RCP CYCLE 2019-2020
The RCP process for changing rules in the NAR Sporting Code is defined in the sporting code under section “D” of the appendix. The process can be reviewed online, the cycle for proposed changes runs on a one year cycle. A dedicated online RCP Forum for proposals to be reviewed, commented on, and finally voted on is available for all NAR members.
Eight proposals were received for this cycle. Proposals require a 51% vote for the proposal to be passed. Proposals that do pass will become a part of the Sporting Code effective for the new contest year on August 1, 2020, but they have no bearing on NARAM-62.
I would like to remind everyone that the opportunity for you to submit a RCP is as simple as writing up your idea or submitting it online.
Important Notice
Due to personal issues, I have not been able to follow the RCP cycle timeline per the Sporting Code Appendix D. Click here to view the timeline. The membership still has 60 days to comment per the standard schedule and 30 days to vote per the standard schedule. –Jim Filler
Name: Chris Kidwell
NAR#: 45225
Email: kidwell@narhams.org
Summary: Rewrite Rule 13.3 NARAM Awards to simplify the wording. There is no change to the awards given.
State the Logic of the Change: Section 13.3 is overly complex, causing many people to misunderstand how NARAM awards are granted. There are several sections that state actions are not prohibited (e.g., 13.3.1.4, 13.3.1.5, 13.3.3.6) and are therefore redundant. Rules for qualifying for Meet Awards (13.3.2.1 and 13.3.2.2) are stated as negatives, and do not explicitly say whether people who qualified for ESA but not National Champion may compete for Meet Awards. The wording of 13.3 can be simplified by restructuring slightly, swapping sections 13.3.2 (Meet Awards) and 13.3.3 (National Champion Awards), making it clearer that the two categories are mutually exclusive. Within each section, the new wording flows through the same progression: who can compete, how the winners are determined, and how many awards are given.
Effect if any on Current Competition and NAR Records: Less confusion on what awards are given at NARAM and who qualifies for those awards.
Exact wording of Section 13.3: Replace all of 13.3 with the following:
13.3 NARAM Awards
13.3.1 Event Specialist Awards
13.3.1.1 Event Specialist competition is open to NARAM competitors who have qualified for an ESA per Rule 13.1.11.6.
13.3.1.2 For each NRC event, the ESA is given to the ESA-qualified contestant in each division with the highest score at NARAM.
13.3.2 National Championship Awards
13.3.2.1 National Championship competition is open to NARAM competitors who have qualified for National Championship per Rule 13.1.11.7.
13.3.2.2 National Championship points are calculated for each contestant as the sum of points awarded per Rule 13.2.4 for all NARAM events.
13.3.2.3 National Champion awards shall be given for 1st and 2nd place in each division.
13.3.2.4 In the event of a tie for 1st or 2nd place, the competitor who has the most 1st place event finishes wins. If a tie still exists, then the competitor who has the most 2nd places finishes wins, etc.
13.3.3 Meet Awards
13.3.3.1 Meet competition is open to NARAM competitors who did not qualify for National Championship per Rule 13.1.11.7.
13.3.3.2 Event Champion awards shall be given for 1st through 3rd places in each division and each event, with duplicate awards given in the case of ties.
13.3.3.2 Meet Championship points are calculated for each contestant as the sum of points awarded per Rule 13.2.4 for all NARAM events.
13.3.3.3 Meet Champion awards shall be given for 1st and 2nd place in each division.
13.3.3.4 Ties for Meet Champion awards are handled according to Rule 13.3.2.4.
Leave your comments here. As of 4.1.20, member comments have closed.
Name: Vern Richardson
NAR#: 91272
Email: vern.rich@gmail.com
Brief Summary of the Proposed Change: Change the requirement to have at least two competitors in a division or they get combined into another division.
State the Logic of the Change: When there is a combining of divisions, the single competitor get all the points awarded in their division regardless of how they place. The detriment is with the division in which they are combined. They often get less points.
Effect if any on Current Competition and NAR Records: This will effect NARAM competition only, points will be distributed differently in divisions that would have been combined.
Exact Wording for the Rule Revision as it should Appear: Section #9.6 – Delete the first sentence and the second paragraph. Delete the words “attempt to” in the second sentence. That leaves the following, “An entry must make an official flight before points can be awarded in the event.”
Leave your comments here. As of 4.1.20, member comments have closed.
Name: Chad Ring
NAR#: 50652
Email: ring@psci.net
Brief Summary of the Proposed Change: Remove the requirement that performance records must use only recording altimeters. All approved altimeters would now be able to set national records.
