Quick A/C judging question

Mick asked:

The usual answer is no, BUT it depends on the a/c type. A few a/c had/have ailerons that actually droop with the flaps.

Rick

Oh, Oh! Flak suits everybody! Here comes that thread on IPMS judging again!

Bill Shuey

So what *if* the original had a broken control cable?

Not knowing the aircraft type and other circumstances, it's impossible to say whether it was wrong or not.

Some aircraft only had hydraulic controls and I could easily see both ailerons droop in this case.

Sten

Bill, how do you know it was an IPMS contest? He did not say that it was.

Woody

William H. Shuey wrote:

Yes...but remember..."judges" are regular people like every other modeler. They are not "better", in any way whatsoever. They have good days, and bad days. The same judges could look at the same models, on two consecutive days...and the results will be totally different. Their "opinion" is no more valid, or invalid, than any other modeler. The problem arises when "judges", especially at IPMS type shows, "annoint" themselves as experts.....

I've judged IPMS contests from local to National level and have yet to see the phenomenon you describe. All the judges I've known have gone to great lengths to be fair so that no contestant leaves disgruntled on their account. If you want to see what really happens volunteer to judge--it'll give you a whole new perspective.

Frank

Actually, I have judged....from local, to regional, to national level... at IPMS shows, and at "open" shows. The phenomenon I describe (at least in my experience, going back to 1983) happens far more often at IPMS shows (and sadly, the higher the level, the more it seems to happen...).

My whole point, was to not "take to task" the judges in the original posters point. The guys who judge, are no more knowledgeable, nor less knowledgeable; than those who do not judge. They are not "all knowing" (none of us are...). They miss things. They mis-interpret things. They have biases (all humans do). The lighting at the exhibition may not be the best (most model-show lighting can be generously described as "piss-poor"). Viewing angles may be poor (why can't IPMS adopt the MFCA standard of RAISING the tables to near eye-level?). These conditions can make a long afternoon of judginhg even more uncomfortable, thereby further influencing the judges' opinions.

Modelers need to understand that if their model fails to win at a contest....so what? That was just due to the judges' opinions, on a particular day. At the next show, against the same models, it just might win....even with the SAME judges. And if you win a "First Place" at a national show.....that does not necessarily mean your entry was the (carved in stone) best. At my first IPMS Nationals, with the first armor kit I EVER built, I won my category.....but to this day, I know that I just got lucky; that my entry was the one the judges happened to "like" on that day. I know that there were "better" entries.

Uhu219 wrote: : After recently attending a show, which had many good A/C entrants, the 1st : prize went to a model where the builder did some extra work w/ the control : surfaces. : Without detailed knowledge of what problems the other entries in the same category had, it is impossible to say. It is quite possible the judges noticed this, took it into consideration, and the model was still the best in its category that day, with that group of judges.

Typically, regardless of the sponsoring/sanctioning body, contests revolve around problems in the building and finishing of a model - seams, paint, decals, etc. Dropping both ailerons is a possible gaff, but may well come under the heading of "accuracy", which really should not be judged, although many people (typically those claiming the judges "annoint themselves as experts") believe to be the key criteria at contests.

If you notice, many models with dropped elevators do NOT have the stick in the full aft position...

Bruce

Accuracy does get judged, face it. Should it? Usually not--most of us only know what we get out of books and magazines, and these sources can differ. Even if a judge is going to consider accuracy, Bruce is right to point out that basics must be considered first.

The sort of accuracy that I suspect most judges will consider are things like elevator-stick inconsistencies, P-51s with inner wheel doors down but flaps up, or patently incorrect alignment (too much anhedral/dihedral, for example). I'm glad I wasn't judging the Bf 109T I saw with the neatly-folded wings--that edges into the zone of accuracy issues that probably should not be judged, even though everything I know about the sub-type tells me no Bf 109T was ever built with folding wings. The problem is that if accuracy is to be judged, then entries should not be victimized because they offer subject matter with which the judge is more familiar and thus more likely to find an accuracy flaw. However, it is impossible in most or all contests to find judges expert enough about all the entries. Trust me, in almost all cases, twenty or so models can be sorted into a first, second and third simply by looking for basic flaws.

