SCAT Electronic News July 29 1999
- Details
- Category: Archive 1999
- Hits: 814
SCAT Electronic News July 29 1999
Table of Contents
=================
Rumpelstiltskin crawls out of the woodwork - Davis
Beware of wolves in sheeps clothing - Malkin
VP for F1B - Ackery - Morrell
Igor YABLONOVSKY Price List
Rumpelstiltskin crawls out of the woodwork
==========================================
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Rumpelstiltskin crawls out of the woodwork, Observations on the FAI Free
Flight events after a 22 year break,
It has been interesting for me to begin getting back into competitive
FAI again after a long break of raising kids and building a business. In
general things have not changed all that much which is comforting. The
sport is still pretty much like it was years ago with the exception of
some technology changes and the fact that the base group of FAI modelers
have all aged and there are not enough younger people coming in to fill
the void. So for what it's worth here is my unsolicited and highly
opinionated observation of the "state of the FAI FF sport". I don't have
any burning issues with the way things are now but from the fresh
perspective of someone on the outside of 22 years of change this may be
useful in the current debates about further rule changes. I love FAI
competition and my passion for that end of modeling is still there so
that is a built-in bias on my part. For what it's worth, here it is!
Having been on the FAI team twice in the past I have at least some
experience to speak from.
Builder of the Model Rule: This one gave me heartburn at first because
building ones own models was to me part and parcel to participation in
the sport. The "hobby" portion of the sport took more time than the
"sport" itself and there is a a nice sense of wholeness in building and
flying ones own models. On the other hand the complexity of FAI models
is such that there is a tremendous threshold to cross to even get into
the sport. I grew up starting out with AMA events and evolved into FAI
but that is a long and convoluted path. To me the sport of FAI is a
world of it's own and can stand on it's own, so overall I think the
ability to buy (or borrow or beg) models and compete may be a good thing
for the sport. I like to think that once someone gets "the bug" they
will eventually want to build at least some portion of their models and
if they don't maybe it's not such a big deal anyway. Admittedly, I have
more respect for the modeler who does do some or all of their own
building but that's my issue. Anything we can do to get more people to
participate in the sport is in all our best interests I believe. It has
been interesting for me to watch my son Evan as he gets involved in
modeling. He has been building some sport models and tinkering with hand
launch etc. for a few years but his path into FAI has been by flying
some of my old wakefields. After flying a few contests he seems to be
thoroughly hooked and has now built one of the Vivchar kits which are an
excellent intermediate model for beginners. I have no doubt that he
will progress on from there be building more of his his own models while
probably buying front ends and parts. Seems like a win/ win to me. Up
until the change in the BOM rule, FAI flying was a Craft, an Art and a
sport all bundled together. The BOM rule potentially takes away some of
the craft but does not rule it out or eliminate it. I feel strongly that
the only way to increase participation in FAI FF is to push the concept
of what a wonderful and fun sport it is and the rest will follow. If
people had to make their own tennis rackets, machine their own fly
reels, carve their own bowling balls and sew their own baseball mitts
there would be damn few people in the sports. The Europeans seem more
clear about the sport issue than we Americans do. We need to open our
eyes to the reality of what is happening around us.
