Lack of Interest In Contest Flying

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
You are creating an edge case argument, a scenario that is vanishingly unlikely to occur at a given launch.

OK . . . Imagine a calm day with numerous parachute duration and /or streamer duration models being flown.

Same problem . . . Launching into "crowded airspace".

Throw in a good-sized Cub Scout / Boy Scout Troop, for good measure.

Dave F.
 
I think interest has to built. It takes time.

Chuck,

I suspect that a big part of the problem stems from Club Officers not wanting to undertake the additional work it takes to run a sanctioned NAR contest, ESPECIALLY with Multiple Events ( Sign-In, Flight Cards, Safety / Motor Verification Inspection, Post-Flight Inspection for Eggs, Payload, Altimeter Data Recording, Post-Flight Damage Assessment for Craftsmanship models, Static Judging of Craftsmanship models, Timing Teams, Tracking, Posting Results, Pad Assignment, etc, etc, etc. ).

Unless Club Leadership is behind the idea, it will be very difficult for Competition to "gain traction".

Dave F.
 
Last edited:
Chuck,

I suspect that a big part of the problem stems from Club Officers not wanting to undertake the additional work it takes a run a sanctioned NAR contest ( Sign-In, Flight Cards, Safety / Motor Verification Inspection, Post-Flight Inspection for Eggs, Payload, Altimeter Data Recording, Post-Flight Damage Assessmemnt for Craftsmanship models, Static Judging of Craftsmanship models, Timing Teams, Tracking, Posting Results, Pad Assignment, etc, etc, etc. ).

Unless Club Leadership is behind the idea, it will be very difficult for Competition to "gain traction".

Dave F.

It is a lot of work. Trust me, I am a club officer.
 
Chuck,

I suspect that a big part of the problem stems from Club Officers not wanting to undertake the additional work it takes to run a sanctioned NAR contest, ESPECIALLY with Multiple Events ( Sign-In, Flight Cards, Safety / Motor Verification Inspection, Post-Flight Inspection for Eggs, Payload, Altimeter Data Recording, Post-Flight Damage Assessment for Craftsmanship models, Static Judging of Craftsmanship models, Timing Teams, Tracking, Posting Results, Pad Assignment, etc, etc, etc. ).

Unless Club Leadership is behind the idea, it will be very difficult for Competition to "gain traction".

Dave F.
It’s a fallacy that club officers need to do the work. Club members can, and do, take on responsibility, with approval of officers. Too many times I’ve been to club meetings where members bring up an idea, and expect the officers to do the work. If members want to see a change or new thing in their club, be prepared to present, plan, promote, and lead the effort.
 
It’s a fallacy that club officers need to do the work. Club members can, and do, take on responsibility, with approval of officers. Too many times I’ve been to club meetings where members bring up an idea, and expect the officers to do the work. If members want to see a change or new thing in their club, be prepared to present, plan, promote, and lead the effort.

They should. Many don’t.
 
Only one of four clubs I visit spends time on competition events. Otherwise, what I know about competition comes from what I read in Sport Rocketry, year after year. Those magazine articles describe an activity dominated by a small clique of old timers, and their overly-coached offspring, usually from the East Coast.

No surprise it is on the decline. Time has passed by NAR/FAI competition. Compared to the high-tech college and high school events (which are growing nicely), the NAR competition looks pointless and antiquated. After competing in NASA events involving HPR and serious payloads, how many college kids will latch on to 1/4A Streamer Duration?
 
It’s a fallacy that club officers need to do the work. Club members can, and do, take on responsibility, with approval of officers. Too many times I’ve been to club meetings where members bring up an idea, and expect the officers to do the work. If members want to see a change or new thing in their club, be prepared to present, plan, promote, and lead the effort.

My point was that, if the Club Officers are not "on board" with holding Competitions, interest and participation will never get enough "traction" to become a regular occurrence.

The best example I can give is NARAM . . . The hosting club(s) officers are all in supervisory positions, while EVERY Competitor is assigned Range Duties, during a pre-scheduled time block. That lets the Officers delegate responsibilities, thus lightening their "work load", yet maintaining full control of the contest.

Unless the Officers step up to organize & plan contests, competition will likely never "blossom".

Dave F.
 
( 1 ) Only one of four clubs I visit spends time on competition events. Otherwise, what I know about competition comes from what I read in Sport Rocketry, year after year. Those magazine articles describe an activity dominated by a small clique of old timers, and their overly-coached offspring, usually from the East Coast.

