SEN 697 - 2 May 2002

SCAT Electronic News 2 May 2002 issue 697

Extract from  SCAT Club M&M, Apr 2002
Segrave on CIAM Procedure
Kansas City Contest June 15-16 - Wiley
Walstons in Europe - Brocks
F1J Thoughts! - The Alien and his puppy
British Free Flight Nationals 2002 - Woodhouse
10th Annual Spring Cup-Seguin - Parker
Big Al's Update - Dukie

Extract from SCAT Club M&M, Apr 2002

Note: Normally the minutes of SCAT meeting are sent only to members.
As they only contain boring administriva. The real excitment of
the meetingis either in looking at models and stuff the members bring
or the traditional ice cream desert.

However at the recent meeting there was some discussion about the recent
CIAM meeting and in particular the process for choosing the US delegate.
Bill Bogart, the former delegate suggested that we publish some section of
the minutes. The minutes have been changed slightly for this publication.

SCAT Club minutes for 24 Apr 2002 meeting @ the Brun residence.

We started the biz with an Americas Cup discussion.
The conflict problem of three Am Cups on this weekend(27-28 Apr)
is a concern. Solution not in our hands directly, unless entries drop
below rules levels.

Bill stated that the F1P proposal was a complete suprise and they
reviewed it as best they could under the circumstances and voted accordingly.

With 20-20 hindsight the members present discussed the proposed rules
and generally agreed that the solution to the problem was much deeper
than the model specifications.

Bill Bogart gave us insight on the FAI background actions on his
appointment & subsequent replacement as U.S. member of CIAM
FF subcommittee.

Bill had been appointed when the previous delegate, George Xenakis
had to stop for family reasons.

Bill attended one meeting and subsequently recieved a letter from
the US FF Team selection commitee asking him to resign. Bill discussed
this with a number of people, including representaives of the AMA.
The decision was left up to him. At the World Champs Bill discussed this
futher with George Batiuk and Dave Brown. Bill and George were under the
impression that Bill was continue for a short time, then he
would retire and be replaced by George.

Ian Kaynes & Dave Brown(AMA Pres & voting FAI delegate)
appointed Dan Tracy to take Bill's place for future meetings.
This was a suprise to both Bill and George.

Based on the Puppie incident the members were concerned about the
procedure for the appointment of the delegate. This is because
the FF Sub Commitee has quite a lot of power, even with
respect to the National Aero Clubs. The consenus was that
the person needed to be on the CIAM Free Flight sub commitee for
some length of time to build up the correct working realationship.

The members resolved to propose the the AMA and US FreeFlight Selection commitee
that the US person on the CIAM Free Flight sub commitee be elected by the
particpants in the FAI Free Flight program for a term of 5 years.

The SCAT membership did not have a issue with Dan Tracy's ability
nor with him being the right kind of person the represent the USA
on the CIAM Free Flight Subcommitee. Dan is technically very capable
and is an active particpant [F1B].

In other business the Prez said that George Batiuk is stepping down as MM FAI &
Finals CD. Bob Tymchek & Bob White will organise the MM comp.
SCAT will investigate the CD'ship possibilities for the 2004 Finals,
which should be at Lost Hills.

Editorial Comments

After the meeting while car pooling home someone commented that the net effect
of the US 'delegate' history was that at least two people - Bill and George,
both of whom contribute significantly end up by being very demotivated.
While this comment is a an over simplification, demotivating major
contributors is probably not the way to prolong the life
of FAI Free Flight.

With respect to Mike Segrave's letter below I would like to comment
that this is based on reports given to Mike by attendees. On one
point Bill Bogart comment that he thought the chairman, Sandy
Pimmenof ran the meeting well, keeping it to the adgenda and such
discipline was needed needed to get through all the items in the
time alloted.

I recieved some e-mails suggesting that I had not published Mike's
letter because I had been threatened in some manner. This is not true.
The only reason for holding the letter was to publish at the same time
as the SCAT minutes because they are related but not the same.

If we look at the AMA in the US, the president, Dave Brown holds
an elected office. Dave has his personal ideas about what is
good for model aviation, which includes the different FAI programs.
Dave is also aware of the constituents that elect him and tries
to represent their desires.

