from the "Model Rocketeer", February 2004 Rules Revision Process 2003-2004 The RCP process for changing rules in the NAR Sporting Code a.k.a. "The Pink Book" is defined in the sporting code under section "f" of the appendix. The cycle for proposed changes now runs in a one-year cycle. The following timeline will complete the current cycle. The previous years cycle was combined with this year. Only one proposal was received for the previous year and has been included with this year's cycle. Take the time to read each of the proposals carefully. I also recommend that you have conversation with your fellow competitors and their opinions about the pros and cons of each proposal. Some clubs even take time at meetings to discuss the RCP proposals. Every NAR member has the opportunity to comment on the proposals. Try to be concise and brief with your comments, remember everybody reading the Model Rocketeer will see your comments to review and consider whether they are for, or against the proposal. The comments will be published right here in the Model Rocketeer for all to read. You may send your comments to me either electronically at zog139@yahoo.com or you can mail them to my address: Jim Filler NAR Rules Revision Chairman. 68 Greenknoll Blvd. Hanover, Md. 21076 All comments by the membership have to include your name and NAR number. All comments must be received by no later then March 15th 2004. Comments will be published with the ballot in the April "Model Rocketeer". Proposals that receive a 66% vote for, are considered passing and will take effect as of the new contest year starting July 1,2004. However, any changes that do pass will have no effect on NARAM-46 which is the culmination of the 2003-2004 contest year which closes on June 30,2004. RCP # 2003-101 TYPE: [x] Regular [ ] Interpretation [ ] Urgent [ ] Emergency [ ] Safety AUTHOR Bruce Markielewski 4055 S. Bannock St. Englewood, CO 80110-4603 Email: markielewski@purplemtn.com NAR # 38377 C BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED CHANGE: Adjust the weighting factors for all NAR contest events so that each value is a multiple of 4. STATE LOGIC AND INTENT OF CHANGE: This change will allow much more flexibility in choosing events for Section, Local, Open and Regional contests. It will allow many more combinations of events to be selected and still be able to fill the maximum weighting factors allowed. The need to include or reject events based on weighting factor values just to meet the maximums will be significantly reduced. This is because the maximums for the contest types (40, 60, and 80) are all multiples of 4. EFFECT, IF ANY, ON CURRENT COMPETITION AND NAR RECORDS: None, other than slight changes in event weighting factors. EXACT WORDING FOR RULE REVISION AS IT SHOULD APPEAR: Sections 20 through 63, and Appendix B: Weighting Factor and Points Chart. See attached sheet for updated weighting chart for Appendix B. Sections 20 through 63 should be updated to match this chart. ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Event | 1/4 | 1/2 | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | | A | A | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Altitude | 8 | 8 | 8 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 16 | 16 | | | | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Boost | 16 | 16 | 16 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 24 | 24 | 28 | Glider | | | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Cluster | 12 | 12 | 16 | 16 | 20 | | | | | Altitude | | | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Dual Egg | | | | | 28 | 28 | 28 | 32 | 32 | Altitude | | | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Dual Egg | | | | | 28 | 28 | 28 | 32 | 32 | Duration | | | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Eggloft | | | | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 24 | 24 | Altitude | | | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Eggloft | | | | 16 | 16 | 16 | 20 | 20 | 24 | Duration | | | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Flex-Wing | 16 | 16 | 16 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 24 | 24 | 28 | Glider | | | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Helicopter | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 24 | 24 | 24 | 28 | 28 | Duration | | | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Parachute | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 12 | | | | | Duration | | | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Payload | | | 16 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 20 | 20 | 24 | | | | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Rocket | 20 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 24 | 24 | 24 | 28 | 28 | Glider | | | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Scale | 24 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 32 | 32 | 32 | 32 | Altitude | | | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Streamer | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 12 | 16 | Duration | | | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Super-Roc | 12 | 12 | 12 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 20 | 20 | 20 | Altitude | | | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| Super-Roc | 12 | 12 | 12 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 20 | 20 | 20 | Duration | | | | | | | | | | ------------|-----|-----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----| NOTE: Add 4 to Duration Weighting factors for Multi-round events -------------------------------|----| Event | WF | -------------------------------|----| Drag Race | 4 | Plastic Model Conversion | 28 | Precision Altitude | 8 | Precision Duration | 8 | Radio Control Glider | 32 | Random Altitude | 12 | Random Duration | 12 | Research & Development | 36 | Scale | 32 | Science Fiction & Future Scale | 20 | Space Systems | 28 | Sport Scale | 20 | Spot Landing | 4 | Super