EVENT NARAM-63
- Thread starter Initiator001
- Start date
Help Support The Rocketry Forum:
Ez2cDave
Well-Known Member
Very true . . . Unless the number of NAR Competition flyers increases, "diminishing returns" will, eventually, be the death of NARAM.
What are some of the obstacles to NAR Competition ?
(1) Lack of active, effective promotion by the NAR and NAR Sections.
(2) Many NAR Sections refuse to hold contests, in deference to HPR flying only.
(3) Lack of interest in "scratch-building" and "designing" skills.
(4) etc, etc, etc.
How do we overcome this and increase interest and participation in NAR Competition ?
Well, looking at #1 & #2 above, those two items are fairly easy to overcome, provided that the two parties involved cooperate, actively.
#1 - The NAR needs to enthusiastically, widely, promote and encourage Competition. Perhaps, Sections should be required to host organized NAR Competition, at least, 4 times per year, as part of their Section Charter. If all Sections participate, the opportunity for growth and expansion is greatly multiplied.
#2 - "NRC", effectively, reinforces problem #2, by giving Sections the ability to say, " Sure, you can fly Competition, on your own, while we fly HPR, provided that you don't get in our way or take away from our HPR flying time, while we wait on your duration models" (several discussions, to this effect, are on TRF).
Now, perhaps the largest obstacle, #3 . . . A "compound problem".
Most Rocketeers, whether LPR, MPR, or HPR are "kit builders", nowadays.
Back in the day, when NAR Competition was flourishing, winning with a "kit" rarely happened. If you didn't scratch-build, using the best, lightest components, you had virtually no chance. The same is true, nowadays, particularly in the Glider events. Also, unless you use the "latest & greatest" piston launcher, you have zero chance in many other events, as well. All of this greatly discourages newcomers and less-experienced competitors.
In an effort to make things less "daunting" for new NAR Competitiors, I propose creating the following "levels" in each Age Division, A, B, C, & Team. It would look like "A1 / A2/ A3, B1 / B2 / B3, C1 / C2 / C3, and T1 / T2 / T3".
(1) Novice - Must fly "stock" kits, no piston launchers, free-flight only (DT's allowed, no RC).
(2) Intermediate - Scratch-built, "own designs" are allowed, no "exotic materials" are allowed ( e.g. - vacuum-bagged foam wings ), basic pistons are allowed ( no "FAI-style" pistons ), RC is allowed only in specific "RC" events, not competing against free-flight models.
(3) Master - "Anything goes", within the limits of the "rules".
The largest question is "How do we attract new NAR Competitors" ?
For that, we will need much open "input & discussion", not bickering and griping.
This is not about "personalities", but the future of NAR Competition and NARAM . . .
Please contribute constructive, meaningful suggestions, nothing negative !
Dave F.
Last edited:
Initiator001
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2009
- Messages
- 3,402
- Reaction score
- 1,119
I belong to two NAR Sections in SoCal.
One makes a point to register all their launches as open for NRC flying. At most of these launches 3-4 members test fly models and/or fly for NRC points.
The other Section has talked about competition flying (And had Open/Sections meets four times a year back in the 1980s and 1990s) but there is no interest in doing it any more among the members.
Neither section is capable of hosting HPR flights due to location and one is restricted to flights under 1,000 feet ASL. Even so, both get 50 or more fliers at each launch.
I see plenty of scratch-built models at both Section launches. Often they are 'fun' models or folks testing boilerplate models of projects they plan to fly at NARAM (Scale models/egglofters). I scratch build models for fun.
The simplest reason for the decline of NAR Competition is that it's not interesting to the majority of the membership. The NRC program which was to 'save' and improve the number of competition fliers has backfired. The main point of changing the competition process was in order to get more youngsters involved. At the same time this 'dumbing-down' of competition has turned off adults who are tired of flying 1/2A Parachute Duration at every other NARAM and might like to try something more challenging like D R/G or F Dual Eggloft Altitude which are not part of the NRC but were before the change.