The "Junior" (lack of them) problem": This is really a tough issue. We
all know that without new people entering the sport we will eventually
see FAI wither away to the point where there is simply not enough
critical mass to sustain the sport. As a father of 3 boys I am aware
that there are lots of competing interests out there for kids although I
don't think it is all that much different than when I was a young guy in
the 60's. Let's face it , between girls, sports, cars, friends, TV,
computers and video games, flying model gliders is not all that
compelling. Seems to me that the critical window for young modelers is
before high school, if you can get a kid engaged enough before they are
15 or 16 there is at least a chance that they will have enough
enthusiasm to carry them through the late teens and college years. Jim
Simpson here in Albuquerque has put enormous effort into getting RC
gliders into the school curriculum at a private school and he is having
success with some of the kids sticking with modeling. Without mentors of
some kind (or ones father) the entry level into the sport is simply too
daunting. Jim is quick to point out that in his opinion the real problem
is not a junior problem but rather a "Senior Problem" in that not enough
of us adults are being proactive in mentoring kids and helping them
become aware of the sport. It's a lot of work to assist kids in getting
involved with models but I know that without the assistance and long
term support of the adults in our old modeling club I would have had
virtually no chance of serious modeling, it's that important! I had two
primary mentors (Jim Taylor and Buzz Averill) who took me under their
wings and put up with all my adolescent crap and coached me along so
that I was eventually hooked on the sport. Seems to me that we need a
clearing house through the AMA of what efforts have been successful in
bringing in kids to modeling and from there those of us serious about
free flight will have to expose the kids to our side of the sport and
find those precious few who are drawn to free flight.
Given my status as a parent of a "current generation" teenager I feel
that in order to bring kids into FAI we are going to have to push the
emphasis of FAI more to the sport side of things and less to the hobby
and craft side. It is my feeling that the kids who enjoy the sport and
stick with it will naturally migrate to the hobby and craft side of it
over time. Based on what I see of teenage life now there is no way that
beginning juniors are going to evolve from the hobby into the sport
without a persistent mentor who really takes them under their wings.
F1A- Nordic: I only flew F1A briefly 20 years ago but without circle
tow it was not that much fun and the folding of wings was a constant
problem. I think the current state of F1A is very good albeit
mechanically complicated. The carbon wings and the circle tow are
essential to this event. As far as fun goes, zooming or bunting a model
off the line both give me about the same adrenaline rush. The bunt is
beautiful when done correctly but the mechanics involved almost dictate
that we will all be buying most if not all of the fuselage and
mechanical innards. I wouldn't find my interest in F1A reduced any if
the bunt were not allowed but I'm not advocating that it be eliminated.
As a self professed gadget junkie I like all the bells and whistles in
the models but the increased complication does make it more difficult to
get into the serious competition flying. The performance of the models
is not so great that it makes maxing a slam dunk so I don't see any
reason to modify the airframe or other rules for this event.
Interestingly enough I have a 22 year old son who is (on his way to an
engineering degree) and wants to come and try out the FAI contests. I
have been suggesting F1A to him but my 16 year old son Evan continues to
point out that no one can fly F1A and be even remotely competitive
without all carbon wings and all the other mechanical stuff. He is
telling my older son to forget Nordic and fly wakefield because you can
still build most of the model yourself as carbon wings and stabs are not
absolutely essential. Interesting observation from a kid especially
since I'm advocating F1A. As far as the sport end of F1A I tell any of
my contemporaries that will listen that F1A is essentially fly fishing
for thermals and that aspect of flying F1A is what appeals to me. That
analogy seems to perk their interest and as we all know fly fishing is
an enormously popular sport and in many ways has all kinds of
similarities to F1A (line, reels, catch & release, traveling to do the
sport, gadgets, etc., ). As any of you who are in business know, how you
market something is all important in getting people engaged in what you
are selling. In order to sell more participants on the sport of FAI we
need to get smart and let go of some of our old preconceptions of what
FAI modeling has been in the past. People, by nature, resist change but
we need to be cognizant of the fact that we may "resist" our sport right
into oblivion.
