January 2000
Introduction:
The SWRA’s Mini-Reno warbird pylon racing event is quite unique in that one-half of each contestant’s final score at a race is determined by the quality of the replication of the model aircraft, as compared to the documentation provided of its full size counterpart. If the model is of a multi-engine aircraft, an additional percentage bonus will be added to the scale score after static judging has been completed. It is clear, therefore, that the scale score will be as important, and for multi-engine aircraft perhaps more important in determining the contestant’s final standing, than his/her flying score. For this reason, the quality and consistency of the scale judging work that judges perform is absolutely essential to the success of the event. Our goal in these rules & handbook is to provide a simple, uniform, and consistent method to use in evaluating the contestants’ models. We ask judges & contestants to remember that this is a sport scale event. Our emphasis is to allow the average modeler an opportunity to bring a sport scale model to this event, and be reasonably competitive if he/she has made a recognizable effort to replicate major scale features, finish, color, markings, & details of the full scale aircraft that is presented in their documentation. Some contestants will go far beyond this standard in presenting a highly detailed and very accurate scale racing model, because of their competitive nature and/or building skills, and they should be rewarded with a better scale score. The critical issue is in how much of a difference there is in awarded points between a well-executed sport scale model and a highly accurate pristine scale effort. At the other end of the spectrum; an out-of-scale, poorly executed, improperly colored, or badly repaired plane is still a roach, and should be scored accordingly. We would like to take this opportunity to thank the scale judges for assisting us in this difficult, but highly important aspect of our event.
Scale Rules:
1.0 Model Aircraft Qualifications:
The only models qualified to be entered in an SWRA event, (except for Novice class), must be scale models replicating (copying) heavier than air, fixed wing, piston engine powered, man carrying, military aircraft that were in production after January 1, 1937, or scale models of non-military aircraft that have raced in the unlimited category of the Reno or Mojave Air Races or in an unlimited air race affiliated with the Unlimited Air Racing Association. To "have raced" means that the aircraft must have crossed the starting line while participating in an official heat. Only aircraft that actually made flights can be selected as qualified subjects for this event. "Penguin" type ground trainers that were not meant to leave the ground, proposed designs, mock-ups, and actually constructed functional aircraft that were never flown cannot be used. Civilian markings, paint schemes, & modifications to military aircraft are allowed. Civilian aircraft that were not designed for, but were used by the military, will be allowed only if documented and presented in the military paint schemes and markings. Profile fuselages and models which only simulate scale aircraft in appearance, but whose basic design bears no relationship to the real aircraft, will not be allowed. All aircraft must have functional landing gear. Hand launched aircraft, or aircraft with take off dollies or similar add on mechanisms are not allowed. Obvious deviations from scale landing gear wheels, such as thin, disk-type "racing wheels", will not be allowed. The contest director may disqualify any entry that, in his/her opinion, is not a bona fide scale model that meets the intent of the event.
2.0 Proof of Fidelity to Scale:
Documentation, which provides proof of the model’s fidelity to scale, is the responsibility of the contestant. Documentation must consist of one page for Outline and one page for Color, Finish, and Markings, with both sides of each page being available for use. One additional single-sided page for written descriptions of the model, will be utilized when required, or when the contestant deems it to be beneficial. Page size is limited to 11" x 15" maximum.
2.1 Accuracy of Outline:
To be eligible for receiving points for accuracy of outline, the contestant must provide one of the two following types of documentation:
2.1(A) A published or copyrighted 3-view drawing done in line, tone, or color, but not in shadow boxes, showing at least the front, top, and side views of the aircraft. Generalized or generic drawings that sometimes come with the instructions of a kit are not considered "published" or "copyrighted" material and therefore are not allowed. Minimum size must be sufficient to generally fill one 8 1/2 x 11" page.
2.1(B) an assembled, unmodified, and unpainted commercial scale plastic model kit produced by a plastic model manufacturer.