Scale | 40 | -------------------------------|----| RCP # 2003-202 TYPE: [x] Regular [ ] Interpretation [ ] Urgent [ ] Emergency [ ] Safety AUTHOR Bruce Markielewski 4055 S. Bannock St. Englewood, CO 80110-4603 Email: markielewski@purplemtn.com NAR # 38377 C BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED CHANGE: As part of the Research and Development Competition event, add, as a required element of the report. the time spent on various aspects of the project. STATE LOGIC AND INTENT OF CHANGE: Including the time spent on an R&D project is at least as important as the money spent, and should be considered when judging the event. EFFECT, IF ANY, ON CURRENT COMPETITION AND NAR RECORDS: None EXACT WORDING FOR RULE REVISION AS IT SHOULD APPEAR: Add the following line to Section 63.5 after the line "The facilities used": The approximate amount of time in hours spent on the project. Include times for separate aspects of the project (research, development, testing, data collection, etc.) RCP # 2003-303 TYPE: [x] Regular [ ] Interpretation [ ] Urgent [ ] Emergency [ ] Safety AUTHOR Bruce Markielewski 4055 S. Bannock St. Englewood, CO 80110-4603 Email: markielewski@purplemtn.com NAR #38377 C BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED CHANGE: Limit the number of competition points that can be amassed during the contest year before the National Championship contest. STATE LOGIC AND INTENT OF CHANGE: The intent of this proposal is to promote an increase in the participation and level competition at the NAR National Championship event and more participation in Pre- NARAM competition. Due to the current Contest Year Points system, the NAR National Championship event is unique among all other sport or hobby national competitions in that the participants do not enter the event at the same level. Over the last seven years, on average, there were only five competitors in each division within 2000 points of each other at NARAM. Below that level, the perception (and generally the reality) is that there is little chance of winning a National Championship. The points differential is simply too much to overcome. Earning enough points to compete for a National Championship is a yearlong commitment. The opportunities to earn Pre-NARAM points vary greatly across the country in contest availability, types of contest events available, competition level and participation, travel distance, cost, weather conditions and scheduling. Because of these types of issues, there becomes a large disparity between the abilities of a competitor and the number of points that one can earn. Participating in Local or Section (or even Open) contests is difficult for those looking to earn contest points due to the low number of points available in these events. The inability to earn enough points to compete nationally has deterred many competitors. Many have suggested removing the Pre-NARAM points completely from the National Championships and having the NAR Champions determined solely at NARAM. While this would level the playing field for determining National Champi- ons, I believe this would be detrimental to competition as it would result in a significant drop in the holding and participation in Pre-NARAM events. My proposal is to place a limit on the number of points that a competitor or team can earn before NARAM. I am proposing that the limit be set to the equivalent of the maximum points available in two Regional Contests. Currently, this would place the limit at 4800 points. I would also propose that because of this limit, the limit on the number of weighting factors that a competitor may participate in be removed. EFFECT, IF ANY, ON CURRENT COMPETITION AND NAR RECORDS: There would be no effect on NAR records. I believe this change will allow all competitors a chance to enter the National Championships at an equal level, and give competitors a clear goal to shoot for during the Pre-NARAM contest year. This will make the national contest much more competitive, and place more emphasis on performing well at the National Contest. It will also promote more participation in Pre- NARAM contests as more competitors feel they have a chance to compete at a national level, and encourage groups to hold more contests for competitors to earn points. The downside is that Pre-NARAM point totals will not have the current "Championship" status due to the many ties at the point limit, but I don't see this as a serious issue as these results were never given the status or recognition level of the National Championships. The same is most likely true for the NAR Meet Champion awards, as in almost every case, those winning the Meet would be the National Champion. While those who would score higher under the current system would have less of an advantage with the point limits, they would still have an advantage in not having to compete in as many Pre-NARAM events to reach the limit, thereby having more time and resources for preparing for the National Contest. Other positives are lowering costs for National Championship awards and shortening the length of awards ceremonies. Overall, I believe the changes would cause a net increase in NAR competition, participation, and the level of competition both at Pre- Naram events, and the National Championships. EXACT WORDING FOR RULE REVISION AS IT SHOULD APPEAR: SEC# 6.3.5 Change "competitions totaling 12 Contest Factors." to: " competitions totaling l2 Contest Factors when point total limits are ignored." SEC# 6.7 Remove the sentence beginning "No member, team, or section may officially enter a sanctioned contest and be awarded competition points ..." SEC# 13.8 A competitor or team shall be limited to a maximum of 4800 pre-NARAM contest points during the contest year. SEC# 13.9 Add the following after the 1st sentence: "(NARAM and pre-NARAM awards may not be applicable due to limits on pre-NARAM points)." RCP # 2003-404 TYPE: [x] Regular [ ] Interpretation [ ] Urgent [ ] Emergency [ ] Safety AUTHOR George Gassaway 1600 Oxmoor Road Homewood, AL 35209 Email: 70760.2560@compuserve.com NAR# 18723 C Division BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED CHANGE: To fix bugs in the staging rule and definitions. One which has been interpreted to disallow air-starting in single staged events. Another being lack of a requirement for stages to actually separate. STATE LOGIC AND INTENT OF CHANGE: A rules revision that took effect in 1993 involved changes to the stage definition which was intended to allow clustered scale models like Deltas, Soyuz, and so forth to be able to separate the boosters without those boosters being considered to be multiple stages, when rule 3.4 did not allow more than three operable stages. Unfortunately the revised wording which referred to distinct thrusting phases caused a problem to crop up regarding air-starting of motors. It has sometimes been interpreted to mean that air-started motors constitute an additional stage, which is a problem for single-staged events. Interpreting air-starts as staging was never the intent of that 1993 revision There was also a loophole which did not actually require stages to separate in flight. This revision is to fix those bugs. Please take note this will have no effect on Cluster Altitude, which is the only event in the Pink Book which specifically disallows air-starting. Should this revision pass, air-starts will remain disallowed in Cluster Altitude. EFFECT, IF ANY, ON CURRENT COMPETITION AND NAR RECORDS Would allow air-starts in single-staged events which otherwise do not prohibit air-starts. Would bring stage separation back to the stage definitions. No known effect on records. EXACT WORDING FOR RULE REVISION AS IT SHOULD APPEAR: SEC# 3.4 Stages "There shall be no more than three consecutively fired stages. The staged configuration of the model is considered to be that of the model at the instant of first motion on the launcher." ALSO: SEC# Appendix A Glossary "stage: Any portion or portions of the model airframe containing one or more model rocket motors. An unpowered portion of the model is not considered a stage. Clustered motors that ignite at the same time , but may be contained in multiple airframe portions such as strap-on boosters which separate in flight (i.e. - Delta, Soyuz), are considered to be one stage. Upper stages must involve ignition and separation from the airframe in order to count as an additional stage. Air-starting of one or more additional motors, which do not involve separation from the model, is not considered to be an additional stage." RCP # 2003-505 TYPE: [x] Regular [ ] Interpretation [ ] Urgent [ ] Emergency [ ] Safety AUTHOR Steve Foster RD 1 Box 2722 Leechburg, PA 15656 Email: stevef@highvision.net NAR #72814 Division C BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED CHANGE: Add the following definition in the Glossary Section - Measurements: Unless otherwise specified, measurements required for judging shall be taken with the most accurate device available and rounded off to the nearest millimeter. STATE LOGIC AND INTENT OF CHANGE: This will allow scale judges to use the most convenient and accurate method of measuring models. This would also allow competitors to know with certainty if the model will quality without having to measure it themselves with a highly precise and or expensive device. All modelers and judges will be able to make these measure- ments with a ruler that has millimeters if that is the most precise device available. Without a defined degree of measurement it is left as an unknown and can change from meet to meet based on the contest directors and/or judges discretion. EFFECT, IF ANY, ON CURRENT COMPETITION AND NAR RECORDS None EXACT WORDING FOR RULE REVISION AS IT SHOULD APPEAR: Add the following definition in Appendix A (Glossary) Measurements: Unless otherwise specified, measurements required for judging shall be taken with the most accurate device available, and rounded off to the nearest millimeter. RCP # 2003-606 TYPE: [x] Regular [ ] Interpretation [ ] Urgent [ ] Emergency [ ] Safety AUTHOR Jeff Vincent Box 523 Slingerlands, NY 12159 Email: jvincent@acmenet.net BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED CHANGE: Create a 1/8A motor class and 1/8A class events. STATE LOGIC AND INTENT OF CHANGE: With the introduction of Quest Micro-Max motors, hobbyists now have a sub-1/4A class motor. The small physical size and limited lifting potential of these motors take the skills of miniaturization and lightweight building to a whole new level. It has been proven to be a viable competition class by individuals and sections (i.e.: PSC and ASTRE in the Northeast). Unfortunately, these efforts towards NAR- sanctioned 1/8A events have had to be done via 1/4A events flown under "gentlemen's agreements" (and thus requiring the full cooperation of all participants). Also, exceptional performances in these unofficial 1/8A events are not recognized (unless they exceed the current NAR 1/4A record). Creating a 1/8A motor class and corresponding events would provide a stable venue for competition and recognition of excellence in this unique genre. EFFECT, IF ANY, ON CURRENT COMPETITION AND NAR RECORDS No effect on current records. New records will be added to each event effected One more motor class to choose from when creating meets. Contestants will find that lightweight 1/4A models will be flyable in 1/8A events. There will be greater experimentation with lightweight materials and models. EXACT WORDING FOR RULE REVISION AS IT SHOULD APPEAR: Sec # 4.6 Add: 1/8A [0.00-0.3125], Change: 1/4A [0.3126-0.625] Sec #20.2 Add: 1/8A 9 Sec #21.6 Add: 1/8A 12.5 25 13 Sec #23.5 Add: 1/8A x2 12 Sec #30.2 Add: 1/8A 7 40 Sec #31.4 Add: 1/8A 8 20 Sec #32.4 Add: 1/8A 21 20 Sec #33.5 Add: 1/8A 12.5 25 12 Sec #36.3 Add: 1/8A 19 30 Sec #37.3 Add: 1/8A 21 30 Sec #38.3 Add: 1/8A 19 30 Sec #51.5 Add: 1/8A 25