Lack of Interest In Contest Flying

[James Duffy]

TARC has a lot of CASH involved and Scholarxhips, not a "NARAM trophy".

I am well familiar with TARC, having had the pleasure of mentoring a team that won both TARC and the International Rocketry Challenge at the Paris Air Show. I also edited the TARC Handbook from which the image attached to your message was excerpted. So, yeah, I know about TARC, and how different to is from other forms of rocketry competition.

Further, I can share that the money was the least of the motivations driving the kids that I mentored. They were interested most in having fun, making friends, and doing something that was both productive and completely out of the ordinary. Competition rocketry hits all of those points.

James

 

[BEC]

I agree. I can't think of any of the kids I've worked with in TARC over the years who were "in it for the money".

I've always been relatively uninterested in competition of any sort, but every now and then I get caught up in doing something new or new to me. That's how I wound up flying an electric airplane in RC Sport Scale at the 1989 AMA NATS. That is back well before the advent of lithium batteries for model use and electronic speed controls of any sort were kind of a new thing.

And....when I got back into rocketry the event that pulled me into doing a little competition was B Cluster Altitude, because there weren't standard designs for the winners and I was aware from my incessant use of altimeters that Chinese Quest B6s outperformed their Penrose-made counterparts noticeably, which is something that seemed to not be widely known, even among the hard core competitors. I actually had Trip Barber ask me what my secret was after I won the event at NARAM-60 (which was my first NARAM) .

Duration events don't do that much for me, though Bunny's challenge about 1/4A Helicopter was a good one, as that is another place where it isn't just about launching into a thermal (though that helps, of course) with a nearly standard design.

I'm glad he also debunked that comment about the percentage of competition-related material in Sport Rocketry. In the 11 or so years I've been reading it, it certainly hasn't been competition-heavy.

As for bringing in new blood and the perceived difficulty for hosting contests....NRC makes it much easier, though reaching kids these days is still challenging (outside of TARC, anyway).

 

[Ez2cDave]

Further, I can share that the money was the least of the motivations driving the kids that I mentored. They were interested most in having fun, making friends, and doing something that was both productive and completely out of the ordinary.

James

I have no doubts that the kids were not motivated by the money, but I suspect that their parents were.

Dave F.

 

[Ez2cDave]

I can't think of any of the kids I've worked with in TARC over the years who were "in it for the money".

What about their parents ?

Dave F.

 

[Alan15578]

alan: I think the Centuri B3 were 2.5" while the MPC mini-jets were 2.25" . I don't think Estes made any of the 2.5" B3 motors. Theye were so bad that by the time motor manufacturing of the Centuri 1/4A-A3 where switched to Estes, the B3 was discontinued . The Centuri mini-motors were introduced at the April 1973 HIAA show and the burb say 1/2" x 2 1/2" . I couldn't find any Centuri advertisements for their mini-motors in any of the 1973/74 Model Rocketeer magazines. anyway attached is the back of a mini-jet motor package showing the Thrust-time curves etc... also attached is a .pdf spreadsheet that I believe Doug Sams made about 10 to 15 years concerning Estes and Centuri engines.

Thanks, especially for the Estes production timeline. I cracked open my old stash of motors, and the Centuri B4 mini motors are indeed 2.5" long. I have a rather large stash of Centuri B4 mini motors and C5 18 mm motors. Is there a list of date codes for "bad" Centuri B mini motors? What was so bad about the Centuri Mini B? Is there any technical reason why Estes would not produce 13 mm motors in a longer casing (A3-6t)?

 

[tsmith1315]

All this tells me is that this pianist was playing piano because he wanted to win a competition, not because he loved playing piano. Both he and piano are probably better off now that he has moved on.

It could also tell us that the pianist may have been on the Autism spectrum, a brilliant pianist, and they gave up on their passion while we have lost them as an artist over issues that most don't understand. Perhaps his manager mistakenly thought it would be a good idea to engage in the competition. Or perhaps you're right. We can't discern that from what @hobie1dog said.

Competition is good for children because it motivates them to improve themselves. There are rewards for achievement and penalties for lack of achievement in Competition, just as there are in Life !

Please be aware, Dave, that all children are not created equal.

Competition is a comfort zone for some people, and they perform well in that situation. Many people enjoy it and feed off it.

There are also many children that are completely de-motivated by competition, some are brilliant, and require a different type of motivation.