I say keep competition but it is no longer a major point for the NAR. Most folks just want to have fun flying the rockets they bought at Hobby Lobby, one of the few remaining hobby shops or online.
Ez2cDave
Well-Known Member
Interesting . . . They build and fly Competition models to fly at NARAM, but they have no interest in flying NAR Competition ? I am pretty sure this is due to "NRC", where no local "head to head" competition occurs and flight results are tallied up, nationally. So, there is no "motivation" to compete, since NRC has effectively turned NAR Competition into a nationwide "Postal Event". If NRC were eliminated, and NAR Competition returned to it's original format ("Pink Book"), the drive to "square off" against each other should return.
Agreed . . . NRC has not delivered the goods and should be discontinued, with a return to traditional NAR Competition. I feel that, due to the low total impulse of the NRC events, the goal was to try to "morph" everything into a "pseudo-FAI" style of flying, without the large diameter airframes.
Precisely the logic behind my "levels", in each Division. If people want to fly kits, they would only have to compete against kits, if they are flying in "Level 1" in their respective Division !
Dave F.
Last edited:
Well…..are you volunteering to provide a site and help run one (or more) of each, then?
Off Grid Gecko
Well-Known Member
Actually I'm planning to do it anyway, with or without NAR/TRA approval/sanction (for lpr of course), and maybe beating the drum around here for the local school to start up a TARC team. Also working on my own fundraising plan to start a "little rocket factory" and buy a chunk of land specifically for hay-field and LPR/MPR events,,, if I can raise the capital.. Just started the process so it will be a while before I have it. RN Springfield is a 2hr drive and that's the closest place to launch HPR. St. Louis is about 4 hours drive, and KC/Argonia not too much further away than that. So I have options for my stuff, but really trying to get something rolling locally for the kids and maybe encourage other schools by developing a 2-3 day "rocket science" curriculum. It's a lofty goal and I dunno if it'll get off the ground, but I do have a couple of interested small investors already.
I posted the above without reading (well, skimming) the rest of this thread.
I am not sure what to make of this out-of-sight-out-of-mind decision to take the sport range completely away from NARAMs beginning next year, even though I understand the reason given that it will make finding host sites/clubs easier to find for NARAM since the high-power side of things — a site that is both waiverable and has a good enough waiver that the HPR guys won’t whine about it — is a major complication, at least from the point of view of NAR competition flying.
On the one hand if that means an NSL in Alamosa for the next three years, that would be fun for me — it’s a great site, and after their “fun” running NSL last year, I expect they now know how to do it. And it’s a perfect setup for a visit to family in New Mexico on the same road trip. That’s a pretty selfish reason to like the idea.
On the other hand, part of what made NARAM what it was for me the three times I’ve attended one (56, 60, 61) was the sport range, even though during the competitions, I was on the competition range. Having the sport range the weekend before made it a more rounded experience for me. Also, having that much flying made the road trip more justifiable, especially to Muncie for NARAM-61.
I have a similar situation with respect to competition as Bob (@Initiator001) does but it’s more acute. My own club site isn’t big enough to host at least half of the NRC events. The other site in the Puget Sound area is better, but neither BEMRC nor WAC have actively sponsored any NRC (or other competition) flying for some time. I can certainly turn up the gain a little bit for BEMRC and at least get the launches after this coming one registered as NRC events and bring the requisite paperwork so that we could fly NRC flights if someone wants to. And I can approach the gentleman who runs the WAC launches in winter and spring about doing so at Sixty Acres and see what he says. We have flown a little competition there in years past….but it’s been quite awhile.
It’s hard to tell whether removing the sport flying aspect from future NARAMs will be the death knell for NAR competition or not. I’m not really among the hardcore competitors (though it is fun to fly with and sometimes beat those guys), so right now I’m kind of ambivalent about the whole thing, as I said above.