( 2 ) No surprise it is on the decline. Time has passed by NAR/FAI competition. Compared to the high-tech college and high school events (which are growing nicely), the NAR competition looks pointless and antiquated. After competing in NASA events involving HPR and serious payloads, how many college kids will latch on to 1/4A Streamer Duration?

( 1 ) Agreed . . . 100% ! However, getting new Competitors involved would certainly change that demographic !

( 2 ) If you want to attract older Competitors, have them "put some skin in the game", with Cash Prizes. Money is a strong motivator in competitive events !

Ideally, the best scenario is to attract young flyers ( and their parents, too ) . . . Get them involved . . . EARLY !

Dave F.
 
( 1 ) Agreed . . . 100% ! However, getting new Competitors involved would certainly change that demographic !

( 2 ) If you want to attract older Competitors, have them "put some skin in the game", with Cash Prizes. Money is a strong motivator in competitive events !

Ideally, the best scenario is to attract young flyers ( and their parents, too ) . . . Get them involved . . . EARLY !

Dave F.

We are probably going to give free flight fees.
 
Our local high school careers center has a TARC team that flew at our club launch this weekend. This is an interesting engineering problem and fun to watch. I played with some competition kits last year and the whole BT5 thing was funny. None of my fingers fits in one! It's also gotten to the point where gains are miniscule. In other words, not exciting.
I would go to the contest site at NARAM to see some of the very cool E and F helicopter duration models I've seen on the subforum here. Otherwise it's HP sport and scale for me. Needs an infusion of NEW.

Cheers / Robert
 
Only one of four clubs I visit spends time on competition events. Otherwise, what I know about competition comes from what I read in Sport Rocketry, year after year. Those magazine articles describe an activity dominated by a small clique of old timers, and their overly-coached offspring, usually from the East Coast.

No surprise it is on the decline. Time has passed by NAR/FAI competition. Compared to the high-tech college and high school events (which are growing nicely), the NAR competition looks pointless and antiquated. After competing in NASA events involving HPR and serious payloads, how many college kids will latch on to 1/4A Streamer Duration?
I actually end up throwing away every Sport Rocketry issue that comes into the mail because 90% of every issue is about contest flying which honestly most people have 0 interest in. NAR needs to have a version of the membership without wasting money on those magazines. I have flown with multiple clubs around the southeast and none of them have remotely shown any interest in contest flying, they just want to have fun and launch a few rockets and have a good time without any constraints.
 
I actually end up throwing away every Sport Rocketry issue that comes into the mail because 90% of every issue is about contest flying which honestly most people have 0 interest in. NAR needs to have a version of the membership without wasting money on those magazines. I have flown with multiple clubs around the southeast and none of them have remotely shown any interest in contest flying, they just want to have fun and launch a few rockets and have a good time without any constraints.

And that right there is a clear indicator of at least one of the reasons that competition is not being flown.

I propose approaching Parents & showing them how much LESS EXPENSIVE flying Competition can be ... Why is that ?

Simple, take a look at a Contest Event like B Streamer Duration : We are building FOUR rockets

From Balsa Machining Service :

( 1 )

T20-34.736x.710x.013x34 Estes 18mm$2.00

( 2 ) . . . Need to buy FOUR of them !

BMS20Q$3.49BUYSlightly longer version of 20BBT20
0.736​
0.710​
1.75​


( 3 ) Enough for MANY rockets !

BSH1163361/16 x 3 x 36 Balsa Sheet$1.63

So, for a cost of $ 17.59, a parent just spent enough for FOUR Competition models ( excluding Streamer, Shock Cord, & Launch Lug ) . . . Call it $20.00 total . . . Only $5.00 per rocket.

If the Modelers learn how to sand their own Foam Nose Cones or make Paper Cones, the price drops to about $2.00 / Rocket ! ! !

Compare that to buying Kits and parents will see that Competition can be MUCH more economical.

Before you say " they can't design rockets", they won't have to, as there are MANY competition plans available online . . . Only ONE example below !

Dave F.

FINS DESIGNS.jpg

1616428962747.png
 
It used to be much cheaper when you could build a model around an A3-6t. :(

It's still cheaper to scratch-build LPR models ( Nose Cones are the biggest expense ) . . . No fancy packaging . . . No expensive decals . . . No printed instructions . . . etc, etc, etc.