Sometimes it's a quiet kid in the corner who has the capacity to be leagues ahead of the boisterous, competitive classmates- but not on their terms.

Sometimes even a small penalty can be seen as pure failure, and can take years to overcome. The risk of being that failure is too great to chance.

Not all children are the same.

I know this because I have one. He taught himself calculus 1 & 2 at night while taking algebra at school in 9th & 10th grade. I don't mean he just read about it, we finally convinced the local university to let him take Calculus 1 over the short summer course online. He missed only 1 question the entire semester- 99.7% average, he bested all of the college students in the class and he never even watched a class video in the process. He just did the work when it was due. Calculus 2 in the fall semester was about the same, with a 94% result. But, when spring rolled around and we found the Calculus 3 class would require tests to be taken alongside other students, he shut down and withdrew from the class before it started.

He was able to excel because he could do it within his comfort zone.

He also withdrew from high school engineering class because every single weekly assignment was arranged as a competition. The young teacher assumed the competitive format would be more fun and engaging. It's too bad, because my son was the top physics student, too. He could have enjoyed and excelled in the class had it just been presented differently. As it was, he didn't make it through the second assignment.


I'm old-school about a lot of things, too.
I also spent years hating most every event I was forced to compete in. No competition ever encouraged me to perform better. No competition ever moved me forward in life in any small amount that I can decipher. No competition ever taught me anything, except that competition was less fun than getting a tooth drilled without anesthetic. And yes, I've had that done.



Make no mistake, "competition is good for some children". But not all children.


Dave - I don't mean this as a personal gouge. It's just a fact, and too often ignored.

 

[cwbullet]

I think we are going to start with an altitude contest. Highest with a D12, etc.

 

[Ez2cDave]

( 1 ) Please be aware, Dave, that all children are not created equal.

( 2 ) Competition is a comfort zone for some people, and they perform well in that situation. Many people enjoy it and feed off it.

( 3 ) There are also many children that are completely de-motivated by competition, some are brilliant, and require a different type of motivation.

( 4 ) Sometimes even a small penalty can be seen as pure failure, and can take years to overcome. The risk of being that failure is too great to chance.

( 5 ) Not all children are the same.

( 6 0 He was able to excel because he could do it within his comfort zone.

( 7 ) Make no mistake, "competition is good for some children". But not all children.

Dave - I don't mean this as a personal gouge. It's just a fact, and too often ignored.

I broke your post down into 7 basic issues, in order to make my response easier to follow.

( 1 ) No, not all children ( or people ) are equal in their abilities . . . Competition ( of any type ) helps them to find their own "niche" in life, whether flying rockets or pursuing a career.

( 2 ) Competition is part of Life, in all areas, especially careers. If one remains in their "comfort zone", they may never achieve their true potential.

( 3 ) "De-Motivation" . . . I place that squarely on the shoulders of Parents and Educators. If a child is raised by Parents who are "motivated" by success and accomplishments to achieve "status", the child will seek supremacy in life. BUT, if a child is taught that "status" over other people is bad, they will avoid competition, either because they are afraid of not "measuring up" or being looked down on, because they take pride in themselves and "victory". In Life, there are Winners and Losers . . . Everyone does not get a trophy,

(4 ) If you "reward" or do not penalize "failure", there is no motivation to improve. If losing a Rocket Contest scars someone for life, there are significantly greater problems in that individual's psyche. How would such a person be able to function in everyday life ?

( 5 ) Agreed . . . All people are not the same and need to recognize their strengths and weaknesses, whether it is a Rocket Contest, School Grades, Performance Evaluation on a job, etc, etc, etc.

( 6 ) See #2 . . . A person can't live their lives in the "bubble" of their Comfort Zone. Case in point, how would that person handle "direct conflict" in Life ( on a job, for example, when you get "chewed out" by a Manager or getting fired on the spot ) ?

( 7 ) Life, itself, is Competition . . . You can't shield a child from reality or they will not be able to function in the "Real World".

**********************************************************************************

True, everyone is different . . . But, how does one ever learn "who they are in Life" ?

( A ) The opinions of others ( not Friends, Family, and Loved Ones ) in the World.

( B ) Personal achievements / prowess obtained though activities like Competition ( Hobbies, Sports, School Grades, Performance Evaluations, etc. ).

( C ) Their own "image" of themselves ( The least applicable, because people can't see themselves objectively . . . "Millennials", for example ),

In closing, "Reality" is the ultimate authority, regardless of any "personality factors", in Life !