I AM far less pleased that this is the first I’ve heard about it, however, here in this thread.
I am not sure what to make of this out-of-sight-out-of-mind decision to take the sport range completely away from NARAMs beginning next year, even though I understand the reason given that it will make finding host sites/clubs easier to find for NARAM since the high-power side of things — a site that is both waiverable and has a good enough waiver that the HPR guys won’t whine about it — is a major complication, at least from the point of view of NAR competition flying.
On the one hand if that means an NSL in Alamosa for the next three years, that would be fun for me — it’s a great site, and after their “fun” running NSL last year, I expect they now know how to do it. And it’s a perfect setup for a visit to family in New Mexico on the same road trip. That’s a pretty selfish reason to like the idea.
On the other hand, part of what made NARAM what it was for me the three times I’ve attended one (56, 60, 61) was the sport range, even though during the competitions, I was on the competition range. Having the sport range the weekend before made it a more rounded experience for me. Also, having that much flying made the road trip more justifiable, especially to Muncie for NARAM-61.
I have a similar situation with respect to competition as Bob (@Initiator001) does but it’s more acute. My own club site isn’t big enough to host at least half of the NRC events. The other site in the Puget Sound area is better, but neither BEMRC nor WAC have actively sponsored any NRC (or other competition) flying for some time. I can certainly turn up the gain a little bit for BEMRC and at least get the launches after this coming one registered as NRC events and bring the requisite paperwork so that we could fly NRC flights if someone wants to. And I can approach the gentleman who runs the WAC launches in winter and spring about doing so at Sixty Acres and see what he says. We have flown a little competition there in years past….but it’s been quite awhile.
It’s hard to tell whether removing the sport flying aspect from future NARAMs will be the death knell for NAR competition or not. I’m not really among the hardcore competitors (though it is fun to fly with and sometimes beat those guys), so right now I’m kind of ambivalent about the whole thing, as I said above.
I AM far less pleased that this is the first I’ve heard about it, however, here in this thread.
Actually, that sounds great. More power to you!
James Duffy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2009
- Messages
- 1,446
- Reaction score
- 1,733
Pretty sure that consistently declining NARAM attendance qualifies as "input from the NAR general membership."
Let's be frank, guys. The growth in membership over the past several years has been due to interest in sport flying, not competition. Shifting organizational resources and attention in the direction of things that the majority of members want to do - sport flying - is the wise thing to do.
As for those commenting that they were disenfranchised in this process, let's take a moment to note that the decision was made by a board of trustees elected by the membership.
Ez2cDave
Well-Known Member
It's possible that "consistently declining NARAM attendance" might have been worsened by the implementation of NRC.
Yes, the Board of Trustees is elected, BUT a decision like this should have been openly discussed with the Membership and put to a vote, rather than just making a unilateral, arbitrary decision, in secret.
It appears that the NAR has "forgotten where it came from" and wants to distance itself from that past.
Dave F.
@James Duffy's last point is well taken.
I will say that traveling to a NARAM at which there is no MPR/HPR sport range would make packing for the road trip easier as the rockets/motors would take up a bunch less room.
I will say that traveling to a NARAM at which there is no MPR/HPR sport range would make packing for the road trip easier as the rockets/motors would take up a bunch less room.
Initiator001
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2009
- Messages
- 3,402
- Reaction score
- 1,119
NARAM competition attendance has been declining.
NARAM Sport flying has been steady and what the majority of NAR members do at a NARAM.
If the members of the NAR are more into Sport Flying why is a NARAM five days and an NSL three days?
I went and reviewed all the meeting notes of the BoT posted on the NAR website. Other than a passing mention that national events need to be looked at there is nothing posted about the changes to the NARAM until the June 2022 BoT meeting notes. From reading the June 2022 BoT Meeting Minutes under National Events it appears the changes were decided by the head of national events without any comment by the BoT.
If I could make it, it wouldn't be my first choice.