The problem of certain motors no longer being available is, indeed, a problem . . . However, each Competitor is faced with the same limitations.

Until you get into the higher impulse classes, where composite motors are usually needed to win, the overall cost is still relatively low, compared to commercial kits.

Frankly, I wish that Estes would lengthen their 13mm casings into the zone where "B" motors are possible, like the OOP Mini-Jet B3 That would also allow for much longer Delays.

Dave F.
 
Frankly, I wish that Estes would lengthen their 13mm casings into the zone where "B" motors are possible, like the OOP Mini-Jet B3 That would also allow for much longer Delays.

Dave F.
Agreed, but did Estes manufacture any of the Centuri 13mm B4 motors?
 
Then again, TARC flying is competition. I wonder how TARC competitors are treated at your fields. Do you tell them to "check their competitive attitude " at the door? Maybe you can point out the lunacy of launching a rocket with a payload, getting it to fly to a set height and duration. Do you point out their elitism? Or perhaps you point out that their competitive ego is their liability? I mean you should tell the TARC competitors that their competitive ego is spoiling your good time and you can't deal with that kind of ego. Or do you take the Cheech and Chong attitude and sloppily say" TARC's different man ? ".

I'm "Old School" . . .

Whenever their is Competition, of ANY kind, there are Winners and Losers . . . Everyone DOES NOT get a trophy !

Each Competitors results, whether Good or Bad, are tallied and posted for all to see.

There is a hierarchy of achievement and a "scale" of one's abilities, compared to others.

This serves to motivate people to improve their individual skills and knowledge, so that they "move up the ladder" against their fellow Competitors.

My High School Soccer / Football coach used to tell us " Gentlemen, there will be one of two outcomes at the end of this game . . . You will either be ahead or you will be behind . . . The object is to be ahead . . . There are two ways to not be ahead . . . You will either be beaten, in which there is no disgrace, provided that you gave 100% effort, OR you will Lose, because you did not give 100% effort and that shame, Gentlemen, is on you !"

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 !

Dave F.
 
Last edited:
I actually end up throwing away every Sport Rocketry issue that comes into the mail because 90% of every issue is about contest flying.

I think that percentage is a little off. I went back and looked at the last year of Sport Rocketry articles. Competition oriented articles have an asterisk by the title:

May/June 2020 - 2 competition articles out of 7 (29%)
View from Above: A History of the Science and Hobby of Aerial Photography​
TARC Outreach – Wisconsin Youth Rocketry Championship​
US/USSR 1988 Spacemodeling Competition Revisited*​
Historic Event: F.I.R.E 2019*​
The Kid​
Interview with Jim Flis, Part 2​
NAR Junior Member Science Fair Contest​

July/August 2020 - 2 competition articles out of 14 (14%)
NARCON 2020 Overview​
Getting Started with Amateur Radio in Hobby Rocketry​
Satellite Dreams: Doing Group HPR Projects​
How to Win at TARC​
FCC Part 15: What you Need to Know​
BPS Space 2020: How to Build a Thrust Vectored Model Rocket​
High Power Rocketry Safety​
Air Launching NASA’s ICON Space Weather Mission​
Hot Air: Thermals, Lift and When to Fly*​
780 Days in Orbit: Dyna-Soar’s Military Mission Legacy to the X-37B​
Secrets of World Class Modeling*​
Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster​
Life Among Titans: A Day in the Life of a Missileer​
What is the Mars Snooper?​

September/October 2020 - 1 competition article out of 8 (12%)
Spaceport America Cup 2019​
Virtual NARCON 2020​
Scale Data: Frangible ARCAS*​
The Saturn V 50/50 Challenge​
Sowing the Seeds of the Future​
Modular Avionics Bay​
Rocketman Dallas​
Book Reviews: The Man Who Ran the Moon, For All Mankind​

November/December 2020 - 7 competition articles out of 9 (78%)
Virtual NARAM*​
How It Came To Be*​
A Tale of Two Altitude Models*​
What It Was Like to CD a Virtual NARAM*​
Best Midwest Qualified Flight*​
Sport Scale*​
V-NARAM Results*​
Updating the F-61 Starfighter, Part 1​
Mike Moran’s Chute Spool​