Dave F.

 

[dhbarr]

I broke your post down into 7 basic issues, in order to make my response easier to follow.

( 1 ) No, all children ( or people ) are equal in their abilities . . . Competition ( of any type ) helps them to find their own "niche" in life, whether flying rockets or pursuing a career.

( 2 ) Competition is part of Life, in all areas, especially careers. If one remains in their "comfort zone", they may never achieve their true potential.

( 3 ) "De-Motivation" . . . I place that squarely on the shoulders of Parents and Educators. If a child is raised by Parents who are "motivated" by success and accomplishments to achieve "status", the child will seek supremacy in life. BUT, if a child is taught that "status" over other people is bad, they will avoid competition, either because they are afraid of not "measuring up" or looked down on, because they take pride in themselves and "victory". In Life, there are Winners and Losers . . . Everyone does not get a trophy,

(4 ) If you "reward" or do not penalize "failure", there is no motivation to improve. If losing a Rocket Contest scars someone for life, there are significantly greater problems in that individual's psyche. How would such a person be able to function in everyday life ?

( 5 ) Agreed . . . All people are not the same and need to recognize their strengths and weaknesses, whether it is a Rocket Contest, School Grades, Performance Evaluation on a job, etc, etc, etc.

( 6 ) See #2 . . . A person can't live their lives in the "bubble" of their Comfort Zone. Case in point, how would that person handle "direct conflict" in Life ( on a job, for example, when you get "chewed out" by a Manager or getting fired on the spot ) ?

( 7 ) Life, itself, is Competition . . . You can't shield a child from reality or they will not be able to function in the "Real World".

**********************************************************************************

True, everyone is different . . . But, how does one ever learn "who they are in Life" ?

( A ) The opinions of others ( not Friends, Family, and Loved Ones ) in the World.

( B ) Personal achievements / prowess obtained though activities like Competition ( Hobbies, Sports, School Grades, Performance Evaluations, etc. ).

( C ) Their own "image" of themselves ( The least applicable, because people can't see themselves objectively . . . "Millennials", for example ),

In closing, "Reality" is the ultimate authority, regardless of any "personality factors", in Life !

Dave F.

This is one way of viewing the world. It is not the only way of viewing the world. Please try to accept that different people may want different things out of life than you were raised to. That doesn't make either one if you right or wrong, just different.

 

[shockie]

Thanks, especially for the Estes production timeline. I cracked open my old stash of motors, and the Centuri B4 mini motors are indeed 2.5" long. I have a rather large stash of Centuri B4 mini motors and C5 18 mm motors. Is there a list of date codes for "bad" Centuri B mini motors? What was so bad about the Centuri Mini B? Is there any technical reason why Estes would not produce 13 mm motors in a longer casing (A3-6t)?

Alan, Estes did create both A3-2t and A3-6t for a while, but the -6 was discontinued because it barely fit in its 1.75" casing. That's what I heard. It was right up to the edge of the casing. Plus, Estes starts and stops the production of motors based on sales.

I don't think there's any technical reason an A3-6t couldn't be made in a longer casing. The MABEL machines that produce 1.75" cased A's might have to be redone. I think Estes has dedicated 13mm, 18mm, 24mm,29mm MABEL's. There may be more than 1motor machine of each type. It appears from Google maps that they have at least 7 machines.

The MPC Mini-jets were supposed to be replica dimensions of the original hand-made Rock-a-chutes by Orv Carlisle. He and GH Stine settled on .710" 18mm as Brown Manufacturing already had the tooling and paper tubes at 18mm.

Then Estes came out with the 1.75" mini-brutes to compete against the GH Stine inspired MPC Mini-jets. NO B size engine from Estes. Finally, Centuri developed their own motor-making machine(s) and decided to go with 2.5" B. Centuri was already a part of Damon Corp by then as was Estes since 69-70. So, it was the Damon management that was making the engine manufacturing decisions during this time period.

The Centuri B4 lasted barely a year from about Mar/April 73 to May/June 74. I've read from other posters they were Cato prone. I really don't know that they were because by 73-74 I was out chasing skirt and street racing among other things.
I did have Estes mini-brutes but also never had any MPC mini-jets that I remember.

Estes could make longer-length mini-engines if they so desired. Technically making a 13mm B is not much different than making an 18mm B.
I guess it all depends on the marketplace demand.

