SEN-395 March 29 2000
- Details
- Category: Archive 2000
- Hits: 819
News and Reports 2000 - First half
SCAT Electronic News 29 March 2000 Issue 395
Table of Contents
=================
World Champs 2001 - Ackery
Congratuations to SEN readers Lagan and Malkin
CIAM - Tracy
Re: The 1/2 A vs F1J Affair - Fletcher
Rex Hinson "S" - Watters
Thinkings about CIAM pleanary meeting - Ursino
World Champs 2001 - Morris
World Champs 2001
=================
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Roger,
Any idea of the date planned for the World Champs ?. I presume since it
is moving from the Southern to Northern hemisphere there will be change.
[David - I assume it will be in October 2001]
Any chance of including the drawing of Klaus's lung powered sprayer, a
picture is a big aid to clarity.
[It will be sent separately]
Congratuations to SEN readers Lagan and Malkin
=============================================
SEN readers Paul Lagan and John Malkin were just elected to the NZMAA
Hall of Fame. Both had represented New Zealand in many World
Champs [Free Flight of course!] and performed numerous services
for aeromodelling in New Zealand. Also elected at the same
were Frank Bethwaite [one of the first R/C World Duration records
holders and Les Wright a early R/C pioneer. These are the
first members in the NZMAA's Hall of Fame.
CIAM
====
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Roger,
I would write an extensive report of my experience in Switzerland but I have to
admit that Ian Kaynes has done a very thorough job of it already. I'd like to
add some details, circumstances and recommendations specifically concerning
the famous RDT situation:
1) The AMA is very concerned with the legality and vulneralbility of the free
flight community's use of the RF spectrum especially in a mixed flight (RC and
Free Flight) environment. This concern is aimed at (but not limited to) the
exact frequency(s) employed, the rate of signal pulsation by individual
flyers, the power of the emmitted signals, and the transition to competitive
flight in an other country - us going to their site or other countries
comming over here. There has been enormous energy and time given to securing
the particular and available spectrum for "model airplane" use by the
AMA and the FCC in this country.
The AMA knows only too well what an involved expedition this can be. There are
direct insurance implications with the arrangements. At the CIAM meeting this
year in Lausanne, the AMA took all of these aspects into consideration.
Dave Brown (the only NAA appointed delegate who votes at the plenary session)
voted against the RDT initiative and would have done! so even if it would
have passed in the subcommittee session (which it didn't
by a couple of votes). He was enlightened with the fact that F1C has had the
privelege for over 10 years.... "They're probably illegal!", sez Dave.
2) I encouraged Ian Kaynes to include in the General Model Characteristics a
disclaimer that would put the responsibility of radio usage onto the
flyer...."If radio control functions are used the competitor is responsible
for the legality and suitability of the frequency and transmissions used."
In the case of F1A, for instance, this would appear in paragrapf 1.3.1.
Since the inititive failed it wasn't necessary to include this disclaimer.
Look for it, however in the future, when we secure the opportunity to use
radios for dethermalization. Realize that there is no actual frequency
specified or radio equipment usage obligations in the entire sporting code
even for any of the legitimate RC events. Also
understand that when the US RC teams fly at world championships in Europe
they are obligated to switch their radio gear to 35 mhz from the 72 mhz that
is used here. The Europeans are required to do the same thing. This stuff
doesn't appear in the sporting code but it is how it ! works.
3) The RF spectrum is so full in the zones available to us that we are warned
it might take a very long time to actually get this into some kind of legal
shape the AMA will be able to underwrite. To facilitate the process there
has to be a bona-fide attempt to work with the frequency committee of the
AMA and outline specific systems intended for use by the free flight
community. (This is st arting to sound like a subcommittee already....
and we will need a chairman...)
Oh, and there has to be a near term report set up to present to the AMA by
these wizzards in about two to three weeks - because the AMA's Freq-comm
meets then. (It would be good timing.) We need a volunteer to pull the
data together and get it into some type of comprehensive format that
identifies the work that has been done -the existing systems and the way
the systems are expected to work.
There has to be specific system objectives identified and what can and cannot
be compromised or traded. The thinking here!
should include the aspect of international competition. It should include the
element of many airplanes in the air simultaneously with independent DT signal
authority. It would be nice if the operators (flyers) didn't need a HAM license
to fly. It would also be nice if the system didn't cause all the garage doors
in western Kern County to open 38 times a day in late September - or if
Weyerhauser's stump blasting remote ignitions didn't seem to go off at
random.... I believe there is a solution to this problem already. There are
some very clever systems Ken Bauer, Tomas Koster and Roger, yourself plus
others have assembled.