Photographs or copies of photos, of the actual aircraft modeled may be used to augment the 3-view drawing or the plastic model when there are outline differences between the photos and the 3-view drawing, or the plastic model. The outline shown in the submitted augmentation photos shall take precedence. This is allowed because the full size aircraft being modeled have frequently been modified, and there may be no accurate 3-view outline drawings or plastic models available of the full size aircraft, as it was modified. Photos without a submitted 3-view drawing or a plastic model are not acceptable by themselves to serve as proof of outline, and no outline points will be awarded by the outline judge in the absence of the documentation required in 2.1(A) or 2.1(B) of these rules. Furthermore, contestants submitting augmentation photos intended to document outline differences in full scale aircraft and the 3-view or plastic model, must declare their intention in writing using the additional single-sided page as allowed in paragraph 2.0 above. This written declaration must identify which submitted photos are to be used for outline purposes, and must also briefly describe the major outline differences shown in those photos. Outline differences in these photos, that are not listed on the contestant’s declaration, are still required to be modeled to avoid reductions in the outline points score.
To be eligible to receive points for color, finish, and markings, the contestant must provide one of the three types of documentation listed below. Color, finish, and marking documentation must minimally show a side view, and either a top view, or bottom view of the full-scale version of the aircraft being modeled. Bisected views of the top and bottom are acceptable but symmetry of colors and markings will be assumed, except when noted. Oblique angles of the views are permitted.
2.2(A) Up to 6 color photographs or color copies of color photos of the real full size aircraft being modeled, not to exceed the limitation of using both sides of an 11" x 15" size page in the documentation package. Color photographs of other models are not acceptable documentation.
2.2(B) Up to 6 color pictures or copies of color pictures of the real full size aircraft being modeled, not to exceed the limitation of using both sides of an 11" x 15" size page. "Pictures" include copyrighted historical artists’ renditions in publications, books, magazines, etc. that are intended to be a serious effort to accurately document and preserve the color and marking schemes of real aircraft that actually existed at one time. An example would be the color side-and-bottom-of-one-wing view of aircraft documented in Squadron Signals publications. Most paintings, watercolors, sketches, box-top and other art included with model kits are generally not considered accurate serious historical artists’ renditions, and are not acceptable as color, finish, and marking documentation.
2.2(C) Notes and diagrams of colors and markings on published or copyrighted 3-view drawings, or on black and white photographs or pictures, may be used. Written descriptions of colors and markings are acceptable when accompanied by published or copyrighted 3-view drawings or black & white photographs or pictures, which depict the locations and boundaries of the colors and markings.
2.3 Lack of Documentation:
If a contestant provides no documentation at all, judges will apply a 0 (zero) point score for Outline, for Color, Finish & Markings, and will take the maximum point deductions for items in sections 3 & 4 of Craftsmanship. Sections 1 & 2 of the Craftsmanship sheet only, may be judged without documentation.
Technological advances in computers, scanning devices, color printers, facsimile and copy machines, etc., have provided the modeler with wonderful opportunities to access and retrieve aircraft documentation from virtually anywhere in the world. It is fully acceptable to use this technology to access, download, and print 3-view drawings, color pictures, written documentation, etc., and to use such documentation in SWRA events, if unaltered. This same technology has provided the opportunity for skilled individuals, who are so inclined, to alter or edit documentation, in order to make the documentation better match the outline, colors, or markings of the model they are presenting to the judges. Some individuals may be tempted to use this technology, or simpler means such as whiting out or erasing details on a 3-view drawing and recopying the drawing, to achieve the same end. Altering any documentation used in an SWRA event for the purpose of making the documentation more closely match the model will be viewed as cheating, is considered unsportsmanlike conduct, and can result in the disqualification of the contestant without refund of entry fee. Contestants should be able & prepared to identify the original source of their documentation for verification, if requested by the contest director.
3.2 The judges may not pick-up or examine the models before judging, and may not during the course of judging examine the model from any distance less than those specified in section 3.1 above.
