SCAT Electronic News 20 February 1999
- Details
- Category: Archive 1999
- Hits: 826
SCAT Electronic News 20 February 1999
Table of Contents
=================
More on the Pole - Jon Davis
The CD on the Pole - George Batiuk
Changed dates - Chuck Markos
Correspondence - Puhakka, Wood, Abad, Tracy
Kerger, Kaynes and the Pole - Ian Kaynes
CIAM Muffler proposal, etc. - Martin Dilly
SCAT Electronic News - Editor
More on the Pole
================
In response to the "The Pole" fiasco at the Max men 14 round contest:
I was 50 feet away from the "scene of the event" and in my opinion the issue
wasn't whether the tall streamer pole should have been there or not ( although
given the size of the pole I feel rather strongly that is should have been much
further upwind, it literally was right in the middle of the flight line
and I know of at least one model that did glide into that very pole on
Sunday) the real issue
was the screaming and cussing that followed the lowering of the pole. My 15 year
old son Evan and I heard the verbal tirade that followed the pole moving (as did
Tom Coussens and one of his sons) and what was disturbing was the over reaction
and in my opinion "unsportsmanlike conduct". If Rich was in the middle of flying
and trying to pick air (I don't know if this was the case but I don't think it
was) then some degree of being upset would be understandable but the string of
profanities and display of hostility were way out of place on the flying field
particularly given all the people and kids around.
I don't know Rich or Chuck very well but I do know they are both exceptionally
nice people and serious modeler's and things just got out of hand. Personally if
it had been my model that was about to hit the pole I would have put it down as
quickly as possible as I agree with Chuck that the model is worth much more than
the pole. There are always the risks of models running into things
( cars, cycles, poles, Bob White, etc., etc.) and conversely there are
risks to any of the thermal
detection devices be it poles, thermistors, or bubble machines. To my way of
thinking the model takes priority over everything else except the safety of
people. Poles are cheap in comparison to a model.
The solution to me seems to be to get the tall streamer poles some reasonable
distance out in front of the flight line, perhaps 25 or 50 meters? If there is
indeed some reference to this in the sporting code then use it as a guideline.
George Batiuk and Bob White did an excellent job running a large and complex
contest and they can't foresee each and every issue that can
come up in a contest.
As sportsmen and members of what is a very small fraternity of FAI modeler's
surely we can be civil to each other and not let our desires to
win get in the way
of the bigger picture which is friendship, fun and some of the
best camaraderie I
have experienced anywhere in my life.
To sum it up, we need definitive guidelines (i.e. rules) that
govern the location
of poles depending on their height. We already have guidelines governing how we
treat each other as modeler's and sportsman and as such I think Rich owes Chuck
(and those of us with kids around) an apology for his verbal assault. It was
inappropriate.
Jon Davis, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
The CD on the Pole
==================
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Roger, I feel that the organization of our Maxmen competition is getting
close to what it should be, and maybe next year, with a few minor changes,
it will be there. I hope everyone enjoyed themselves, and we look forward to
seeing everyone next year. I think the only splotch on this year's meet was
the incident with Mr. Rohrke's pole, which I will address now. I saw that
the CIAM Free Flight Sub-committee sent a reply to the matter, and much to
my dismay, I had a copy of this document in my hand when the incident
occurred, thanks to Mr. Allnutt and Mr. Keyes. The document is called "A
Guide for the Organisers of Contrests in the Outdoor Free Flight Classes".
In this guide there is a section called "Launching Area", which you quoted
from the FF Sub-committee. As you can see, this defines the area in
question as 25M (approx. 82 ft.), not the 50M that I ruled, the height of an
object at 2M (approx. 80in.), not the 5M that I ruled. It also states
"anything higher than 2 meters should be quickly collapsible". I am very
sorry for the erroneous ruling, and I put the blame on no one other than
myself. Hopefully it will not happen again.
Having said my apology, I would
now like to get my 2 cents in. Mr. Rohrke is a very dear flying companion
of mine, we have travel the country to competitions over the past 20 years,
and it hurt to have to make him remove his pole. But I know Rich well
enough to know that he is understanding, and will forgive me for my poor
judgement. It seems to me that this pole has been at the center of several
controversies in years past, and I have always wondered why. The way we
conduct our meets, ie, all 3 F1 events flown at the same time, leads to the
problem. In Europe, most WC meets fly F1A on a seperate day, so they have
figured out that these guys need a lot of space. Flying the events as we do
leads to other problems also. Rich brings up a very good point about
towlines being left on the field. I do not know how many times I have
inadvertently run over a carelessly left towline on the field, only to be
hysterically yelled at for being numb to the overall well-being of some
angelic F1A flier. Pardon me, perhaps I have strayed from the subject, we
were talking about poles. It seems that any model, F1A or otherwise, could
hit any object, pole or otherwise, whether it is on the flight line or 100M
away. Of course, if I see my model flying toward a object, I am going to
try to get that object out of the way, so I can see a flier 'politely'
removing an object such as a pole, but I think it should be done in such a
way as to not start another civil war. In the future, I would encourage
Rich to bring his pole, and I would encourage all participants to act in a
civilized manner. George Batiuk
[George
the distance is 75 m from the F1A line ..
We were discussing the flying schedule for our Patterson Contest
at last nights SCAT meeting. Maybe we should look at splitting the
F1A and F1B/C ?
I guess one solution for the Max Men International
is to increase the space between the F1A and F1B/C
but I think I have a better one that would remove the need for thermal
poles. How about have the F1A, always up wind of the F1B/C ?!