State the Logic of the Change: If an altimeter is approved for use in all competition, and is acceptable for use in all events, including NARAM, why is it not good enough for setting national records? Accuracy of even the most basic altimeters has come a long way since this rule was written.
Effect if any on Current Competition and NAR Records: None. If this RCP passes, more altimeter flights would be eligible for records.
Exact Wording for the Rule Revision as it should appear: Section # 14.5: Delete the line “Altimeter data file”. Section # 20.2.5: Delete entire section.
Section # 20.2.4: Add as final paragraph “If the altimeter data is, in the opinion of a contest official, significantly inconsistent with the observed flight, the altimeter data may be disallowed. In such cases, that flight can be considered “No Data” per Rule 20.3.3 – Untracked Flights.
Leave your comments here. As of 4.1.20, member comments have closed.
Name: Steve Foster
NAR#: 72814
Email: stevef63@windstream.net
Brief Summary of the Proposed Change: Disqualification of craftsmanship models that are missing significant components.
State Logic and Intent of Change: The spirit of craftsmanship entries is that the entries must fly as judged, however entries have been allowed to fly with significant changes for some flights (most always from a severely damaged first flight).
Effect, if any, on current competition and NAR records: None
Exact wording for the rule revision as it should appear (include section#): 51.11/52.10/55.5/56.4 replace with this rule Flight: An entry that does not make a safe, stable flight must be disqualified. Any flight including re-flights that are missing significant component(s) (i.e.; booster pods, fins, transitions, escape towers, payload sections, nose cones), must be disqualified. Any flight including re-fights may fly missing small surface details (i.e. non-functional lugs, antennas, landing pads/wheels, etc.), this will be scored as damage.
Also add rule 53.3.1: Flight: An entry that does not make a safe, stable flight must be disqualified. Scale altitude entries missing any items will receive an altitude score of 0 (zero).
Leave your comments here. As of 4.1.20, member comments have closed.
Name: Mark B. Bundick
NAR #: 19250 LIFE
Email Address: mbundick@comcast.net
Brief Summary of the Proposed Change: I am proposing a change to Rule 13.1 National Rocketry Competition (NRC), Section 13.1.2 Event Selection to permit different event selection for different competition divisions.
State the Logic of the Change: The NRC’s creation was designed to attract new participants into the NAR’s competition community. The NRC has succeeded in doing this primarily by making contest easier to organize and report, and by providing nearly instant feedback on standings at the NAR website. The 2018-2019 Contest Year showed that these gains could be hampered, particularly for younger competitors, when very difficult events are selected for the NRC. 1/4A Helicopter Duration vexed many flyers, even experienced competitors. In the past, NARAM Contest Directors have also recognized that younger competitors may have difficulties in events that older flyers wish to fly. They accommodated the needs of both groups by selecting different events for different groups:
NARAM-54: D Egg Lofting Altitude (A & B Division) G Egg Lofting Altitude (C & T Division)
NARAM-59: D Helicopter Duration (A & B Division) G Helicopter Duration (C & T Division).
This proposed change seeks to provide an option for the Contest Board to consider a similar approach for NRC events. By allowing the Contest Board the option to select different events for different divisions, younger flyers will continue to improve their skills and not become frustrated by repeatedly poor performance in a more difficult event aimed primarily at older, more experienced competitors.
Effect if any on Current Competition and NAR Records: There will be no significant impacts to manufacturers, contest management, records or range operations from this proposed change.
Exact Wording for the Rule Revision as it should appear:
Add the following sentence to 13.1.2 – Event Selection: At the discretion of the Contest Board, different NRC events may be selected for different competition divisions.
Leave your comments here. As of 4.1.20, member comments have closed.
Name: Mark B. Bundick
NAR #: 19250 LIFE
Email Address: mbundick@comcast.net
Brief Summary of the Proposed Change: I am proposing a change to Rule 13.1 National Rocketry Competition (NRC), Section 13.1.4 – NRC Events List to add ¼A-A Rocket Glider.
State the Logic of the Change: The NRC currently includes ¼A-A Boost Glider. ¼A-A Rocket Glider is a natural extension of that NRC event and will use similar skills developed from Boost Glider. This event would certainly be no more difficult than the Helicopter Duration event, currently part of the NRC.
Effect if any on Current Competition and NAR Records: There will be no significant impacts to manufacturers, contest management, records or range operations from this proposed change.