These are fine but are considered "renegade" systems and need some significant
civilizing there cowboy.
4) The AMA is very intent on being involved in the RDT matter. Make no mistake:
THEY WILL BE INVOLVED. I spent considerable time, money and effort attending
the CIAM meeting this Spring. I was given George Xenakis' permission to vote in
his stead at the free flight subcommittee meeting. The RDT initiative was one
of the main agenda items I was prepared to be involved in.
I followed the debate on the SCAT pages with determination.
I asked that a survey be taken so I could accurately represent
the collective democratic notions of the witting flyers.
I researched the existing rules and interviewed flyers erudite in the
technology. But I was confounded, vexed and, yes, angered when I found out
that at the free flight subcommittee meeting in Lausanne, when the voting on
the RDT issue took place, another USA vote was surreptitiously included
in addition to my own - unknown by me at the time - that appearantly
cancelled my vote. I voted FOR the RDT system to be allowed in F1A and F1B!
Civil decorum miraculously prevailed although my best diplomatic self wanted
to accomplish someting akin to red froth especially when confronted with the
arrogrance with which this deed was defended. Smoking, boney-assed bastard...
In any event there wasn't enough votes any way to pass the item. I
tell these things to identify that we are involved in a very complex and
ostensibly emotional issue. We must garner science and work hard to get
RDT into the rules next year when there is one more chance before the
four year dry spell of no rule changes commences.
Daniel J. Tracy
Re: The 1/2 A vs F1J Affair
==============================
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
I am a simple soul really, but something really puzzles me. The F1J rules
were carefully written so as not to exclude the old fashioned Cox powered
1/2 A from the event. I know - I had a hand in writing them. Nitro fuel is
still permitted to favour the Cox TD and the weight limit allows a
traditional lightweight 1/2A to compete. So my question is this - how come
that as soon as the F1J rules were published then some people made perfect
miniature copies of existing F!C ships, complete with all the weight. I have
consistently beaten F1J ships with my ten year old model design to great
effect.
So the conundrum is this - the old TD 049 and 051's should have been seen to
have been competitive against the new fangled F1J but weren't - people just
gave up on them. What went wrong? Should we be writing the rules around what
works, not what should work?
Jon Fletcher
[This was sent to the This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. address so was lost
for a few days - do not use that address for 'regular' correspondence
or even survey stuff as the survey is now over.]
Rex Hinson "S"
==============
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Rex,
I have been thinking about your question on variable pitch/velocity/wing
wiggler setting in burst climb and would like to add the following:
It would appear to me that the higher variable pitch at burst, caused by
higher torque, would also create more left turn reaction on the model tending
to give more left turn. Thus the slower flying model in the burst with the
same wing incidence change may/could have the same pattern as the faster,
lower burst torque, non-variable pitch. It would all depend on the wing
airfoil lift/drag characteristics at the slower speed verses higher speed and
the rate of prop pitch change----looks like another one of these trial and
error solutions to me. Maybe someone can model it for the next Symposium.
Also, I'm with you, I will be happy to go west to help with the World
Championships in 2001.
John Watters
Battle Creek, Michigan
Thinkings about CIAM pleanary meeting
=====================================
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Hello everybody,
I have read with interest the last news from the CIAM plenary meeting.
If we exclude several irrelevant rule changes, it seems to me that they
have not changed anything, as usual.
ALthough I am Italian, I was not completely for the Italian proposal.
I agree that it was too drastic to be approved, however it was not even
taken into consideration and this is too much. This means that they
were far to even understand its inspiring principles.
I also disapprove the rejection of the proposal to extend RCDT to F1A
and F1B, being they doubtful about the possibility that somebody could
cheat .... really unbelievable.
Sadly, Free Flight is slowly running low of competitors. Nothing
changes, no newcomers, and this is, in my opinion, another step towards
the definitive extinction of this beautiful sport.
Thermals
M.Ursicino
Italy
World Champs 2001
=================
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Roger, On behalf of the FF Team Selection Committee, I wish to
congratulate you, George Batiuk, Hardy Broderson, Bob Waterman, the Scat
Club, AMA and whoever I may have missed for a successful bid for hosting
the 2001 World Championship Contest. The Committee stands willing and able
to help where protocol permits. Gil Morris
.............
Roger Morrell
