IMPBA scale rules

[Gale54]

Wes, the scale rules for IMPBA states your boat is legal. But, the reason it was looked at is the after plane is long and your boat has a swim deck. The boat you made yours off of was a back up hull leased from Fred Leland Not the boat that hit the wall in Detroit. It does not have a swim deck and the rear shoes are much shorter. The hole back end of your boat is wrong. Look at the very picture you used for your scale.

http://cdenslow.smugmug.com/Unlimited-Hydroplanes/2010-Season-UH/2010-San-Diego-Friday/13828162_yZSsw#1014513603_q7MJY

Whats it matter Wes race your boat and have fun. Play station looks better all the time to me. Call of duty anyone?

 

[Bigbird]

Don, we have always tried to strive for a true 1/8 scale class. Our way of running the class leans toward the NAMBA rules in that the boats are true images of the real boats. Having said that, if you want IMPBA to change their rules, you need to go to the source. Write a new set of rules for 1/8th scale class and see if you can get IMPBA to adopt them. Until then the class is run as is. Just toy boats, remember...

BB

 

[Douglas P Shepherd]

I have to say that, well none BB . This is the bottom line!!!! TOY BOATS The class is only as good as the rules will allow! Doug Shepherd

 

[Gale54]

Uhm, shows me for speaking up.

 

[shann harrison]

I agree too disagree.But where is the lines drawn.this has always been an issue that seems to raise its ugly head now then.More reasons for me not to even run scale anymore.IMPBA says lenght x width.plain and simple.NAMBA is everything in between.lenght width pickle fork, afterplane, tunnel width.If this is the case build it as NAMBA put it in black and white either way it will be legal to run in IMPBA.Could you please sum this up your a little vague as to make changes in what areas? Not trying to be strong tongued but.How scale is scale honestly.I could go on BUT.Its like Doug said Toy boats.race em have fun theres so many decreaces in scale boats already when should the line be drawn?Guys like myself included give up and drop the classs due to so much political crap over this class.Shann

 

[Douglas P Shepherd]

NO , THANK YOU DON for showing use direction, Doug

 

[Bert Dygert]

Guys,

I have to say I take pride in building a close to scale as possible. I do believe that the IMPBA rule need some work. My belief that a scale hull should be built and raced in the same hull configuration as the hull it is scaled from. Most buliders myself and Doug included use the NAMBA Master hull list for the baseline of our hulls. After all you never know where one of your boats will end up racing it could be race in NAMBA, or IMPBA or RC Unlimiteds.

Just my 2 cents

Bert Dygert

 

[Don Ferrette]

Rules ..... yup everyone hates them. However they are a necessary evil ESPECIALLY in scale. The scale rules were actually updated (voted on in December 2007 ballot #07-005) but the not in the rulebook .... yet. That has been a disaster all it's own but we VERY close to having the updated rulebook on line, thank Kevin Sheren for spending far too much of his time getting all that mess straightened out. And as for the scale rules themselves...... they need to be tighter than other classes as the whole point is to replicate REAL unlimited hydroplanes that raced ...... and not bastardize the class with a bunch of one off boats that may have been tested once or were only display boats. Sorry if that ruffles some feathers but that's how it should be, models of the real boats that qualified, attempted to qualify or raced ....... not some one off "test boat" B)

 

[RodneyPierce]

**OT** Hey Don, glad to see you got back to posting :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Greg Hahn]

Fidelity to scale is completely dependent on the amount of accurate documentation available. As the rules get tighter, the mumber of do-able boats gets proportionally smaller!

The rules must be written within the confines of what can be accurately proven and in my opinion there's not much here that can be accurately proven outside of the master hull list dimensions, so the rules must reflect that lack of documentation.

There are so many modifications done to the full scale boats almost weekly, or at least yearly that being truly accurate seems next to impossible. I was talking to Dave V. here at the AMA Nats a few weeks ago about small design changes and mods he's made on the Quatar boat that are not easily seen in a handfull of photos. He started in and I quickly realized the list was long and so my idea of creating a truly accurate boat will be difficult at best.