This is not the case when we look at the 'names' in the CIAM hierachy,
they are all people who have made a signficant contribution to model aviation
but they have been in those positions for a very long time
and most are no longer active particpants. Mike Segrave's
article may not be strictly conrrect but I suspect
that there is more than an element of truth.

I was very suprised and disconcerted when I saw a copy
of the famous "ban the gears" e-mail from Bob Sifleet
to the CIAM president. But I found that Bob was not
the only person doing this as another US mover
in the F1C/F1J world also told be he called
Sandy [his words , not mine] to discuss this....
why did both these sportsmen not go through their
National Aero Club ?

Segrave on CIAM Procedure

You, me and 95% of FF modellers thought that proposals
for rule changes were sent to the FF sub committee via
the National Aeroclub (NAC) who then discussed and vetted
them before forwarding them to the March Annual
Meeting for approval..The agenda for this meeting is
published beforehand and we examine it to see whether is
any item of interest (like gears!) The approving body
then practically rubber stamp these forwarded (and agenda
items) proposals as they were judged OK by the sub-

What really happens is this:
First of all, there are TWO Meetings, not just one. The
first is in November, the "Bureau" and the second in the
following March, which includes the "Plenary". Taking
these meetings in order:
1.At the November meeting, the "Bureau", which is made up
of its 6 officers, is joined by the sub committee
chairmen who report on their committee's activity.. Rules
proposals are briefly reviewed here but are examined more
closely between this and the March meeting by the
"Bureau" members. An agenda listing proposals is finally
drawn up for publication
Only the "Bureau" members can vote here due to the rules
of the FAI(not CIAM), not the chairmen. This "Bureau" is
run on the basis of "consensus" rather than .actual vote
but that may change shortly.
Meanwhile, these proposals are taken back to the relevant
sub committees by their chairmen for further
consideration and discussion. These sub committees are
mainly "
"phone and mail" operations, physical meetings take place
only rarely

March meeting, including the "Plenary"
2. The "Bureau" meets to discuss general proposals, W/C
reports and future organisation as well as their
officials but will occasionally drift into rules where
the future of the sport may be affected. Again, the sub
committee chairmen attend.

This "Bureau" meeting ( and that on the third day) tend
to be run with an iron fist by Mr. Pimenoff, and it can
be difficult to overcome his tendency to "command. In the
past, for example formal motions and votes were seldom
taken, and he ruled on the basis of "there is no
objection, therefore". That changed, somewhat, at this
last meeting when the US delegate insisted that the exact
wording of a motion be written down and a vote recorded.
This proved fortunate later when President Pimenoff tried
to "improve" his work before it went to the Plenary.

Second day
The time is taken up with Technical Meetings chaired by
the various sub committee chairmen. These meetings go
over relevant proposals which were on the agenda, in
detail, and will make recommendations to the "Bureau"
meeting on the following day.(the Plenary). However, in
addition to these proposals, each sub committee may make
ADDITIONAL proposals. In addition to that, the chairman
can make "suggestions" which are his own thoughts and/or
ideas on a subject. Just like others(?), he has the right
to suggestions as to rules(?) and, if there are no other
suggestions or changes, they commonly become the
recommendations of the committee(!!!!) (my punctuations -
MS) The chairman will also take ideas expressed around
the table and condense them into a reccommendation. In
other words, the committee and more importantly, the
chairman have practically carte blanche as regards rule
changes (!!!) and thus can produce sensations, like F1P,
at will.

Third day
During this session , every proposal from the agenda
along with the relevant approval/rejection from the sub
committee comes to the floor for a vote, each country
having one vote. Typically, 35 or so countries are
present but not all vote on every subject
Finally, the election of officers and sub committee
chairmen for the following year takes place. Note that
these SC Chairmen are elected by the National Aeroclub
delegates present rather than the members of the sub
committee. Unless there is a challenger or a really good
reason, the incumbent is usually re-elected.