Exact Wording for the Rule Revision as it should appear: Add the following to the list in 13.1.4 NRC Events List: 1/4A –A Rocket Glide
Leave your comments here. As of 4.1.20, member comments have closed.
Name: Mark B. Bundick
NAR #: 19250 LIFE
Email Address: mbundick@comcast.net
Brief Summary of the Proposed Change: I am proposing a change to Rule 13.1 National Rocketry Competition (NRC), Section 13.1.4 – NRC Events List to add Predicted and Set Altitude.
State the Logic of the Change: The NRC currently includes three altitude events. The American Rocketry Challenge (TARC) has always had a target altitude performance metric, and middle and high school teams have shown they are capable of building models which will consistently achieve a target altitude under a variety of atmospheric conditions. Incorporating this well-known competition metric will broaden participation and, in contrast to other NRC events, will already be familiar to TARC participants. I chose to NOT include Random Altitude because it is fundamentally different than the TARC experience, and competitors would be flying different random altitudes all during the contest year. While that’s interesting and fun, Random Altitude didn’t parallel the TARC altitude metric.
Effect if any on Current Competition and NAR Records: There will be no significant impacts to manufacturers, contest management, records or range operations from this proposed change.
Exact Wording for the Rule Revision as it should appear: Add the following to the list in 13.1.4 NRC Events List: Predicted Altitude-Altimeter Set Altitude – Altimeter
Leave your comments here. As of 4.1.20, member comments have closed.
Name: Mark B. Bundick
NAR #: 19250 LIFE
Email Address: mbundick@comcast.net
Brief Summary of the Proposed Change: I am proposing a change to Rule 13.1 National Rocketry Competition (NRC), Section 13.1.4 – NRC Events List to add Predicted and Set Duration.
State the Logic of the Change: The American Rocketry Challenge (TARC) has always had a target duration performance metric, and middle and high school teams have shown they are capable of building models, which will consistently achieve the target duration under a variety of atmospheric conditions. Incorporating this well-known competition metric into the NRC will broaden participation and, in contrast to other NRC events, will already be familiar to TARC participants. I chose to NOT include Random Duration because it is fundamentally different than the TARC experience, and competitors would be flying different random duration times all during the contest year. While that’s interesting and fun, Random Duration didn’t parallel the TARC duration metric.
Effect if any on Current Competition and NAR Records: There will be no significant impacts to manufacturers, contest management, records or range operations from this proposed change.
Set Duration
Leave your comments here. As of 4.1.20, member comments have closed.
From: Brian J Muzek
NAR# 86418
Email: bjguzek@gmail.com
Type of Proposal: Regular
Brief Summary of the Proposed Change: Increase multi-round maximum for parachute duration.
State Logic and Intent of Change: As the NRC maximum is the target for people to shoot for, it should be such that an NRC maximum is difficult, but not impossible. However, for the 2018-19 season, 13 (out of 38) C divisioners and 5 (out of 12) D division teams achieved an NRC max in 1/4A-PD. In order to see more differentiation between fliers, the Multi-round and NRC maximum durations should be increased to make achieving one more difficult.
Effect, if any, on current competition and NAR records: Increased differentiation throughout the NRC season. No effect on NARAM or records.
Exact wording for the rule revision as it should appear (include section#):
31.3 Classes This event is divided into classes based on the permissible total impulse of the motor(s). The following classes of Parachute Duration are established:
(Current times are in black, suggested revised times are in red)
| Motor Class | Multi-round max | NRC Max |
| 1/8A | 40 sec | |
| 1/4A | 60 sec 75 sec | 180 sec 225 sec |
| 1/2A | 120 sec 180 sec | 360 sec 540 sec |
| A | 180 sec 240 sec | 540 sec 720 sec |
| FAI A | 300 sec | |
| B | 240 sec | |
| C | 300 sec |
Leave your comments here. As of 4.1.20, member comments have closed.
From: Brian J Muzek
NAR# 86418
Email: bjguzek@gmail.com
Brief Summary of the Proposed Change: Include Rocket Glider in the list of possible NRC Events
State Logic and Intent of Change: Rocket glider is a staple of NAR competition and an excellent test of modeling skills.
Effect, if any, on current competition and NAR records: Possible inclusion of Rocket Glider in the NRC events list
Exact wording for the rule revision as it should appear (include section#): Add the following to the list in 13.1.4 NRC Events List: 1/2A-C Rocket Glider
Leave your comments here. As of 4.1.20, member comments have closed.