Without an approved three view drawing we're essentially fishing in the dark on Hull shapes, arcs, tangents, swim decks, sponson angles and so on!

I would hate to see the rules get in the way of promoting the class and interfearing with the enjoyment factor. I remember Mikey S. one time saying something about " in the spirit of the class"!

I agree with Don F. on the issue of "one off's" and "experimental" stuff. The boats should have raced or at least qualified.

Coming from Scale Aircraft as I do I'll have to say that Scale Hydros are very frustrating to me because of the extreme lack of documentation. I enjoy it, but it's frustrating!

gh

 

[P THOMAS]

Yea get your pictures, then get more pictures then build a boat.

Also, the know it alls dont have pictures either I bet, so protest the hull if it is really against the rules or shut up and lets race boats.

 

[Dasboatman]

Hey Greg,

I agree 100% with your comments. The only real available documentation we have is the Master Hull Roster (MHR) and photographs.Within the MHR we have annotations "M" - measurement of the real boat, and "P" - taken from plans of the real boat.

A major difference I see between Scale airplane and Scale Unlimited boats is "Production numbers". For airplanes we have very accurate 3 view engineering drawings of the aircraft, and engineering drawings of sub componets also. I don't believe they exist for Unlimited hydroplanes, or, if they do - are only available to the builders. Roger Newton's plans have been a source to many boaters for many years, and are the best we as modelers have. Roger did more for Scale model hydroplane racing than anyone. I doubt his contributions will ever be equaled. But I have often wondered what the reference source for Roger's drawings really were. His frame plans were drawn and hulls close to those were listed under that plan set. Over the years I have found items that are not correct. Example: the 108 plan. I was building MHR 7474 hulls, and a Friend wanted a 7207 hull. Measurements are close but reguire a little "Swag" of the 108 plan to be accurate.

I believe Scale boaters fall within a wide spectrum. At one end is the racer - not really concerned with how accurate his hull is - just loves to race. On the other end is the full out Scale builder. These boats are absolute works of art - may or may not be able to race. At one point, there was a requirement to score 50 points in order to qualify for Concours. I have seen boaters just make two starts to fulfil this requirement. I have also seen absolutely beautiful Scale model race with the best of them.

Scale is not for everyone. For those that don't like to follow guidelines of a Rule Book and don't want to go through the trouble of building Scale looking boats - - there are Hydro classes, and Sport hydro classes within NAMBA and IMPBA. Scale has always been a difficult class to maintain good numbers of. R/C Unlimiteds have done it very successfully for many years. Electric R/C Unlimited, and Pacific NW Thunderboat Association grew from there.

I have been involved with boating since 1970 - built and raced scale looking hulls in E & D Hydro before there were Scale or Sport 40 classes in the Rule Book. Viva La Scale !!!! CHEERS !!! Bob

 

[Gale54]

I think that the IMPBA should adopt the NAMBA rules so that it is equal across the board. How would anyone feel if say they went out west to the NW scale championship and there boat was legal in IMPBA L x W but they found it Illegal because they use different rules. It is not that hard I have been building scales for over (holly crap!) 20 years and never had a problem meeting the rules or looking like the real boat. Integrity that is all I am saying.

