This ought to throw you all for a loop. Watch for the FE Sport Hydro proposal in the upcoming NAMBA newsletter. It's a bit amiguous by design.
IMO, Sport by it's very nature is a grey area. It was born grey, lives grey and will die in the grey. We've attempted to write a rule that pays homage to the grey, but narrows it a bit relative to what nitro allows.
A sample: (We borrowed language from both organizations)
a. The intent of this class is to simulate the appearance of Unlimited and/or
Limited three-point, full-bodied hydroplanes as raced full scale.
b. A hull must conform to the three-point hydroplane configuration and resemble
a real limited or unlimited hydroplane from the past or present.
c. Boats which do not resemble real full-scale designs (i.e. outriggers, modified
outriggers, canards, tunnels or catamarans) will not be allowed to race as
Sport Hydroplanes.
There's that "intent" word again, but all it takes a dictionary definition of "simulate" and "resemble" to clarify and define the intent.
------------------------------------
sim·u·late: To have or take on the appearance, form, or sound of; imitate. To make in imitation of or as a substitute for.
------------------------------------
re·sem·ble: To exhibit similarity or likeness to
------------------------------------
Synonyms for "intent" include: purpose, goal, end, aim, object. So the intent of the class is to simulate and/or resemble a full-sized racing hydro.
I always thought the intent of Sport was to create a hydro class where you didn't have to spend the time on the detail required in Scale. IOW, Sport was to closer to Scale than it is to Hydroplane. Maybe I've misunderstood the class. I've only been at it 6 years.
As for innovation, there's still plenty of room in SH but I also thought that's what (unlimited) Hydroplane was all about.
We did something else in the proposal. We figure there are two broad perspectives in terms of model boaters. The modeler/artist and the more technical/analytical. (The line is not clearly defined and many of us have aspects of both styles.) The former buys into broad descriptions, the latter wants numbers and measurements.
The proposal has a separate paragraph that addresses each style. The "intent" is in the first paragraph. The idea is that if a CD sees a boat that raises a red flag, he pulls out the tape and goes to paragraph 2.
The proposal might be considered to be riddled with loopholes and exceptions. They are nod to our smaller numbers, limited hull choices and "run what ya brung" culture. We spec a transom width, but don't want to disqualify the guy who makes scale models of Lauterbach dropped sponson shovels with VERY narrow transoms.
One big catch-all exception is that the rule says if it's a scale model of a real boat that raced more than one season, it's legal in Sport.
We also have one rule for all of our Sport Hydro classes and no length restrictions. In FE, the majority agrees the water is the almighty equalizer.
No one can accuse this proposal of walking the line. It breaks with tradition. Some of us take our racing more seriously than others, but at the end of day, we are all just big men (and woman) playing with toy boats. (I should add a respectful nod to those that make a living supplying us with our toys).
We'll see what happens in the vote.