3.3 Cockpit and cabin interiors, even if visible, will not be considered in the scoring. All other visible features may be considered.
3.4 Subjects having uncowled radial engines or configurations whose shape does allow sufficient nose, or cowling sizes (as dictated by the scale of the model built), to completely conceal the engine, will not be downgraded in static judging. Additionally, when portions of the engine or muffler are exposed, or non-scale openings are required for engine cooling, the model will not be downgraded in static judging. This does not relieve the modeler of the requirement to have a cowl on the model when the full size aircraft was so equipped.
3.5 No change in the model between static judging and flying will be allowed except as noted below:
3.5(A) The propeller may be changed.
3.5(B) The spinner may be changed with one of similar size and color.
3.5(C) Any type of radio antenna may be added.
3.5(D) Sharp or pointed objects such as pitot tubes, antenna masts, guns, and rockets may be removed.
If a contestant’s model is damaged during the racing portion of the event, and it is repaired or modified to continue to fly in the event, and the model’s scale appearance is altered from when it was static judged, a penalty of 15% of the total unadjusted static score will be assessed. This includes any missing item that would have affected the static score of the model, such as the cowl, canopy, landing gear doors, spinner, etc. It is the contestant’s responsibility to report these changes to the contest director. Failure to inform the contest director will result in disqualification of the contestant.
3.6 Back-up aircraft will be judged in the same manner as any primary aircraft.
A maximum total of 100 static points are available to be earned by each single-engine model. Available points will be divided among the three judging categories as follows:
Accuracy of Outline – 40 points
Color, Finish, & Markings – 30 points
Craftsmanship – 30 points
In the event
that there is a tie for any of the three places for top static (best
of scale) awards, the tie will be broken by comparing scores for
the separate judging categories, in the following order:
|
||
Model aircraft that have more than one engine will receive a multi-engine aircraft bonus, which adjusts their judged static score. Twin engine aircraft will receive a 10% bonus added to their unadjusted static score. Entries with more than two engines will receive a bonus of 10% of their unadjusted static score plus and additional 5% of their unadjusted static score for each engine over the initial two. The multi-engine aircraft bonus will count toward the contestant’s total combined static and flying score in determining his/her final ranking in the race, and will also count toward his/her ranking for combined points champion. Multi-engined bonus points will not, however, be used in determining ranking for top static (best of scale) trophies.
4.2 Back-up Aircraft:
If a competitor determines that it is no longer possible or prudent to continue flying his/her primary aircraft in the race, he/she may switch to a registered back-up aircraft. The lower of the two static scores between the primary and the back-up aircraft will be used in determining the competitor’s final ranking in the race, and for combined points champion awards consideration. Competitors must inform the contest director when they are switching to a back-up aircraft. Once a competitor has elected to switch to his/her back-up aircraft, the lower of the static scores will be used, and the primary aircraft will not be flown again in that event.
5.0 Requests for Changing Rules:
Any SWRA member in good standing may submit a written proposal to the Executive Committee to change the rules of the SWRA. Refer to Section 2 of Article XVII (Standing Rules) of the SWRA By-Laws document in this handbook, and follow the established procedure for proposing a rule change.
Scale Judges’ Guide:
Judges should begin by reviewing all of the documentation before looking at the model. Be sure to read any written material carefully. Often the modeler will give specific written instructions as to what parts of the documentation are intended to be used for outline, or for color, finish, & makings. For example, there may not be an accurate 3-view drawing that shows specific outline aspects of the version of the full-scale aircraft modeled, and the contestant may have included augmentation photographs which contain outline information that will take precedence over the 3-view drawing in the documentation package. He/she may, or may not want the judge to use such outline augmentation photos for color, finish, & markings. Contestants should make such written instructions very clear. Also, judges should look for instances where the documentation provided is not acceptable as defined in the scale rules. Such cases should be brought to the contest director’s attention immediately.