F1B- Wakefield: This event is close to my heart and was the one I was
most serious about and on the 73 and 75 teams in. The prevailing wisdom
I hear is that current top end models will do 5 to 7 minutes in dead air
and from what I have seen that seems to be the case. Whatever the
reason for the huge performance boost (auto surfaces, better rubber,
carbon wings, VP front ends etc.) it seems clear that the technology has
out paced the limitations and intent of the original rules particularly
the 3 minute max. Stepping back into the scene after a long lapse it
seems obvious to me that some changes are in order. Longer maxes and
long fly off flights are not the solution as finding good flying fields
is getting worse, not better, and the long fly off flights are a timers
crap shot due to distance and late afternoon visibility. I realize the
issue of changing the rules is a heated one but it seems to me that one
way or another the performance of wakefields needs to be pared down. I'm
not in favor of banning new technologies and forcing the models to be
simple. The only two viable options I see are to reduce the amount of
available energy (cut motor size to 30 grams or less) and possibly up
the weight of the model. I don't agree with the argument that cutting
the performance of the current models will make the event any less
exciting, the excitement is relative to what you are used to and those
of us flying wakefield 20 or 30 years ago were no less excited about the
event than those flying it now. From a purely pragmatic point of view
the high performance is causing problems with retrieval, timing,
suitable sites, etc. I don't see the fun in a 7 minute fly off when
most timers can't see the entire flight anyway. I have a pair of high
end 10x40 binoculars and average eyesight and it is disquieting to be
timing a flight and know that the model is still up but no longer
visible due to the long flight and late in the day visibility. I'm sure
I'm not the only one to have ever experienced this and it is a bad setup
for mistimed flights and lost models. If I can't see the models to the
ground then I sure that there are many other timers who can't either and
in most cases probably can't see as well I can given their age. I agree
with Jim Haughts viewpoint that "what is the point of a 180 max when the
models will do that several times over" but I don't think increasing the
base max time makes sense. Anselmo Zeris critique on wakefield
performance simulation made total sense to me. Some combination of
reduced motor weight and increased model weight makes infinite sense.
Changing the status quo is always hard but sometimes necessary.
F1C Power: I can't speak with any authority on power as I only flew AMA
power events many years ago and I didn't like the noise, the fuel and
nicked fingers. As a technology nut it seems like a slam dunk to me that
the only way to get more people into FAI power is to make the
"controversial and painful" jump from fuel power to Electric power. The
5 second engine run is a joke and is impossible to time accurately. At
the rate things are going we might as well just strap a rocket motor on
them and blast them up. Looking at F1C from my perspective I would find
a slightly scaled down and not so so rocket like F1C with electric power
to be very compelling. I Like free flight because it is graceful and in
many ways a beautiful sport. To me the current state of F1C makes just
about as much sense as women in mud wrestling, it just doesn't jibe
with the overall flavor of the sport. Hey, I said these are MY opinions
so don't all you hard core F1C flyers get all up in arms over this. What
I am saying probably feels about as good as it does when someone tells
you your newborn baby is ugly. We all love our babies but the fact is
many of them really are ugly. What about a few people proto-typing an
electric F1C just to see how it might work and what the snags may be?
Maybe an electric version of F1J is where F1C needs to evolve to? I
probably don't have to remind any of you that the electric power side of
RC flying is growing much faster than the fuel power side and the
reasons are to me plainly obvious, it's more fun, less hassle and
definitely more state of the art in technology and less painful to get
started in.
Team Selection Program: I have mixed emotions on this as I really like
the feel and excitement of the "end of the contest" flyoff. One some
level the argument that Arom Schlossberg set out in a recent NFFS
article made a lot of sense but I don't think the issue of how we select
our team is on the critical path right how. It seems that the opinions
on this vary quite a bit and that is probably healthy. My own view would
be to tweak the existing program by the rule changes I advocated earlier
and possibly make the first two early morning rounds longer ( 4 minutes
assuming the rules change) and keep the end of the contest flyoff
intact. The program works and I don't see it as being the place that
needs the most focus.
Final Thoughts: I realize that some of this may provoke knee jerk
reactions. I am not out to criticize the way things currently are but
rather to provide a perspective that may be difficult to for those who
are are fully embedded in the current model of FAI free flight to easily
see. We have all had the experience of being so fully involved in
something that we can't see the forest for the trees. My efforts here
are more or a brainstorming nature and meant to be food for thought.