Springfield Leather Company would be my first choice. I buy a lot of leather from them and I would love to meet Liz and Tony that does the Video's. It's too bad that Clayton finally moved onto a Mechanical Engineering Position designing rod holders for Bass Pro Shops boats.
If you go to Springfield, stop in and check out SLC! It's a real adventure and I'm sure you will enjoy it if you have any interest in Leather or rocks and gems. They even have a slooth you can pan your dirt though and find something worth some money!
If I could trust my old Ranger with 400K+ miles on it running on 4 of 6 cylinders to make it I'd be there. But I doubt I would make it. So I'll wait and read what happens...again...
Springfield Leather Company would be my first choice. I buy a lot of leather from them and I would love to meet Liz and Tony that does the Video's. It's too bad that Clayton finally moved onto a Mechanical Engineering Position designing rod holders for Bass Pro Shops boats.
If you go to Springfield, stop in and check out SLC! It's a real adventure and I'm sure you will enjoy it if you have any interest in Leather or rocks and gems. They even have a slooth you can pan your dirt though and find something worth some money!
If I could trust my old Ranger with 400K+ miles on it running on 4 of 6 cylinders to make it I'd be there. But I doubt I would make it. So I'll wait and read what happens...again...
GuyNoir
Well-Known Member
From attendance data found at the NAR website:
NSL 2019 149
NSL 2021 131
NSL 2022 69
NARAM 60 223
NARAM 61 174
NARAM 62 142
NARAM 63 170
Draw your own conclusions, but my take is that there's not a strong fixed relationship between attendance and activity (sport / competition). The site, the contest events, the distance people have to drive, etc. all figure into attendance at national events.
YMMV.
GuyNoir
Well-Known Member
The key to any revitalization isn't very complicated.
It takes people willing to mentor others in how to fly contest events. Such mentoring is clearly present in TARC and HPR, but aside from Dan Wolf and Robert Zurek, I don't see others doing it.
GuyNoir
Well-Known Member
On what basis does this claim stand?
I didn't see ANYONE in the competition community consulted about NARAM changes in advance of the reference in the June meeting minutes posted at the NAR website.
Ez2cDave
Well-Known Member
How many of the Sport Flyers, at those NARAM's, were also Competitors ?
It also takes the cooperation of NAR Sections. Since most are unwilling to host Competition, the logical solution to require them to do so, as part of the Section Charter. Failure to comply would then be "actionable".
The "record" speaks for itself. "Ed said . . ."
https://www.nar.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/1JUN2022-BoT-conference-call.pdf
QUOTE :
National Events
Ed said that there will be no Board meeting at NARAM since John will be out of the country. Lynn will run the NAR Town Hall in John’s absence. Ed reminded the Board that the second NSL will roll out in2023 and that NARAM-64 will not have a sport range. NARAM will be a five-day competition-only launch, probably in Muncie, Indiana.
END QUOTE :
The decision to remove the Sport Range from NARAM was made "behind closed doors", without consulting the Membership At Large for "permission" to do so, via voting. Therfor, without advanced notice, it was a "mandate", issued in secret.
Dave F.
Last edited:
Initiator001
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2009
- Messages
- 3,402
- Reaction score
- 1,119
Correct. The majority of competition members were not informed of this change.
Only 3-6 select competitors (I suspect the same ones who were involved in the establishment of the NRC program) devised this change to NARAMs without input from anyone but themselves.
Kinda sounds like government bureaucrats enacting changes without any oversight. BATFE?
Having read the last few messages, I realized that I didn't know that the meeting minutes were posted on the website. Sure enough, logged in and found the archive of meeting minutes. Some good reading. I will have to keep a closer eye on these meeting minutes.
Unfortunate to hear that the sport range will not be at NARAM 64. That being said, has it been decided that there will forever be no sport range? I haven't found that tidbit yet in the minutes.
Either way, wish I could be there this weekend but the field does not seem conducive from what I hear for an M motor flight.
