking the same thought, to provide part of a days entertainment for people who may not be aeromodellers but have paid good money to be entertained.

Dave, I agree with the points you make, but, as you say, at times a 10 minute slot is too long (unless you are flying, and then its too short ) What is the problem with having, say, two mega models in a slot, and having one orbit at a safe height while one does a 5 minute showcase and then swopping over- both pilots are in a 10 minute slot, the audience is not bored, and both are in the air at the same time? Or the idea, al la the Cosford pageant, of 'rolling slots' where the next model takes off before the last one has landed? It takes a bit of setting up (ask Glenn!) but would make for a better 'show'.
Just a 2p worth....
Bob

The reasons behind solo slots, I think, is straight forward to understand. One of the other points the original letter highlighted was the amount of slots some pilots get regardless of solo slots or flying with others. Now, if you take one aircraft you would probably expect to get two slots per day for your efforts. But if you take four aircraft should you get eight slots? It should make no difference who you are, when I was part of the organising team behind the Rougham Show before the LMA took over the flying there was a simple rule, two slots per day promised per pilot. If, as was the case many times, there are extra slots available due to unservicability of unsuitable aircraft for the weather etc then extra slots would become available. Pilots were told quite clearly that they were only promised two slots per day and most were happy with that. Had I attended a show that I had booked into only to be told I couldnt have a slot and my aircraft wasnt good enough to fly with a group of others I would have been pretty hacked off. If the aircraft in the letter wasnt wanted the pilot should have been told before committing to the expense and time of traveling to the show.
I suppose the bottom line is this, paying public expect a show and that is what they should get. However, constant solo slots get very tedious and I have been on the flightline watching the crowd walk away from watching consecutive solo slots. Put on a group of bombers or fighters or Gee Bees then the public come back. Some aircraft are more exciting to fly than watch, personally watching WW1 planes sends me to sleep but flying them on the other hand can be very exciting. We all have different opinions of what makes a great show and what aircraft types amke them more interesting but getting back to the letter I believe its message is fairly simple. Why can we not have equal treatment of all pilots who go to the bother and expense of attending a show without some getting preferential treatment?

Pat Marsden wrote:The reasons behind solo slots, I think, is straight forward to understand. One of the other points the original letter highlighted was the amount of slots some pilots get regardless of solo slots or flying with others. Now, if you take one aircraft you would probably expect to get two slots per day for your efforts. But if you take four aircraft should you get eight slots? It should make no difference who you are, when I was part of the organising team behind the Rougham Show before the LMA took over the flying there was a simple rule, two slots per day promised per pilot. If, as was the case many times, there are extra slots available due to unservicability of unsuitable aircraft for the weather etc then extra slots would become available. Pilots were told quite clearly that they were only promised two slots per day and most were happy with that. Had I attended a show that I had booked into only to be told I couldnt have a slot and my aircraft wasnt good enough to fly with a group of others I would have been pretty hacked off. If the aircraft in the letter wasnt wanted the pilot should have been told before committing to the expense and time of traveling to the show.
I suppose the bottom line is this, paying public expect a show and that is what they should get. However, constant solo slots get very tedious and I have been on the flightline watching the crowd walk away from watching consecutive solo slots. Put on a group of bombers or fighters or Gee Bees then the public come back. Some aircraft are more exciting to fly than watch, personally watching WW1 planes sends me to sleep but flying them on the other hand can be very exciting. We all have different opinions of what makes a great show and what aircraft types amke them more interesting but getting back to the letter I believe its message is fairly simple. Why can we not have equal treatment of all pilots who go to the bother and expense of attending a show without some getting preferential treatment?

Pat, with the Gee Bees we SET OUT to put on a 'show', that was the whole idea. The YT guys and some others do the same, and it shows. The WW1 boys need a bit of organising, but could also put on a convincing show- we were engrossed at the large Sopwiths of the Italian team at Euroflugtag, they put on an amazing show. You could never call them boring. No-one wants people to risk a very expensive model, but if you wish to display your model at a public show then there is a risk, this has to be accepted, or else EVERY slot would be a solo...

I'm looking at this very basically please put me right if I'm on the wrong track here,The whole concept of our association is in the name.
Large Model Association and this Association was put together to promote a gathering of people that have the same interest, which was to build and fly large models.And as far as I can see it's done just that and groan in size over the years thanks to chats on the crowd lines and for some years.commentators have promoted quite a few people as well so give our selfs a small clap for that. the size's of planes that attend the fly-ins and shows are quite varied in size which is nice to see.
You have just to look at the warbird slots to see that.
If we are worried that the crowds getting bored, which I have seen in the last couple of years visual and by ear, one way around this problem I thinks is the very large planes fly two slots like every one else or as many slots that can be fitted in for the day but put aside a few slots for planes the crowds want to see again then every ones happy.
And as the crowds are paying for the show I think this is very fair.