If you could, post some nozzle pics of the b4 with a ruler? closeup? Also take a look at the casing: is it a spiral-wound or parallel-wound paper tube?



EDIT Additional info

The Centuri B4-xM was no longer on the June 1974 NAR Certification list
Here are some additional stats on the engines:
iT tb Tmax N Tavg
MPC/AVI B3 3.78 1.58 s 8.4N 23 2.4N
Centuri B4 2.89 1.36 s 12.4N 4 2.1N
B4 3.07 1.30 s 14.0N 9 2.3N

1st Centuri line above is Feb 74 and bottom June 74. They were essentially B2

iT = Total Impulse
tb = Thrust Duration
TMax = Max thrust
N = number of samples
Tavg = Thrust Average

Centuri said their were production delay problems at NARAM 15 in Aug 1974
Introduced at the Pittsburgh Spring Convention in March 1973

 

[Ez2cDave]

This is one way of viewing the world. It is not the only way of viewing the world. Please try to accept that different people may want different things out of life than you were raised to. That doesn't make either one if you right or wrong, just different.

Agreed . . . My point is that one type of person will always have an advantage over another type of person, particularly in their careers.

If one is unable or unwilling to compete and improve, they will come out on the "short end" of Life.

Dave F.

 

[Alan15578]

Alan, Estes did create both A3-2t and A3-6t for a while, but the -6 was discontinued because it barely fit in its 1.75" casing. That's what I heard. It was right up to the edge of the casing. Plus, Estes starts and stops the production of motors based on sales.

I don't think there's any technical reason an A3-6t couldn't be made in a longer casing. The MABEL machines that produce 1.75" cased A's might have to be redone. I think Estes has dedicated 13mm, 18mm, 24mm,29mm MABEL's. There may be more than 1motor machine of each type. It appears from Google maps that they have at least 7 machines.

The MPC Mini-jets were supposed to be replica dimensions of the original hand-made Rock-a-chutes by Orv Carlisle. He and GH Stine settled on .710" 18mm as Brown Manufacturing already had the tooling and paper tubes at 18mm.

Then Estes came out with the 1.75" mini-brutes to compete against the GH Stine inspired MPC Mini-jets. NO B size engine from Estes. Finally, Centuri developed their own motor-making machine(s) and decided to go with 2.5" B. Centuri was already a part of Damon Corp by then as was Estes since 69-70. So, it was the Damon management that was making the engine manufacturing decisions during this time period.

The Centuri B4 lasted barely a year from about Mar/April 73 to May/June 74. I've read from other posters they were Cato prone. I really don't know that they were because by 73-74 I was out chasing skirt and street racing among other things.
I did have Estes mini-brutes but also never had any MPC mini-jets that I remember.

Estes could make longer-length mini-engines if they so desired. Technically making a 13mm B is not much different than making an 18mm B.
I guess it all depends on the marketplace demand.

If you could, post some nozzle pics of the b4 with a ruler? closeup? Also take a look at the casing: is it a spiral-wound or parallel-wound paper tube?



EDIT Additional info

The Centuri B4-xM was no longer on the June 1974 NAR Certification list
Here are some additional stats on the engines:
iT tb Tmax N Tavg
MPC/AVI B3 3.78 1.58 s 8.4N 23 2.4N
Centuri B4 2.89 1.36 s 12.4N 4 2.1N
B4 3.07 1.30 s 14.0N 9 2.3N

1st Centuri line above is Feb 74 and bottom June 74. They were essentially B2

iT = Total Impulse
tb = Thrust Duration
TMax = Max thrust
N = number of samples
Tavg = Thrust Average

Centuri said their were production delay problems at NARAM 15 in Aug 1974
Introduced at the Pittsburgh Spring Convention in March 1973

Thanks, If I had known that the total impulse of the B4 was that low, and more cato prone, I would not have bought so many. After the B4 had been discontinued, I started buying them up at hobby shops. I don't know why Centuri selected 2.5". Perhaps they thought it was a marketing ploy, like selling a cigarette that was silly mm longer?

My first NARAM was 12, and NARAM was the preferred venue for debuting new products. Centuri demoed the Enerjet motors, and Lee Piester sold them, one to a customer, out of the back of his station wagon. I lined up. The F67s sold out first, followed by progressively smaller motors. I may have gotten the last one, a D21-10. I actually wanted a D21-7 as I thought it would make a good eggloft motor.

