[Capcanuck]

I would help co- CD a contest at the 400 club. We would have to fly the Alternate but it is a great site. Mid June or July ( without conflict with the US nationals) is preferred.
Lee

[-Rick-]

Off track, sorry. But sometimes I believe IMAC has limited themselves by the size of plane due to field size. What would be the minimum requirement for the field size be? 400 feet landing area, 500?

[Capcanuck]

Field size isn't the issue, it's overfly area. These planes use a lot of sky and are visible for miles. They are often quieter, but the publics perception is that they are closer than they actually are and can be annoying because they fly for long times ( most IMAC pilots are constantly practicing their routines which take ten or twelve minutes) unlike sport flyers who fly lower, more erratically and shorter times.
There are work arounds, such as flying at off hours, flying the Alternate routines ( for the upper classes) and using three blade props and lots of throttle control.
There is also a perception in most clubs that IMAC guys are imposing and maybe a little uppity with their fancy radios and big planes. Good communication, a friendly and open attitude and trying to be helpful with club members who you think might be receptive goes a long way to endear you with sport flying members.

[Billpilotca]

The factors that Lee outline are correct, however field size is an issue as there are some fields that just cannot accommodate 35-40% planes, or not readily handle 2 lines with pilots taking off and landing within seconds of each other.

I don't want to disagree with Lee, but I understand why Rick is asking the question as the field I have discussed with him likely cannot easily handle 40% aircraft. Take-offs would not be an issue but getting them back down can be tricky, especially on a field that is unfamiliar to pilots who don't fly there on a regular basis. With the right wind and good landing skills I am not saying it is impossible, just there are a variety of pilots in these contests with varying abilities.

Rick I cannot tell you how many feet without doing a review of several fields and figuring out what their measurements are.

[Alan Brace]

Rick if its the field I am thinking its only 300 ft. the location is great as far as space, but you could only have 1 flight line.
we would need another 150 ft just for safety, and if you wanted a contest I am sure we would have to talk to the aerodrome to keep full size away as they like to fly over.

[-Rick-]

Originally Posted by Billpilotca

The factors that Lee outline are correct, however field size is an issue as there are some fields that just cannot accommodate 35-40% planes, or not readily handle 2 lines with pilots taking off and landing within seconds of each other.

I don't want to disagree with Lee, but I understand why Rick is asking the question as the field I have discussed with him likely cannot easily handle 40% aircraft. Take-offs would not be an issue but getting them back down can be tricky, especially on a field that is unfamiliar to pilots who don't fly there on a regular basis. With the right wind and good landing skills I am not saying it is impossible, just there are a variety of pilots in these contests with varying abilities.

Rick I cannot tell you how many feet without doing a review of several fields and figuring out what their measurements are.

Understood Bill, but those two factors do take many fields out of the running for IMAC. I totally agree with your thoughts on the issue.

[-Rick-]

Originally Posted by Alan Brace

Rick if its the field I am thinking its only 300 ft. the location is great as far as space, but you could only have 1 flight line.
we would need another 150 ft just for safety, and if you wanted a contest I am sure we would have to talk to the aerodrome to keep full size away as they like to fly over.

Yes Alan, I know that it would never work at Owen Sound. Way to close to the airport.

[Ken W]

The loss of fields is a major reason why there is a decrease in in IMAC participation. Nobody wants to have a lot of money tied up in a plane you can't use. There are more reasons just check out the thread on that other site for people who like to fly giant planes.We are losing fields for different reasons, Stoney Creek was lost thanks to our ZD, Chatham was from wind turbines etc. For the long term sustainability of IMAC and rc in general I think we should look at ownership of the airport or RC field.That way we can make going to the field more than just flying,like camping or events ?

[steven r]

Still ironing out some details but looks like Woodstock will be a two day event next year. Hoping this makes it worth the drive for people further away.

[BMG]

Thanks for working on that Steve. Every contest helps us to stay alive and foster new interest.