January/February 2021 – 1 competition article out of 7 (14%)
vNARCON Registration​
Using an Arduino to Record In-Flight Data​
Updating the F-61 Starfighter, Part II​
The Arizona Cup, 2020*​
An Overview of “Tip to Tip” Fin Lamination​
Rocket Motor Certification List​
Manufacts​

March/April 2021 - 1 competition article out of 8 (12%)
Gravity’s Rainbow: An Intelligent LED Light for Night Flying​
Flying 1/2A Altitude*​
Fly the Star Trek: First Contact Phoenix​
Building and Flying the Omega A​
Building a Dumpster Fire​
Customizing Rockets using a Cricut​
Revitalize your Fleet: Reuse, Rebuild and Refly​
Manufacts​

Looks like 21 of 62 articles or 34%. YMMV.
 
Competition requires a drive to accomplish goals and to establish supremacy over other Competitors, something not being taught in today's schools.

Dave F.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps there might be renewed interest in NAR contest flying if they added H motors and above

The NAR's HPR Record program has been under development for the past 12 years though, so I'm not holding my breath...

https://www.nar.org/contest-flying/high-power-competition/

"NAR HPR Sporting Code 2009 Edition – 2 –
1 Altitude Data
1.1 Record setting
The NAR HPR record program is currently under development. The Contest and Records Committee will advise the membership when it is complete."
 
Agreed, but did Estes manufacture any of the Centuri 13mm B4 motors?
If I remember correctly, and that's an IF, the Centuri B 13mm were 2.5" in length while the mini-brutes from Estes were 1.75". For a small time in the early to mid 70's (73-74) Centuri finally started making their own motors and were no longer dependent on Estes. Although by this time Estes had been part Of Damon for almost 4 to 5 years, and Damon had purchased Centuri by 75, so the Centuri manufactured 13mm 2.5" became Estes 1.75" manufactured for Centuri. The B4-3M was notorious for catoing. and discontinued.
 
If I remember correctly, and that's an IF, the Centuri B 13mm were 2.5" in length while the mini-brutes from Estes were 1.75". For a small time in the early to mid 70's (73-74) Centuri finally started making their own motors and were no longer dependent on Estes. Although by this time Estes had been part Of Damon for almost 4 to 5 years, and Damon had purchased Centuri by 75, so the Centuri manufactured 13mm 2.5" became Estes 1.75" manufactured for Centuri. The B4-3M was notorious for catoing. and discontinued.
My recollection may be faulty, but I certainly acknowledge some knowledge gaps. The MPC mini-Jets 1/4A-B were first, at 2.25". Next came the Estes Mini Brutes 1/4A-A at 1.75". Last was the Centuri mini motors, 1/4A-B, at 2.25". At some point Centuri transferred all motor production to Estes, and never returned. Estes cut the Centuri 1/4A-A mini motors down to 1.75" mini Brute size and packaged them with a 0.5" motor spacer. This could not be done with the B motor, so did Estes make Centuri B mini motors in the longer case, or not? I'd like to think that Estes has the experience to produce them.

Neither mini B was a full 5.0 N-s, but they would outperform any 18mm B in suitable models. I'm not sure which was better, but I generally used the MPC/AVI mini B simply because they were the poineers. I had not noticed any difference in cato rates. I will note the Centuri Mini motors were pretty, while the MPC motors were ugly, many with bulging cases that had to be sanded to fit into models.
 
I think that percentage is a little off. I went back and looked at the last year of Sport Rocketry articles. Competition oriented articles have an asterisk by the title:

May/June 2020 - 2 competition articles out of 7 (29%)
View from Above: A History of the Science and Hobby of Aerial Photography​
TARC Outreach – Wisconsin Youth Rocketry Championship​
US/USSR 1988 Spacemodeling Competition Revisited*​
Historic Event: F.I.R.E 2019*​
The Kid​
Interview with Jim Flis, Part 2​
NAR Junior Member Science Fair Contest​

July/August 2020 - 2 competition articles out of 14 (14%)
NARCON 2020 Overview​
Getting Started with Amateur Radio in Hobby Rocketry​
Satellite Dreams: Doing Group HPR Projects​
How to Win at TARC​
FCC Part 15: What you Need to Know​
BPS Space 2020: How to Build a Thrust Vectored Model Rocket​
High Power Rocketry Safety​
Air Launching NASA’s ICON Space Weather Mission​
Hot Air: Thermals, Lift and When to Fly*​
780 Days in Orbit: Dyna-Soar’s Military Mission Legacy to the X-37B​
Secrets of World Class Modeling*​
Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster​
Life Among Titans: A Day in the Life of a Missileer​
What is the Mars Snooper?​