I was at that convention where the MPC Mini-Jets were introduced. They were only available in plain white 25 motor packs; that was too much for me at the time. I did buy later, after I could make arrangements to split the motors up. I was also at NARAM 15, but I don't remember much from that one. The whole Centuri mini motor thing was kind of a ho-hum me too development. I was essentially out of the loop 74-78 while I was earning and paying for my college degree.

I am not going to post a pic. However, the Centuri B4 had a larger throat, and the grey nozzles, allegedly with graphite dust machined from Enerjet nozzles, and colored parallel wound cases. Estes also made a batch of Mini-Brutes with blue cases, but that may have been done for a NARAM range store.

This nostalgic look at mini motors is not what I had intended, and I could go on. However, I would like to return to the issue of cost in competition, but later.

 

[shockie]

Agreed . . . My point is that one type of person will always have an advantage over another type of person, particularly in their careers.

If one is unable or unwilling to compete and improve, they will come out on the "short end" of Life.

Dave F.

meritocracy vs socialism...... some people have better skills than some and are suitably recognized or everybody gets a participation trophy

 

[Alan15578]

Alan, Estes did create both A3-2t and A3-6t for a while, but the -6 was discontinued because it barely fit in its 1.75" casing. That's what I heard. It was right up to the edge of the casing. Plus, Estes starts and stops the production of motors based on sales.

I don't think there's any technical reason an A3-6t couldn't be made in a longer casing. The MABEL machines that produce 1.75" cased A's might have to be redone. I think Estes has dedicated 13mm, 18mm, 24mm,29mm MABEL's. There may be more than 1motor machine of each type. It appears from Google maps that they have at least 7 machines.

At one time most of Estes motor sales came through big box stores, especially Walmart. Walmart in particular is a big bully that pressures suppliers on price and product; they wanted Estes to reduce the number of SKUs. This is why Estes dropped the A3-6t, A3-2t, and replaced some smaller motors 2 and 4 second delays with a single 3 second delay. For a brief time you could still buy the A3-6t, but only through Apogee. After Apogee started making it's own motors at Aerotech, Estes reacted by refusing to make and sell motors to Apogee. Today, I can't find Estes motors at Walmart, and Hobby Lobby is the big bully. Hobby Lobby used it's power to get Estes to make some kits that are exclusive to Hobby lobby. My nearest Hobby Lobby does not sell the larger Estes motors, but then my LHS does not carry them either, nor the C5-3 or any Quest/AT motors. Estes could have reintroduced the A3-6t after Walmart's influence had faded, but by then they were using the poor BP and could no longer pack it into the 1.75" case.

I saw your post on YORF, but I had no real questions about the mini B motors, aside from the dates of CATO prone B4 mini motors. My main question was if the existing MABELs could be easily adjusted or adapted to produce the A3-6t in a longer case. I don't think demand for the A3-6t is great enough to justify building a new motor making machine for that purpose. On the other hand, a new machine to make 2.75" or so 13mm B motors would be most appreciated.

 

[tab28682]

I have no doubts that the kids were not motivated by the money, but I suspect that their parents were.

Dave F.

in my opinion, that is an unsubstantiated guess that has nothing to do with reality.

 

[Ez2cDave]

in my opinion, that is an unsubstantiated guess that has nothing to do with reality.

The "reality" is that parents are, pretty much always, looking to save money and a cash prize or scholarship would be very attractive and a strong motivator.

Dave F.

 

[tab28682]

The "reality" is that parents are, pretty much always, looking to save money and a cash prize or scholarship would be very attractive and a strong motivator.

Dave F.

Lets model this with some numbers that might not be exact, but will illustrate the odds. With over 600 teams and perhaps an average of 5 students per team, that is 3000 participants. Top 10 teams (40-60 students) take home the money. If 50 students, that is about 2K per student. Not a huge amount considering the cost of college today.

A factor, but not the prime motivator. The event looks great on student resumes, is fantastic for STEM education, the event is fun and I think it does get some competitive juices flowing.

I am on the SAE Aero Design committee, a college STEM event, where students design and build load lifting RC aircraft. I direct the events when they are held in Fort Worth. 85 teams from 10-12 countries compete, with as many as 700 students on site. Two events per year, East and West. Sponsored by Aerospace companies and the Society of Automotive Engineers.

There is prize money involved, but the competition is about university pride, bragging rights and the desire to compete and excel, not about the prize money.
Odds are not that great for any given team. k