SEN 651- December 5, 2001
Category: Archive 2001
Table of Contents
SEN, Viruses and the Like
Toyness - Bennett
updated web-site - Stoev
AMA Power Events - Stalick
The cost to pursue the sport of free flight models. - Schroedter
Humor - Boutillier
Salutations - Ryan
Re: F1C - Andresen
Attention CDs (not CD's) - Ramrod
Attn CD's. Round times - Hines
Wooden wonder? - Scott
F1C Humour Rules or What - Editorial
SEN, Viruses and the Like
In the last few days SEN was not properly available because
our ISP has some DNS issues that caused our domain name
aeromodel.com to be not available for some Internet users.
They have hopefully fixed their problems.
In the last few weeks we have recieved a number of mail messages
that have the Nimda virus or a derivative there of. If they
can from a person that I felt I knew well enough I told them
of the situation.
Most of these viruses or worms rely on some of the
features of well known [usually Microsoft] products.
We do not use these products at SEN, so that they
have not caused us any problems, and the way we
do things signficantly reduces the likelyhood of
us passing them on to subscribers. We do use
some proprietary software to help us prepare SEN.
Fror security reasons we prefer not to explain
exactly how SEN is put together because people
try to hack our web site daily. This part of doing
SEN is a bus man's holiday as for my real job
I run an IT department for a multinational data
communications services provider.
I always appreciate the help that I get from the SEN
readers, In particular the material you send
In a message dated 12/3/01 10:39:45 PM Pacific Standard Time,
I would contend almost the opposite. The more that airframes are
purchased complete, the more a toy-like quality that amounts to. Complexity
Some days before were made of updating on page www.img.ru
The drawings in sections F1A and F1H are added.
You can see configuration of models with E-timer.
AMA Power Events
Re: Bob Mattes' proposal to combine events so that there are three classes in
AMA and Nostalgia events. The original Classic Gas proposal did just that. It
combined AMA classes into 1/2A, A-B, and C-D. It also limited the events to
Cat. III since that was the primary source of the problem with multiple
Both of these ideas were shot down with vengeance, and the current rules,
which were a cross proposal to the original, were eventually approved.
It would be helpful, in my opinion, to limit the number of gas events. The
original proposal was a reasonable attempt at doing so, but it didn't get any
Maybe in the future, someone can try again.
The cost to pursue the sport of free flight models.
I have been flying free flight models now for 66 years, with only a
few breaks. I can't imagine a more rewarding and challenging sport to
pursue. The greatest part has been all the wonderful fellow and gals
whom I've got to know. (Sadly, so many have passed on.) But I also had
the pleasure of a free trip to Australia to fly in the '93 World Champs
and a year later to China for the China-America Friendship competition.
I could go on and on describing the rewards I have received from this
The new high-tech FAI models are the greatest. They are far more
challenging to fly because so many things have to be set just right.
Other than the costs to get underway in one or more of the 6 classes, I
don't feel that this is an expensive sport. I look at my son Martin, who
is an avid fisherman, and see what he spends to go fishing. I think he
just bought his 5th boat (there is always a better boat that he must
have), and his motorhome is now a 26' Four Winds. He regularly flies to
Alaska to catch red and king salmon. He must spend ten times what I
spend on models. Fortunately, he is one of the higher paid up in Silicon
One can make a list a mile long of sports that are far more costly
than free flight. Unlike my son, my retirement income is modest but
sufficient. I just watch what I spend for other things. I have
absolutely no debts. My newest car is a '92 4WD Explorer which I find
extremely satisfactory for my needs. So I need very little to live
comfortably. If I do have an extravagance, it is buying new computers.
But I have someone assemble one for me rather than buy a major brand.
(Does anyone need a used computer?)
This past weekend I asked Roger Coleman what it would cost me if I
decided to buy two of the best new and geared F1C's and all the required
support equipment. I think he said something like 8 grand. I have no
interest in switching to F1C (I fly F1B and F1G), but I could manage the
cost to start if I wanted to.
I do admit that this sport would be difficult for a young married
man just getting underway in his profession. But the vast majority of
free flighters, unfortunately, are pretty old. (I'm 74) We think a flyer
in his 40's is just a kid.
So the bottom line is this: even if you choose F1C to fly, this
sport can give you more pleasure per dollar that any other pasttime.
Sorry to all,
Perhaps my English is not fluent enough to allw me to recognize
humor every time!
Just thought it would only be fair to let y'all know that I am now lurking on t
his list. I just got my first digest of SCAT letters this morning. Everyday I
am closer to finishing my second F1B in Achterberg's garage. I have one new m
odel ready and test flown for MaxMen. 30 grams?!? I would love to hear from s
I'll see y'all on the field of dreams.
Fly, Max, Win.
"It's hard to make predictions, especially about the future." Yogi Berra
This pretty well sums up the track record of making rules for simple events.