One issue is people think it is OK to move Rich's pole, but is it OK
to move someone's car , RV or what ?]
Changed date at Muncie
======================
Roger,
The Aug 21-22 date for the Chicago Aeronuts FAI Invitational has been
changed to Aug 28 - 29. A dog show will be on the 21-22 weekend.
Please update the SCAT America's Cup calendar.
Thanks,
Chuck
Correspondence
==============
Re: SCAT Electronic News 18 February 1999
-----------------------------------------
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Roger
Your point was well said and made the point. I wish I would have been
able to express myself so well. I applaud your comment. Thanks for
printing it.
Mark
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
------------------------
Roger,
Thanks for your editorial. It is just on the mark.
Risto
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
-------------------------------------
Subject : RE: comments on FAI proposals
Thanks- very concise and direct and I align with every item myself - I agree.
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
-----------------------------
Subject : Re: - MaxMen Results
A look at the
results list shows participants from Great Britain, Austria, Ukraine,
Russia, Holland, Belgium, Canada, Japan, Finland and Israel as well as
the USA .. and the other part of the USA east of the Rockies.
Hi Roger,
You sure already know I came from Canary Islands, a nice part of Spain......
See you next year at the Flyoff!
I did enjoy flying at Lost Hills, even on 15 th monday morning.
With thanks,
Javier Abad
[Sorry about that, it was indeed a good event and the testing the next
morning was very productive. Maybe if the editorial bird/assistant, Boddington
was a canary rather than cockatiel I would have remembered.]
Kerger, Kaynes and the Pole
===========================
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Roger
Poles
Thanks for including the extract from the Organisers Guide on this subject.
Note that this is advisory. The Guide is available to anyone who needs it
without limitation, but like anything it is not "given out" automatically.
I was puzzled by Terry Kerger's comment about the 1989 FAI Sporting Code. I
could not remember such a phrase ever being in the Code, so I looked and
found that para 4.3.8 is in the F2C team racing section and says nothing
about allowing them to use thermal detection!
Ian
[Ian, I think that you will understand this momentary abberation when you
learn that Mr Kerger is an F1C flyer who sometimes does a little control line
combat. However there is hope for him as he was seen buying 2 F1As from
Victor Stamov.]
CIAM Muffler proposal, etc.
===========================
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Roger,
First, could I use the SCAT page pass on my thanks and I'm
sure those of the other Max Men competitors to everyone involved in running
the 1999 contest. I certainly enjoyed it greatly. Special thanks, too, to
Pierre Brun with whom we shared a pole, for the use of the chase bike,
though it'll take me a while to figure how to operate the clutch while
holding a model in the same hand.
Having had a look at the results, could I suggest that, as it is an FAI
World Cup contest, it might be nice (maybe even required by the FAI?) to
show the nationality of each competitor.
However, the main point of this is the proposal from Belgium requiring
across the board muffler use.
Perhaps some background may help. In the UK around 25 years or more ago, we
in the BMFA imposed a 100% muffler rule. It lasted about a year. Shortly
afterwards we opened negotiations with our government's Department of the
Environment to establish a Code of Practice for Model Aircraft Noise.
Throughout we made clear that different types of model require different
means of abating any nuisance. Note that word 'nuisance'; it does not mean
decibel level, but it does mean the public's reaction to our activities.
Having just spent a few days at Lost Hills where most SCAT members fly,
this may seem a bit pedantic, as I suspect that you could run a J-57 on
afterburner out there without anyone noticing. However, at everal flying
sites in the UK where F/F power models with 10 and 15 second runs have been
flown unmuffled for decades, the public complaints arose when R/C models
arrived, complete with 89 dB mufflers, but flying for ten minutes at a time
at a height of several hundred feet. Result, - lost sites for all of us, or
at best, if the R/C club got a grip on the site, a blanket muffler
requirement and limited flying hours.
The real answer if we want to stop complaints is to limit engine running
times, but this may not go down too well with the average R/C flyer.
Another means is to limit the altitude (F2A, C/L speed, does not produce
complaints because the unmuffled aircraft rarely exceed about 2 metres
altitude).
I attend the CIAM meetings as New Zealand delegate, and the large majority
of other nations' delegates fly R/C and represent NAeCs with a large
majority of R/C flyers. There is now a serious concern that unless the F/F
community in each nation can very firmly brief its delegates within the
next three weeks (the CIAM Plenary meeting is on March 18-19th) as to what
the aim should be (i.e. limit the noise nuisance by whatever means is
appropriate for the class, and not simply address the noise level), then we
will have a blanket muffler rule within the next few weeks. I hope I'm
wrong.
Thermals,
Martin Dilly
SCAT Electronic News
====================
This is SCAT Electronic News. It is a moderated E-mail newsletter about
FAI Free Flight. It is produced in conjunction with the SCAT Online Web
Site at www.aeromodel.com/scat. SCAT is the Southern California Aero Team.
The contents of this are archived on-line at the SCAT Web Site and can be
e-mailed to you. It is published on an irregular basis when information is
ready.
If you want to get this e-mailed to you send a subscribe request to
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. To unsubscribe send and unsubscribe request to the same
address.
If you have information to publish send it to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. We are
interested in everything about FAI free flight, new developments,
information about new products, rules changes, notices about upcoming
events, reports on events, and results. Please contribute. Other
contributors include everyone from World Champions to absolute beginners.
Information is best sent as plain ASCII text. Word processor documents can
be converted and results sent in Excel spreadsheet format will be converted
for display.
If you have not received this before, you were put on the list because you
requested it, some else requested it for you or we thought that you might
like to receive it.
............................
Roger Morrell