There are three general categories that will be evaluated during the judging process. The first is Outline, the second is Color, Finish, & Markings, and the third is Craftsmanship. These may be broken down and handled by separate judges. The categories are distinct and separate from each other and, in no way, should the score of one category influence the score of another.
Judging Outline – 40 Points
The outline judging sheet has been developed to make the task of judging the scale outline of a model aircraft as simplified as possible. The sheet is broken down into three sections - side view, top view, and front view. Have the competitor place his/her model on the table 15 feet in front of you, displaying the side view. Review the competitor’s documentation and find the 3-view drawing or a scale plastic model, (with or without augmentation photos), provided as proof of outline. If neither of these two types of documentation are provided, deduct 40 points at the bottom of the page and write in a 0 (zero) for the total score for outline. Compare the outline of the model with the outline presented in the documentation for each of the items listed under side view on the outline judging sheet. If, for each item on the sheet, the model outline is not the same as the outline presented in the documentation, deduct the full number of points shown next to each item inside the parenthesis. If the outline of each item on the model is accurate, leave the space inside the parenthesis blank. As you proceed down the list, have the contestant change and hold the position the model for the top view and front view, as you need it.
Judging Color, Finish, & Markings – 30 Points
Score the color, finish, & markings on the judging sheet provided using the following general guideline. Minor deviations are a deduction of 0.5 points, and major deviations are a deduction of 1 full point. A minor deviation should be thought of as a variance that is just barely noticeable, and detection of a minor deviation should require more than a momentary study of the model. A major deviation, on the other hand, is a clearly visible variance that should be immediately noticeable.
The first step is to review the documentation to find out what has been provided to document the color & markings of the aircraft. Color photos, color pictures, or black and white documentation with notations or written documentation that show the location(s) of color(s) and markings, as described in section 2.2 (c) of the scale rules, are acceptable. If at least one of the above have not been furnished, or if the color & markings documentation is not at least similar to the model being presented, use lines 1 and/or 3 of the Color, Finish, & Markings Judging Sheet to deduct 15 points for color and finish, and/or 15 points for markings, as appropriate.
If the documentation is OK, score color by considering the aircraft as having three distinct parts; wing, fuselage, and tail group. Assess a 1 point major penalty for each color present on the full size aircraft that is clearly the wrong color, missing, or in the wrong place on each of the three distinct parts of the model. Place a tick mark in the box marked "major" for the wing, fuselage, or tail group as appropriate for each major and individual color variance noted. Remember, as a major deviation, we are talking about a totally incorrect color, (not a minor deviation in the shade of the color), or a color on the full size aircraft that is absent on the model, or a color that has obviously been applied in the wrong place on the model. Consider each color on the full size aircraft separately and compare each to the model for potential major point deductions on the wing, fuselage, and tail group.
Once the major portion of the color judging has been considered, you are ready to judge for minor (0.5 point) deviations relating to minor deviations in color location. Once again, consider the model divided into three distinct parts. For each minor deviation in color placement, such as on military aircraft where the camouflage pattern is somewhat off, or painted stripes or patterns on civilian aircraft where the width of the stripe or pattern is a little off, place a tick mark in the box marked "minor"corresponding to the wing, fuselage, or tail group.
Now you are ready to evaluate the finish of the model for the correct sheen or glossiness. Examine the documentation carefully to see if you can determine if the finish is shiny, dull, or somewhere in between. Typically, anti-glare panels painted on the nose in front of the cockpit are a flat (dull) finish, as are anti-skid walking strips painted on the wing. Wartime camouflage paint schemes on military aircraft were also typically flat (dull); however, some restored camouflage paint schemes may be in high gloss paint for ease of maintenance. Observe the model to see if the finish is too shiny or too dull for each major color presented, in comparison with the documentation provided. If the finish on the full size airplane color was dull, and the finish on the same color of the model is high gloss, that would be a major variance on each of the three distinct parts of the model where the finish of a color is incorrect. If the full size aircraft had a finish in between high gloss and dull, and the model has either a dull or a high gloss finish, that would be a minor variance on each of the three distinct parts of the model where the finish of a color is incorrect. If you are unable to determine the level of gloss or dullness from the documentation, do not deduct any points.