Times are changing we will either ride the wave of change or get buried
by it. The wave doesn't care one way or the other. I don't feel
comfortable standing on the sidelines now and not saying what I see.
Without some kind of effort and change I have no doubt that in 20 years
there will be a relative handful of us left still flying FAI as the old
guard slowly slips away and I don't want to look back and wish we had
done something while there were still enough participants to matter. I
can't say this with statistical certainty but it seems obvious that the
median age of serious FAI flyers has gone up considerably since I was
active and I don't see the trend changing unless we make a concerted
effort of some kind. (I would love to see a graph of this, nothing like
a picture to bring things to clarity). Please bear in mind that all I
have said here is in the spirit of positive dialogue and in response to
what I see from my perspective. As I "ramp up" for serious FAI flying
again these are the things that are coming into focus for me. I welcome
feedback both public and private. My e-mail is
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Jon Davis
Albuquerque, NM, USA
Important.
=========
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Rog,
The most important part of the knot deal is that it has to be New
Zealand Wool :-)
John.
[Pure Virgin no less ..]
VP for F1B
==========
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Roger,
I have a query that I hope people can help with. A friend is getting
into Wakefield, and has several variable pitch hubs, (W hobby) but they
did not come with any advice or instructions and he does not really know
how to set up the prop. Perhaps there are fliers out there with some
experience with VP who can share their knowledge..
The basic principle is that the pitch starts high for the burst, then
reduces for the cruise, so the questions are
[Firstly I am not familar with the W-Hobby device. My first hand
experience is with Vivchar hubs and I have some second
hand Andriukov experience ]
1) What should the pitch be for the burst, and the cruise, how much
should it change ? (yes I know, how long is piece of string). some
numbers for pitch or blade angle would help.
[ Most times you cannot change the amount of the pitch change.
with out machining a new part.
I would suggest that set the low pitch to be between 21 and 24 degrees
at 200mm.
Typically on older Vivchar hubs when you did this the high
pitch would be about 30 - 31 degrees, just a little higher than
on a fixed pitch hub. [Note the latest Vivchar hubs
have more pitch movement]
On Andriukov hubs people typically set the pitch so the high pitch is in the
high 30s. Say 35-37. I have heard
of people setting it at 40. .. seeing Alex reads this he might like to
comment on the 'suggested' value.
Typically to work with a high pitch a very hard launch is needed -
harder that a beginner should do.]
2) If our flier is using VP for the first time should he be setting the
pitch for what he uses normally, and then let the mechanism increase it
for the burst ?, or some other way ?..
[It is easiest to set the low pitch as no torque is needed
to do that.
Then put a bobbin, apply torque and see what the high pitch is.
It should be only a very small amount above what you would normally use.
- or even the same.
Then fly it and experiment with changing the pitch as you would
a fixed pitch prop.
It biggest advantage with a VP prop is that it make better use of the tail
end of the motor run or of a weaker motor.
Do not use it to control the power]
3) Are there other questions we should ask ?.
Any help would be appreciated by a flier who is working hard to get more
experience.
