By Melvin Schuette
Wednesday, June 23, was Class I and II Carrier in both the internal combustion glow motors and electric-powered planes. The difference between the events that were flown on Tuesday and those on Wednesday is that the planes flown on Tuesday used profile fuselages that only have to resemble an actual plane that made a takeoff and arrested landing on a carrier ship or is designated as a carrier-based plane. The classes of Carrier flown on Wednesday have built-up fuselages and must be within plus or minus 5% of the actual scale outline.
While on Tuesday most of the contestants had to deal with mechanical issues in flight, on Wednesday only one person had any in-flight mechanical issues, and no planes were damaged because of it.
The high point of the day was Pete Mazur’s record-setting Electric Class II Carrier flight.
The results for Wednesday’s events are as follows:
Glow Class I
Contestant High Speed Low Speed Landing Scale Points Total Score
Burt Brokaw 101.5 mph 7 mph 100 100 445.5
Glow Class II
Contestant High Speed Low Speed Landing Scale Points Total Score
Burt Brokaw 95.3 mph 5.2 mph 100 100 473.7
Electric Class I
Contestant High Speed Low Speed Landing Scale Points Total Score
Pete Mazur 104 mph 7.7 mph 100 100 438.3
Mike Anderson 81.4 mph 9 mph 100 100 370.5
Dick Perry 81.2 mph 11.6 mph 100 100 350.4
Electric Class II
Contestant High Speed Low Speed Landing Scale Points Total Score
Pete Mazur 102 mph 6.4 mph 100 100 457.7
Mike Anderson 88.8 mph 8.2 mph 100 100 396.2.
The annual Navy Carrier Society meeting was held on site after the official flying was done. At this meeting the Eugene Elay award was awarded to the person with the highest combined total in one of the Profile Carrier events, one of the Class I Carrier Events and one of the Class II Carrier events. This year Burt Brokaw beat out all of the other contestants for this award.
The Carrier Events could not be held without volunteers. I would personally like to thank Tara DeGraff for working both days of carrier and to all the other contestants for their help in making things run so smoothly.
Until next year.
Burt Brokaw (R) receiving the Eugene Eley award from Dick Perry.
Mike Anderson receiving his trophy for his efforts in the Carrier events.
Pete Mazur (L) with Event Director Melvin Schuette and his record-setting plane.
Volunteers Tara DeGraff and Burt Brokaw at work.
Comments
I guess I just don't understand the logic of building a model and then never flying it because you don't think you can win with it. You certainly can't win by hanging it on the wall and skipping the contest it is supposed to be fun. How is that more fun than flying ?
Did the MO-1 ruin class 1 and 2 carrier....I know it fits the rules but i does't give the other scale planes much of a chance, and not everyone wants to build one. I have a Devastor and Skyraider for both classes but won't attend a contest because I cn get the low speed to compete. Wanted to go to the nats this year but decide it wasn't worth the drive.
I agree with you. The intent of the event was to use real Navy Carrier fighters, not light observation planes that could land on a carrier or, for that matter, a sport field or a city street. The intent was further stretched by allowing one-off prototype of land-based planes that made a token carrier landing as part of a failed sales effort.
But it is what it is and those who are winning won't change at this point in time.
i got over the idea that I might win and build/fly the carrier planes cuz I like it. I like to build all different models that are carrier rules compliant. don't let competitiveness stop you from flying your favorite design. I have an MO 1 and many other designs. Just get out there and fly.
Rick you brought up something that I certainly relate to. While the MO-1 has dimensions that allow it to excel particularly in scale-based carrier it is so devoid of aesthetic/modeling appeal when compared to the "real" carrier-based combat aircraft of ANY generation you choose, These exciting planes profoundly changed the nature of Naval warfare, and didn't carrier modeling originate in part as a tribute to them (and the pilots that flew them and to the Navy for supporting the NATS) and the MOs fail that for me. In competition its all about the scorecard and I don't have any good solution other than to confine my efforts to the various profile events where I may have some liberty to adjust moments & areas but still create a recognizable facsimile and paint scheme of a Navy fighter (for me its Vietnam-era jets) which would otherwise prove downright laughable in class 1 or 2 competition.
Add new comment