Finally, we are ready to score the markings. In this section, the model is NOT divided into three distinct parts, but we will use the major and minor variance scoring system. Major variances include missing markings that would be clearly visible at the scale to which the model is built, markings that are obviously too large or too small, markings that are significantly out of position or very poorly aligned, markings that are the wrong shape, or markings that are obviously the wrong color. Minor variances include missing markings that would be quite small on the model such as fuel filler caps, pilot names near the canopy, crew name credits on landing gear covers, etc. Also, small inaccuracies in the size, shape, location, or alignment of larger markings would be considered minor variances. Place tick marks in the appropriate major or minor box for each variance noted in the markings.
Judging Craftsmanship – 30 Points
The third and final category of scale judging is craftsmanship. In this category we evaluate the quality of the model’s construction, the degree to which the modeler has faithfully reproduced the working flying surfaces and retractable landing gear of the full size aircraft, and whether at least some scale detailing is present on the model, if appropriate. A craftsmanship judging sheet has been developed to provide a simplified check-off system, with the number of points to be deducted for each noted defect or missing item(s). Points that are to be deducted are to be written inside the parenthesis to the right of the described item. If the item is present & correct on the model, nothing is to be placed inside the parenthesis.
Most of these items are self-explanatory; however, some will be described in more detail, to help clarify the intent. In section 2, the first item calls for the identification of "poor joints". Typical defects in this area include a wide or uneven gap between a control surface and its attachment point, wide or uneven gaps between major components such as the wing and fuselage, or poorly fitted cowls or engine nacelles which result in gaps or highly visible joints instead of a smooth transition to the fuselage or wing. In section 3, item "a", the judge is asked to evaluate if the main gear and nose and/or tail gear are retractable, if the full size aircraft was so equipped. Because this is static judging, no demonstration of radio control features is desired or allowed. If the model has recessed gear wells in the wing or fuselage, the associated gear will be considered retractable. Outlined, painted, or no gear wells do not satisfy the requirement. In section 3, item "b", the judge is asked to evaluate whether the ailerons, elevator(s), and rudder(s) are modeled and working in the full-scale shape. Surfaces that have merely been drawn, painted, or outlined in scale shape, where the full-scale shape surface does not actually move, do not satisfy this requirement. The one exception to the working scale shaped surface requirement is flaps. Most racing models do not require flaps, and the extra weight resulting from installing scale working flaps is imprudent in our venue. The flaps must only be drawn, painted, or outlined in to avoid deduction of points.
Amount of Time Spent Judging:
Judges are cautioned about spending too much time in judging each aircraft. Of particular importance, is not spending a large amount of time on the first few aircraft judged, and then speeding up or being less critical in judging subsequent aircraft after realizing how long it will take to complete the judging job. This results in unfair lower scoring of the aircraft at the beginning of the judging line. Consistency of judging is very important in making sure each competitor gets a fair and equal review by each judge. Keeping this in mind, a typical SWRA event averages a little over 60 aircraft that need to be judged, including back-ups. Consider that about 1 minute of time will be spent in moving each aircraft and documentation package from one judging category (table) to the next. With these figures in mind, the following list will guide you in how long the judging process can take:
@ 2 judging min. per aircraft, per category, 20 planes per hour = 3 hours of judging time.
@ 3 judging min. per aircraft, per category, 15 planes per hour = 4 hours of judging time.
@ 4 judging min. per aircraft, per category,
12 planes per hour = 5 hours of judging time.
@ 5 judging min. per aircraft, per category, 10 planes per hour = 6 hours of judging time.
If there are 70 airplanes to judge, the total hours of judging time go up to 3.5 hrs, 4.7 hrs, 5.8 hrs, and 7 hours respectively.