A few notes
The sub committees themselves are also allowed to make
proposals (outside those from the NACs)
Although only SC chairmen are officially there, SC
members are encouraged to attend. In addition, ANYONE can
attend these Technical meetings on the second day subject
to the approval of their NAC and the relevant chairman.
They are totally open meetings.
There are many meetings going on simultaneously and since
some delegates have multiple interests, the shuffle from
that one meeting to another at will, resulting in some
countries casting multiple votes if they have more than
one person there. Theoretically, though, its one country,
one vote.

Now for the last March meeting. and F1P
(Note: it is not completely clear when or where the
following discussion took place)

The class arose , primarily, at the behest of Mr.
Pimenoff. It was an outgrowth of the discussion of geared
engines in F1C which spilled over to discussions of the
same in F1J. This brought out the point that the Junior
class(F1J) was in real trouble and only one strike away
from elimination by statute on the basis of too little
participation. Pimenoff thought the creation of a simpler
class, for JUNIORS (my italics) would perhaps save the
class.( Note that no consideration was given as to why
there was a low entry, such as lack of promotion of the
class. Note here also the manner in which Pimenoff runs a
meeting, above) A thought process which was agreed to by
the vast majority of those present who were willing to
make a last ditch effort to keep it.

The Technical meeting put it together and it was voted in
the next day at the Plenary meeting.. It happened that
quick!!! With NO feedback from the NACs back in each
country.!!! Note also the conditions and complete freedom
under which the chairman and the members can act., as
described above also.

As a closing point, a possible scenario. If at this
meeting, the chairman of the FF sub committee or one of
it's members had made a proposal to BAN GEARS, and
received on the spot approval of the rest of the
committee, then we would have had gears outlawed. Put
that in your pipe and smoke it!

Regards Mike S

Kansas City Contest June 15-16
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Hi Roger:

The Heart of America FF Association has rented the parking lot of the
Kansas Speedway (KC,KS) for a National Cup Contest 15-16 June. This
looks like a decent venue, it is mostly flat, grassy, and about 1 mile
NS and .5-.75 mi EW. There are some field to the north on unfenced land.
All FAI classes are also scheduled, with F1A, F1B, and F1C on Saturday
(7 rounds), and the Mini-Events on Sunday (5 rounds). This is a new
venue. If it works we would like to talk about an America Cup contest
next season. For updates and information those interested can go to my
web site: We urge any and all flyers
in the immediate and not-so-immediate area to attend. If the Speedway
people see a big crowd they are likely to be pleased, become interested,
and invite us back.

Thanks, Ed Wiley

Walstons in Europe
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

I'm planning on flying at the Beauvoir-sur-Niort and Poitou contests in F=
rance this August. How does the Walston retrieval system work in France a=
nd generally in Europe? The Walston transmitters send in the 216 to 220 M=
Hz range. I know that it's use is illegal in Europe - but is there any ba=
d interference from other strong users on this frequency?

Thanks, Peter Brocks This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. =20

Mine worked fine there last year. No problems at all]

F1J Thoughts!
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

I have been asked by an anonymous person to write my feelings on the
difficulty of flying F1J models.
My experience with the event is that it is indeed not as difficult as
some people believe. The available designs of which there are several,
when set up according to the proper specs.(CG, Correct wing warps,
proper wing and stab incidence and etc.), take a relatively short time
to adjust for proper flight. With the advent of the carbon wing and stab
structures, they tend to stay in proper adjustment. I rarely test them
except for maybe one check flight prior to the first round of a contest.
They are not as difficult to fly as an F1C model. While F1J's do
accelerate more quickly than an F1C, they probably do not go any faster
than an F1C after about 3 or 4 seconds.
Because of their lighter wing loading, they tend to sustain less
damage when landing dt'd or otherwise.
As far as complexity, they tend to be easier than F1C models to set-up
due to only one glide position and the absence af a brake. The fact that
they are allowed a folding prop is a plus, as I have never broken one,
and am still using the original props on all of my F1J models, the
oldest of which is about 4 years old.
The new F1P event is really not going to answer the perceived problems
of F1J. There are no current designs for the event that I am aware of
and so F1P will have the added problem of finding the design that will
work. These models will have to be scratch built until at least a carbon
wing and stab can be manufactured for them. While this may seem fine to
the Luddites, for sure they will become availiable and at that point
become necessary for a faster climbing, thinner airfoiled model.
Bob Gutai

British Free Flight Nationals 2002
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

No doubt "You've heard it through the grape vine" that it's on! The
Nationals will take place on June 1st, 2nd and 3rd at Barkston Heath
featuring the usual programme of events. All the regular features of on
site camping and toilet facilities etc will be in place.