Having read the previoce comments, it seems the problem is there are a limited number of slots and the larger percent of these are being flown by a handfull of pilots. my first point is we must remember the paying public have come to see model aircraft and not the pilots (althou some pilots can dispay better than others). we are a large model association so surly the large models should take preferacne, however not flown so often the crowd get bored, 2-3 times in a day is more than enough. I belive the display teams also have a place in the show, as they entertain, and unusual scale models should also be displayed.
I don't think there is a place for the novelty aircraft or the small electric foam jet things. These may be fun to fly in privte but have no place at a large model show.
Hope i havn't offended anyone.

paul hughes wrote: Hope i havn't offended anyone.

You, Paul? never! The novelty slots are ok for 'trade' shows like Western Park, but I agree, have no place in a LMA show. Thats not what Joe Public comes to see.
I still think that more efficient use of the time available will ease the problems, how many times have we sat watching while a model with a problem sits on the ground with people milling around it and nothing in the sky? With a 'rolling slot' system , this would never happen.

Bob how does the rolling slot position work sounds interesting.

stephen spittle wrote:Bob how does the rolling slot position work sounds interesting.

simple- while one (or more) models are in the air, the next slot takes off and orbits out of the way of the current slot- they then come down and start their display and, at a convenient time, they go high and the last slot lands.
The display resumes, and then the next slot takes off.
It only takes a marshall to call 'go high' and this can all be done safely, and, from the audience point, there is never a moment without a model in the air. This works best with the solo slots, of course, but is the way full size air shows work. And before someone says it is not safe, we are all competent pilots, are we not? It means more work for the flightline guys, but would be worth it in terms of more slots, and a very slick and professional style of show.

Thanks for the run down ,and it sounds very simply idea the only problem I could see crop up would be channel clash but with 2.4gh on the up it wouldn't be a prob but the qty of planes in the air at one time might be a cause not to do it.
But yes it would keep the air exciting.

There has been some interesting comments and suggestions on this thread which I hope LMA event organisers have read and inwardly digested, lest we be labelled elitist.
However please do go back and read the letter of Terry Lee on page 48 Journal 130 again.
Among his complaints is the suggestion that at at least one LMA show a slot was allocated to an individual to whom potential participants were referred by the organisers to apply for a flight!

stephen spittle wrote:Thanks for the run down ,and it sounds very simply idea the only problem I could see crop up would be channel clash but with 2.4gh on the up it wouldn't be a prob but the qty of planes in the air at one time might be a cause not to do it.
But yes it would keep the air exciting.

This was basically how Glenn did it on the Cosford Pageant weekend- it worked really well from the crowd side of things, everyone I spoke to said it was the best model show they had been to. The biggest problem he had was the number of prima donnas who thought they were above all that....
Gentlemen, we are there to put on a show, not to stroke our individual egos. If we cant work together to make a smooth running and exciting show, then the term 'show pilot' is a joke!

You are right Bob about the Cosford Pageant, the idea was great but this system has to be even more disciplined than ever. The public saw what seemed to be a well organised display but behind the scenes the schedule was running about 2 hours behind at the end of the day. This was mainly due to pilots not landing when requested and causing bottlenecks on the flightline, it was organised superbly by Glen, even to supplying a comprehensive sound track for the commentator with music and relevent items of news of the era, but these things only work if everyone does what they are told when they are told.

Dave Hayfield wrote:You are right Bob about the Cosford Pageant, the idea was great but this system has to be even more disciplined than ever. The public saw what seemed to be a well organised display but behind the scenes the schedule was running about 2 hours behind at the end of the day. This was mainly due to pilots not landing when requested and causing bottlenecks on the flightline, it was organised superbly by Glen, even to supplying a comprehensive sound track for the commentator with music and relevent items of news of the era, but these things only work if everyone does what they are told when they are told.

Exactly what I am saying about prima donnas, Dave- all pilots need to take a long hard look and realise just why they are there, and all work together to make LMA shows the ones that people want to go to! Discipline is something we should all have anyway, there is no excuse for not obeying flightline directors. If Pete Brotherton were here.......

Bob Thompson1894 wrote:[ If Pete Brotherton were here.......

Now there's a great name to conjure with, and a great guy whose name should be down in the annuls of the Association, "What an Organiser!"

I agree, Vince. Its all about respect, and I am a firm believer in the Flightline Director is ALWAYS right...