 

[Ray Sametz]

I have been Model boating for many years, but I'm a newbie when it comes to scale. I started my boat almost 3 seasons ago, the first season I researched the hull and ASK a lot of questions of most of the guys in this thread. I'm a wood guy, so that part was easy. It's the fiberglass center section that's kicking my butt. I want it to be as accurate as possible. In time maybe a clearly defined IMPBA rule book can have it's own section here on IW. If I'm not sure, I ASK. OMHO. Hammer B)

 

[Hydro Junkie]

Building a scale boat isn't all that hard. It's when you try to build a boat and the plans are way off that problems start. I've had that problem with the 8806 that I've been working on. I found that everything but the sponsons are totally wrong as Roger based the plan set on the T-2, built a year earlier. I've spent years getting dimensions off the actual boat to make sure what I'm building is as accurate as possible. Were I see a serious problem is when the MHR IS ALSO WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The 8806 has a tunnel width of 84"(I measured it myself to make sure I had it right) and, probably due to the similarity between the 8806 and 8701, it's listed on all the MHRs at 88". I know the 8806 was changed several times over the years but I've never heard of anyone saying the center section of the boat was removed and narrowed, just the bulnose moved forward and aft and the addition of 22" long shoes, so I believe the initial posting into the MHR was wrong to begin with.

 

[Mike McKnight]

Ok I am going to preface this by saying my response here may not be very popular but so be it. First let me say that there are no know-it-alls. At least there shouldn't be. Even Roger if he were still here would tell you that. I've been around boat racing on a number of levels for most of my life and I still learn stuff about different boats all the time. Some us know more than others about a particular team or boat because we were passionate about that boat or team. But we are dum dums about another. That's me I'm that guy. I'm passionate about the Circus/Atlas/Miller boats and teams. I'm not as good with Bud or the Leland boats or whoever. If I don't know I dig until I get the answer. That's why I love this class. The day you stop learning about anything....not just about boats...you are done.

Bob you kind of stole my thunder there with the observation about modelers vs. racers. It is very rare that you have someone that is extremely successful at both. It's tough to balance. However, back to the heart of the problem that started this thread is that you have a boat that is representing a boat in the recent fleet where there is ample pictures and some documentation that shows the model built had some issues. I haven't seen the IMPBA rules in depth but I heard the boat was allowed to run so I guess the rules didn't have enough teeth or maybe portions were just ignored I am not sure. But this is not a problem exclusive to IMPBA. I've seen and experienced this in NAMBA too. I have been complaining for years that rules are too vague. Some wiggle room is necessary but In some cases WAY to much wiggle room. The class has a sense of integrity that needs to be maintained. No one says you have to be EXACT because that is near impossible but there have been numerous cases where the bare minimum standard for appearance was not met and it was allowed to slide. It was said' "I would hate to see the rules get in the way of promoting the class and interfering with the enjoyment factor." So let me ask the question...How does letting boats with obvious appearance discrepancies promote the class? I'm not talking about nit picky small stuff I am talking about very obvious plain as day discrepancies. The rules are not there to interfere. They are or should be there to set the minimum standard. If you see the rules as interference, assuming the rules are not way out of whack, then you are racing the wrong class.

Ok I'm off my soapbox....

 

[Hydro Junkie]

You won't get any complaints or arguments from me Mike

 

[Greg Hahn]

Obviously all the available plans and drawings will have problems, nature of the beast. Just like the Quatar/Ellstrom boat, Dave V. said it's basiclly a T-6 with modifications, then he went into the mods and I thought wow it's a different boat??

So bottom line build it as close as the eyeball will allow and head to the pond for some fun.

gh

 

[RodneyPierce]

 

[BlueBlaster]

This may be a stupid statment, but if you look at a lot of the real boats most had a centered cockpit( exception of a few I'm sure had an offset) and the builders and fiberglass hulls have been designed offset. Now from what I figure they have because we go clockwise and it's for the engine and such. If you look at the new boats most are centered. So would that mean I could only do one or two boats that had the offset. Ex.( Phils or Joe morceil boat has an offset, but I seen them as the Elam and the U-10 Hoss that have centers. So its seem like there a line, the design for boat racing and true to scale look. I'm green when it's comes to scale rules. I say if it within the rules and it looks scale and you have proof it raced and pictures I don't see the issue. Like some have said there Model Boats that we enjoy looking at and race. To fully replicate every detail may be someone thing but only if you want a shelf queen to show off but to race I don't think it should be so picky as to how scale it should be.