Mark Schynert

Mark Schynert

I remember seeing a photo of a Corsair model with all 3 prop plades sitting on a bench & the hub still on the crankshaft. IIRC, it was in IPMS a year or 2 ago & won something. Problem is, that's not the way the real ones come apart.

The 109T-1did in fact have folding wings. Now whether or not they actually folded them or not is a different story. Only the early production types had the folding wing option. The later types (109T-2) did not have folding wings as the carrier project was dropped and the remaining planes were modified to have non folding wings. T-1 were upgraded to the T-2 when all the arrestor gear and wing fold mechanisms were removed. Planes built (T-1) when the carrier project was in full swing had folding wings when the type was being tested for carrier operations.

In most aircraft if the elevators are dropped then the stick should be forward not aft.

HERETIC!! :-)

Oxmoron1 MFE

And Francis L. Marshall ("Sea Eagles: The Messerschmitt Bf 109T," Air Research Publications, 1993) begs to differ. Interesting that there is not one photo of a Bf 109T with folded wings (or at least, that I've ever seen). Maybe you're right and I'm wrong, but it does illustrate rather forcefully the point I'm making about judging accuracy.

Mark Schynert

I hesitate to judge on "accuracy" mainly because I'm not an expert on all the a/c I'm judging. Let's say you're a P-51 expert, and can critique the canopy type, vertical fin extension, color of the main landing gear axle nut cotter pin, etc. But you are also judging a Northrop N3PB, about which you know nothing, so you assume everything is accurate. Not fair to the P-51 owner. Another problem I have with judging accuracy is that judges grade on things they know little about, or they don't think is "right." We are still making discoveries on things that happened a half century ago, and are now considered conventional wisdom, until some new discovery is made that repudiates the previous conventional wisdom (see the Bf 109T discussion). Finally,models can usually be judged by workmanship without having to rely on accuracy calls.

Curt

...er...that would be "stick in the full forward position" with the elevators "dropped"...and then only for a type with a non-hydraulically actuated stab.

And again, it depends on what type of aircraft is was...if is was a jet, it might have probably been correct...what WAS the model in question?..

Yes...and that is a philosophy that Bruce holds to (to great credit) when he coordinates judging. One other point to consider: In many, if not most cases; the builder of a particular model has probably done his own research. It is probable that he has done more research on the subject than the "judge for that day".

One semi-bizarre/humorous thing I have noticed; with regards to the difference between "aircraft guys" and "armor/diorama/figure" guys, when it comes to judging:

The "aircraft guys" tend to look at what has NOT been done to a kit. (kind of like starting at "100", and deducting as you go....)

The "armor/diorama/figure" guys tend to look at what HAS been done to a kit. (Like starting at "0", and awarding points as you go...)

Rick DeNatale wrote: : On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 22:11:07 -0600, Bruce Burden wrote: : :> If you notice, many models with dropped elevators do NOT :> have the stick in the full aft position... : : In most aircraft if the elevators are dropped then the stick should be : forward not aft. : DOH! Stupid irony. :-)

The armor collorary is tons of track sag between the sprocket and idler, yet crisp taught track between the idler/ sprocket and first/last roadwheels.

I have to say, I am pleased as to the reasoning that accuracy shouldn't be considered. Why folks don't realize they are only hurting their favorite subject is beyond me.

One thing I have noticed, and perhaps this is what Greg is commenting about, is that a strong personality can dictate what the 3 person IPMS(/USA) team does/behaves/ considers important. And, certainly the pressure to get things done quickly leads to mistakes. The only comment I have there is to note that its a team, although people to tend to follow "leader types".

Bruce