regards
David Ackery
New Zealand
Igor YABLONOVSKY Price List
===========================
Num. Name USD
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Long bunt model (wing span 2360 mm, wing area: 30,55 dm^2,
stabilizer area: 3,43 dm^2, stabilizer arm: 770 mm)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.1 with 2-position wingwiggler 570,0
1.2 with 3-position wingwiggler 599,0
1.3 electronic model with 3-position wingwiggler 999,0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Short bunt model (wing span 2200 mm, wing area: 29,99 dm^2,
stabilizer area: 3,99 dm^2, stabilizer arm: 730 mm)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.4 with constant butterfly 520,0
1.5 with 2-position wingwiggler 550,0
1.6 with 3-position wingwiggler 570,0
1.7 electronic model with 3-position wingwiggler 949,0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Complete fuselage + stabilizer + ready lines
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.1.1 for "long" model 260,0
2.1.2 for "short" model 260,0
2.1.3 for "long" model with 3-position wingwiggler 280,0
2.1.4 for "short" model with 3-position wingwiggler 280,0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Complete fuselage
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.2.1 for "long" model 190,0
2.2.2 for "short" model 190,0
2.2.3 for "long" model with 3-position wingwiggler 210,0
2.2.4 for "short" model with 3-position wingwiggler 210,0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fuselage details
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.10 Tailboom (alu-carbon-alu) D: 16,5...6,5; L:820mm; W: 14g 16,0
2.11 Covers for nose fuselage with window cover 20,0
2.11.1 Window cover 2,0
2.12 Fin 13,0
2.13.1 2-position wingwiggler 15,0
2.13.2 3-position wingwiggler 25,0
2.14 Mechanical 3-function timer 38,0
2.15 Towhook 30,0
2.16 "Bunt" mechanism (3 pieces) 22,0
2.16.1 Adjustable column 5,0
2.16.2 Stabmount 7,0
2.16.3 "Bunt" roller 10,0
2.17 Rudder adjuster 3,0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wings (covered with polyester paper and painted (pin(s) included)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.1.1 for "long" model (wing span: 2360 mm) 270,0
3.1.2 for "short" model (wing span: 2200 mm) 250,0
3.2.1 Uncovered wings for "long" model with pins 240,0
3.2.2 Uncovered wings for "short" model with pin 220,0
3.3.1 Complete D-box with pins for "long" model 110,0
3.3.2 Complete D-box with pin for "short" model 95,0
3.4.1 Finished spars with pins for "long" model 50,0
3.4.2 Finished spars with pin for "short" model 45,0
3.5 A set of spars and trailing edges for wings 32,0
3.5.1 Treiling edges 10,0
3.5.2 Set of spars 20,0
3.5.3 Kevlar thread for spars about 90 m 2,5
3.6 Complete set of D-box for "long" model 47,0
3.6.1 2 covers lenght 750 mm (sp.weight: 2,39 g/dm^2) 29,0
3.6.2 2 covers lenght 500 mm (sp.weight: 1,79 g/dm^2) 18,0
3.7 Complete set of D-box for "short" model 45,0
3.7.1 2 covers lenght 650 mm (sp.weight: 2,39 g/dm^2) 27,0
3.7.2 2 covers lenght 500 mm (sp.weight: 1,79 g/dm^2) 18,0
3.8.1 Wingjoiner D: 5,0 L: 160...180 mm 5,0
3.8.2 Wingjoiner D: 5,5 L: 160...180 mm 5,0
3.8.3 Wingjoiner D: 5,8 L: 160...180 mm 5,0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stabilizer covered with mylar (weight: 7,2 g)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.1.1 for "long" model area: 3,43 dm^2 30,0
4.1.2 for "short" model area: 3,99 dm^2 30,0
4.2.1 Uncovered stabilizer for "long" model 25,0
4.2.2 Uncovered stabilizer for "short" model 25,0
4.3.1 Unfinished stabilizer for "long" model 22,0
4.3.2 Unfinished stabilizer for "short" model 22,0
4.4 A set of treiling edges for stabilizer (3-pieces) 10,0
4.4.1 Complete set of D-box for stabilizer 8,0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
5.1 Ready towline (soft or rigid) with winch 25,0
5.2 100 m towline 10,0
5.3 Key for timer 4,0
5.4 Towline winch 15,0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The prices are real only up to the end of 1999. Any questions you can set:
Jari VALO
Liusketie 6F36
00710 Helsinki
FINLAND
tel. +358 9 379228
E-Mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
------------------------------------------
Igor YABLONOVSKY
Nauki Ave. 4, Apt.83,
Kiev-039, 252039,
UKRAINE.
tel/fax: +38-044-2652470
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
------------------------------------------
.....................
Roger Morrell