September/October 2020 - 1 competition article out of 8 (12%)
Spaceport America Cup 2019​
Virtual NARCON 2020​
Scale Data: Frangible ARCAS*​
The Saturn V 50/50 Challenge​
Sowing the Seeds of the Future​
Modular Avionics Bay​
Rocketman Dallas​
Book Reviews: The Man Who Ran the Moon, For All Mankind​

November/December 2020 - 7 competition articles out of 9 (78%)
Virtual NARAM*​
How It Came To Be*​
A Tale of Two Altitude Models*​
What It Was Like to CD a Virtual NARAM*​
Best Midwest Qualified Flight*​
Sport Scale*​
V-NARAM Results*​
Updating the F-61 Starfighter, Part 1​
Mike Moran’s Chute Spool​

January/February 2021 – 1 competition article out of 7 (14%)
vNARCON Registration​
Using an Arduino to Record In-Flight Data​
Updating the F-61 Starfighter, Part II​
The Arizona Cup, 2020*​
An Overview of “Tip to Tip” Fin Lamination​
Rocket Motor Certification List​
Manufacts​

March/April 2021 - 1 competition article out of 8 (12%)
Gravity’s Rainbow: An Intelligent LED Light for Night Flying​
Flying 1/2A Altitude*​
Fly the Star Trek: First Contact Phoenix​
Building and Flying the Omega A​
Building a Dumpster Fire​
Customizing Rockets using a Cricut​
Revitalize your Fleet: Reuse, Rebuild and Refly​
Manufacts​

Looks like 21 of 62 articles or 34%. YMMV.
Thanks for the summary. I stopped reading it many years ago because it lacked sufficient STEM content. It had become just a picture book of mostly HPR stuff. I do understand that many rocketeers live to see their name, face, or rocket in the mag, and you can't publish what has not been written or submitted. Even the contest reports were mostly just a tabulation of the places and not the engaging story of the victory.
 
My recollection may be faulty, but I certainly acknowledge some knowledge gaps. The MPC mini-Jets 1/4A-B were first, at 2.25". Next came the Estes Mini Brutes 1/4A-A at 1.75". Last was the Centuri mini motors, 1/4A-B, at 2.25". At some point Centuri transferred all motor production to Estes, and never returned. Estes cut the Centuri 1/4A-A mini motors down to 1.75" mini Brute size and packaged them with a 0.5" motor spacer. This could not be done with the B motor, so did Estes make Centuri B mini motors in the longer case, or not? I'd like to think that Estes has the experience to produce them.

Neither mini B was a full 5.0 N-s, but they would outperform any 18mm B in suitable models. I'm not sure which was better, but I generally used the MPC/AVI mini B simply because they were the poineers. I had not noticed any difference in cato rates. I will note the Centuri Mini motors were pretty, while the MPC motors were ugly, many with bulging cases that had to be sanded to fit into models.
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.
 

Attachments

  • MiniJet Back.jpg
    MiniJet Back.jpg
    98.3 KB · Views: 8
  • Cent-Est-lin.pdf
    70.2 KB · Views: 17
Last edited:
Time has passed by NAR/FAI competition. Compared to the high-tech college and high school events (which are growing nicely), the NAR competition looks pointless and antiquated.

I agree wholeheartedly that school based events such as SLI and TARC show impressive participation numbers. In fact, perhaps rocketry competition has never been in greater shape than it is right now due to the success of these events? It just looks different now.

Traditional NAR Competition has indeed seen better days. I'm going to push back gently on the comments concerning FAI, though. That program has seen steady increases in interest and participation over the past couple of decades, and many of the young people who have flown FAI in recent years were introduced to rocketry via TARC.

A bid for the USA to host the 2023 World Spacemodeling Championships is currently in front of the FAI leadership, and will be voted on during meetings to be held in early May. If the US wins that bid, expect FAI-style competition rocketry to experience a groundswell of interest as we approach 2023.

James
 
I agree wholeheartedly that school based events such as SLI and TARC show impressive participation numbers. In fact, perhaps rocketry competition has never been in greater shape than it is right now due to the success of these events? It just looks different now.

James

James,

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

Dave F.

1616687812802.png

1616687862258.png
 
Back
Top