EZB is probably the extreme example, being one of the most challenging
events, disguised as an entry level beginners event.
The proposal for fixed power props sounds good at first, but is dangerous
due to undetected damage and more expensive due to more replacements.
Actually, the weight and area restrictions are a major factor causing F1C's
to be more expensive than AMA models. Still, compared to the cost of shop
space, transportation and accomodations and in some rare cases the lost
wages for the few non-retirees, the model cost diminishes. How much more
does it cost to campaign an F1C than a HLG?
A former co-worker races Formula Vee's and considers any FF cost as trivial.
A final point. 20yr ago a 5meg harddrive broke the $10,000 barrier. Now we
get 1000X the capacity for 1/100 the cost with infinitely more reliability.
While the market for FF won't result in these improvements, we shouldn't
judge the final results by the initial offering.
Don't count the direct drive prop out either.
Attention CDs (not CD's)
I'm not in favor of 45-minute rounds as a standard for mini events. Sure,
there's plenty of "down time" when the weather is excellent, but if 1) it's
windy and/or 2) there are downwind "issues" such as crops, trees, rough
terrain, etc. then getting flights in every 45 minutes can be a real rush
situation, which seems sorta counter to the whole idea.
Shortening the rounds also seems to perpetuate the notion of "Let's get this
over with. After all, it's JUST F1G/H/J" as though the mini events were
unloved stepchildren to F1A/B/C. I have experienced this mindset a number of
times before, but it is one that I believe is fading; as more and more of the
"big kids" fly the mini events, the level and intensity of competition has
increased to the point where the desire of the top fliers to win these events
is just as keen as with the larger models. Why not treat these models and
their fliers with the same respect?
Attn CD's. Round times
The rounds for the towlines events don't seem to entail the wait that
George S notes in SEN 650.
It seemed that glider fliers have been content with hour rounds & any
time off after retrieval before next round is about right to get some
refreshments, rest & socialize a bit.
If I flew rubber or power classes I might feel as you,
but I prefer the hour round for F1A especially.
I feel 45 minutes is a workable time for the mini events, since they fly
to the shorter max times than the premier events & retrieval is
PS: are the National Cup scores available yet?
It has been interesting and instructive to read the responses in
SEN, and those sent directly
to me, to my outrageous suggestion that composite structures
be banned in F1C in order to
increase participation. Obviously a lot of strong emotions were stirred
by a suggestion that
dared to consider something way beyond the ineffectual attempts
of the past to maintain the
viability of the class. Most responses in SEN have been so
defensive and self-protective
that the question of whether such a crazy idea may in fact
increase participation was not
dealt with at all. And with the number of red herrings
dragged in, I could start a fish shop!
But, such radical surgery seems necessary if new fliers are
to be attracted to the class.
The skills and ingenuity of those who have created the
technologies used in current F1C
were never questioned in the original suggestion. Rather, it was
implied that such
technologies work against a recovery in participation
numbers (and may well lead to a WC
with just four of five well equipped contestants who,
between flights, wander about asking
why nobody else is able to come and play with them).
Are those who sent responses SEN actually interested at all in
Or are they more comfortable, for whatever reason, with
limited competitor numbers?
Whatever the answer, returning F1C to vitality will require care
that decisions are
unbiased by the self-interest and narcissism of entrenched fliers.
To those who emailed me directly with their ideas, why not make
your opinions public?
There must be many other power fliers out there who would
be tempted by a more
accessible F1C, and whose opinions as potential participants
are essential if the
event is to be brought within reach.
F1C Humour Rules or What
The frustration of the active sportsman - which sometimes
results in "humor" is caused apparantly frivilous suggestions
about to changing the rules. There is no question that active
particpants should have a major say in changing the rules.
Inspite of some popularily held beliefs there are still
a reasonable number of active participants in F1C.
The key question is how much should someone who
not an active particpant have to say in changing the rules.
There is no doubt that there is wisdom to be gained from all.
But on the other hand I have had 'friends' propose various
changes to the rules of the class I fly [F1B] - these people
had no interested in taking part personally but thought
the class would be better if some rule was changed. ...
For example forbidding moveable surfaces. In reality
the net effect of the rule change would be spoil the class
for those taking part and make it more difficult for beginners.
In the case of F1C, some change may indeed be desirable but
making the class revert to all wood models is not the way to do it.
The use of composite materials, while increasing the cost
of the individual model has decreased the operating cost.
Composite models last so much longer. Wooden models
wear out with usage and become unreliable and need to be
replaced. Historical evidence has shown that
with a major rules change some number of
participants will probably abandon the class. Clearly a
rules change has to have the buy-in of a reasonable
number of the existing participants so the productive
way of accomplishing this would be to come up with
an alternative rather than confronting the entrenched,
self-interested, biased and narcissistic active participant.