Unfortunate to hear that the sport range will not be at NARAM 64. That being said, has it been decided that there will forever be no sport range? I haven't found that tidbit yet in the minutes.
Either way, wish I could be there this weekend but the field does not seem conducive from what I hear for an M motor flight.
Initiator001
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2009
- Messages
- 3,402
- Reaction score
- 1,119
The hard-core competition types do not want any Sport Range at NARAM.
If the competition events are only 'B' motor or lower then the flying can take place on smaller fields which will open up more locations for NARAMs without having to take into consideration Sport Fliers using larger impulse motors.
The thing is..... you can have a huge field and still have it not be big enough for PD or SD in just about any impulse class. So it seems to me that that is false that a smaller site would be usable and therefore easier to find. NAR competition can go up to G impulse, though it is seldom done (one of the NARAMs I attended had G helicopter duration IIRC). Something like that is clearly outside the intent of the NRC, but that's a different discussion.
I kind of agree with @CTimm that sites that don't have a high power waiver would still be quite suitable for sport flying up through MPR. And then NSL can have even more of a high power launch feel, I suppose, than it does the three I have attended.
I think I'm going to ping at least a couple of NAR board members and see what their takes are on this seemingly out-of-the-blue "decision".
I kind of agree with @CTimm that sites that don't have a high power waiver would still be quite suitable for sport flying up through MPR. And then NSL can have even more of a high power launch feel, I suppose, than it does the three I have attended.
I think I'm going to ping at least a couple of NAR board members and see what their takes are on this seemingly out-of-the-blue "decision".
GuyNoir
Well-Known Member
Nonsense. The "hard-core competition types" I hang out with are perfectly happy to have and enjoy a sport range at NARAM.
Kabulrocks
Well-Known Member
Can someone post a google map link to the NARAM 63 launch site? I haven’t found the directions on the webpages yet. Thanks!
Edit:
Found it!
https://www.google.com/maps/place/37.29350, -93.84420
For those attending the event, this is a great restaurant filled with RC airplanes located on an active crop duster strip, and only 15 minutes from the launch site.
Hangar Kafe
https://hangarkafe.com/
Edit:
Found it!
https://www.google.com/maps/place/37.29350, -93.84420
For those attending the event, this is a great restaurant filled with RC airplanes located on an active crop duster strip, and only 15 minutes from the launch site.
Hangar Kafe
https://hangarkafe.com/
Last edited:
Off Grid Gecko
Well-Known Member
Their other field has a 10,000ft waiver. Think they are flying at this one because it's closer to the highway but I've been out of contact with them for some time. Yeah, I don't think an M is in the cards though, haha, unless you're launching something REALLY heavy. I'm going to try and get out there at least one day, maybe 2 or 3. It's not a terribly long drive for me. I have motors and matches coming in and would like to test DD on my small rocket before I attempt my L2 with dual deployment.
Ez2cDave
Well-Known Member
Of course, "Sport Range" has different connotations, LPR/MPR vs. HPR.
How many NARAM Competitors also fly HPR on the Sport Range ?
How many HPR flyers also participate in Competition, at NARAM ?
Dave F.
Ez2cDave
Well-Known Member
Simple solution . . . Fly larger diameter rockets with "Baby M" motors.
Depending on the motor used, keeping things under 8,000' AGL should be easy !
Dave F.
James Duffy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2009
- Messages
- 1,446
- Reaction score
- 1,733
It would be impossible to conceive of a more efficient way to destroy the NAR.
Off Grid Gecko
Well-Known Member
I can think of a couple. People just tossing ideas around. Agreeing or disagreeing seems fine but no reason that I see to default to "worst idea ever." That's just my opinion, though. Carry on.
CTimm
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2009
- Messages
- 722
- Reaction score
- 48
Exactly.
Even a limited-impulse sport range would work for the competitors, their families, and the casual flyers for the best promotion of rocketry - socializing.
