WILL 1968 be the last of the Navy-hosted Nationals? Both the Academy of Model Aeronautics and the Hobby Industry Assoc. of America are on notice that, unless certain conditions are met in 1968 - or at least, that significant progress be made toward essential objectives - Navy may drop out of the picture in 1969. Simply stated, Navy's objections are a prohibitive expense in manpower and dollars, as well as failure on our part to fulfill the original Navy objectives (of 1948) in hosting the National Model Airplane Championships. It was exactly 20 years ago that Navy hosted their first Nationals -like 1968, also in Olathe, Kansas. Their objectives at that time were: a) To encourage the interest of nation's youth and, more specifically, the aircraft model enthusiast in the U. S. Navy and thereby further, on a long-range basis, public-understanding of the national security; b) To encourage active participation by naval personnel in the model aircraft program. To these objectives have been added two more current requirements in keeping with changing times: a) To directly and indirectly strengthen the recruiting program; b) To enhance the Navy public image in areas of internal -relations, community relations, and public information. These current Navy objectives are being met, although great improvement is possible  and, we may assume, more or less imperative. This, it is admitted, is a Navy problem. Navy we presume will, of its own accord, sharpen its aims this year in this area. However, the original objectives have broken down. "The participation of young people in the National Model Airplane Championships has steadily declined. ... During the 1967 meet ... the average age of contestants was 32 years," states Navy. Incidentally, AMA is desperately, and hard, at work on a youth tie-in for Olathe '68. This program is being built on the sensational success of the AMA Delta Dart (see Delta Dart: The Plane That Fooled the Experts, April, '67). If successful, and we believe it will be, this demonstration is expected to hold the line for follow-on developments essential to hold momentum during the 1969 Nats. Navy would like HIAA to help carry the load in 1969. How satisfied Navy will prove to be in the future depends upon the degree of progress, as related to overall costs. Navy must cut out the fat. There is an expensive "war" going on. Manpower costs, in training in this case, are at least as important as the cost in dollars. And with huge National budgets and deficits these days, the significant costs to Navy inevitably are critically scrutinized. What does it take to put on a Nationals? It costs Navy $150,000, of which $100,000 can be ascribed to such positive results as attracting people to Navy, and $50,000 for

 Continued on page 68

Straight and level Continued from page 6

rented or made-PA systems, telephone lines, equipment, barriers, signs, painting circles, etc. Income considered, AMA still loses several thousands of dollars on the Nats each year.

Navy looks to AMA and HIAA to provide more support. What does AMA supply? Here's the list: 1) Contest director, event directors, and assistant directors; 2) Insurance coverage for contestants and events; 3) Instruction of Navy personnel in registration, judging, tabulation, timing, etc.; 4) Publicity support;; 5) Selected items of equipment.

What does HIAA supply? 1) Trophies (and AMA sweats blood to extract these trophies at considerable expense to itself, and with inconsistent results); 2) Sun helmets for event personnel; 3) Financial support for the Junior winners carrier cruise after the meet; 4) Publicity. Financially, HIAA as an organization, appears to suffer no inordinate strain thus far.

Significantly, Navy calls attention to the fact that HIAA had, until five years ago (but not for many years, in actuality) a National Air Youth Competition, which was superimposed on the Nats. Regional competitions produced state champions, who then competed at the Nats for Air Youth National Champion.

"This competition resulted in great Navy and news media interest," states Navy. Well, where is this valuable Air Youth program today? Dead for lack of financial support. People like Charlie Miller of Testor, Art Laneau, and Nat Polk - Nat more than any individual- made it go with their personal drive. But there is a limit to this sort of thing. If this program worked before, what is HIAA and AMA going to do about reviving it? The question demands an answer.

Navy, at least, has recommendations. They are willing to go on - provided! Of AMA and HIAA they want registration teams, tabulation teams, trophy detail personnel, processors, clerical personnel, janitorial service for contestant work areas. They want a return to the original objectives of 1948.

That AMA and HIAA institute measures to encourage and increase a larger percentage of youthful contestants; including reestablishment of an air youth regional and national competition by the 1969 meet; scholarship award programs for winners in Junior competitions, waiver of registration fee for elementary and high school students, with an accompanying sponsored publicity program in the nations schools; sponsored Boy Scout and Girl Scout model airplane flying clubs with regional competitions for Scouts only; sponsored model flying clubs aboard Navy facilities available to Naval and Marine personnel and their dependents. Navy also lists their own necessary contributions, which don't apply here. As to the length and

size of the Nats, flying should be limited to five days, thinks Navy, Wednesday through Sunday. The absolutely unavoidable requirements, if we are to have Navy-boosted Nationals, are personnel assistance from AMA and HIAA; and that the percentage of youthful contestants be markedly increased by 1969. These problems could, and must be solved. We believe that AMA has a fighting chance to meet its requirements. Unfortunately, the greater requirements - in that someone must raise significant funds - fall on industry. But the industry is incredibly disorganized. They lack member-to-member dialogue. HIAA spends large monies to fight glue-sniffing legislation. Will they support the modeler himself? Numerous radio-control manufacturers have no interest in HIAA. They don't need HIAA they say. They don't even exhibit at the Annual Trade Show. Numerous dealers don't belong to HIAA. What is left is old-time firms, such as Top Flite, Sterling - and how many can you name? - who, also in radio, still maintain a broad base. There are not enough of them. The radio people have their own association - but contribute little or nothing to sustain the whole hobby, even though their own futures are tied to a life-cycle of interesting youthful beginners in model aviation. Navy support cannot be defaulted. Nothing comparable will replace it. The Plymouth Internationals are long since gone. Also, the Air Youth program. Must Navy be added to the list? AMA is moving on these problems. But we cannot rest content on hard-core, middle-aged, specialist hobbyists. Because we do, the hobby is sick. The Navy problem is both a symptom, and a challenge. There is lastly the unrational belief that model building should automatically be supported by space-age industry, etc., in short, by "they." Why? We always argue that model airplanes are good for kids, off-set delinquency, teach skills, etc. So someone underwrites a meet only to discover that the modelers are as old as their own executives. This is always the problem. The older modeler, who once was a kid who did benefit (and wants it to go on) from various sponsorships, keeps a stranglehold on the competition picture. The reasons one hears why this or that cannot be done, are fantastically cockeyed. No one wants to leave out the Open-class modeler. In fact, Navy wants him, too. The "champ" adds color, and inspires the youngsters. If 2Q% of the Nats entries were Open Class, Navy could justify support. But at the last Nats, 57% of the entries were in the age bracket 30 to 79. Yes, they ran that old. Seventeen percent were 21 to 39, and only 26% five to 20. In this bracket, relatively few were in the Junior classification. Fifty-nine were 12 or under; 139, including these, 15 or under. We are lucky to have a 1968 Nats. If we have one in 1969 it probably will be due to a thing called the Delta Dart.