The only major change is that we will not be operating the computerised
entry system. This year the whole event will be controlled via a manual
entry form. In order to help facilitate the event, please make your pre
entry to the Leicester office as soon as possible, this will be
acknowledged. Pre entry is not mandatory however pre entry will save you
and the organisation time when you arrive at the field. Please remember to
bring your entry acknowledgement with you as this will be your "ticket" onto
the airfield and camp site as well as entry into the contest.

As mentioned we will not be using a computer based scoring system. The
event will be controlled using the "Timperly" recording system.

Having, at this late date, got the show back on the road we need your help.
As the FFTC will be engaged in making sure that the overall operation works,
we will need a number CD's to run the events. Please step forward and offer
your help to Alan Gibbs on 02476 676507.

At the time of writing the hanger is not available for our use.

Help make this the best Nationals ever by spreading the word and turning up
in your droves to both help and fly. We will keep you advised with the
latest news being posted to the FFTC web site

Finally, on your behalf, I would like to thank Graham Lynn our Chief
Executive who managed to persuade the authorities to release the field as
well as other members of the BMFA Council and the FFTC who have simply and
quickly swung in action.

e-mail me for an entry form

Mike Woodhouse

Chairman FFTC

10th Annual Spring Cup-Seguin
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Yes canopies can fly and it really can be "too windy to haul rocks". A nice
way of saying our "good weather" luck ran out this year. Saturday morning
broke with 10-15 mph wind, which rapidly increase to 20-25 (30 mph gusts) by
the time we called a halt to flying at the end of round two (large events).
We were obviously flying two minute maxes and did so for the remainder of
the contest.

Our decision was to finish the large events (5 additional rounds) with the
mini-events on Sunday using 1-1/2 hour overlapping rounds. Sunday morning
stated off with 10-12 mph wind and very hazy. We opted to fly super maxes in
the two evens where two contestants were clean (F1A and F1B) to avoid
flying off during the anticipated windier conditions latter in the day.
Fortunately the wind never really picked up much and actually calmed during
some of the large thermals. Had a lot of flights off the field, some in the
trees and I found a stock tank with my F1J (the Icarex did fine - thank
you!). We did finish everything and no flyoffs were necessary. Attendance
was down a little due mainly to the folks who looked at the weather
forecast. A special tanks to my wife Julie who ruled the registration desk
with iron fist and a fashionable "no whining" sign. Her efforts allowed me
to participate, while attending to the critical CD issues. The results:

F1A (6 Flew)
1) Steve Spence 878
2) Jackie Sheffer 766
3) Mike Fedor 697
4) John Schelp (Jr) 676
5) Jesse Shepherd 657
6) Michael Reeves 129

F1B (2 Flew)
1) Richard Wood 890
2) Fred Pearce 720

F1C (2 Flew)
1) Faust Parker 840
2) Henry Spence 120
3) Reid Simpson DNF (Smart!!!)

Open Gas (5 Flew)
1) Marvin Mace 828
2) Jackie Sheffer 804
3) Henry Jackson 657

P-30 (4 Flew)
1) Craig Hollier 358
2) John O'Dwyer 346
3) Arthur Milam 301

F1G (2 Flew)
1) Richard Wood 575
2) John O'Dwyer 92

F1H (4 Flew)
1) Mike Fedor 546
2) Michael Reeves 445
3) Jackie Sheffer 390
4) Steve Spence 320

F1J (6 Flew)
1) Faust Parker 600
2) Jackie Sheffer 575
3) Marvin Mace 555
4) Russ Snyder 534
5) Jon Schelp 226
6) Mike Fedor 93

Final Note: ALWAYS! load a transmitter story: The only ship lost during the
contest under such windy conditions was Henry Spence's brand new "107" VE
Powered F1C. Henry was putting the first flights on the ship, so he decided
he did not need a transmitter ("I wasn't going to glide the model") The
thing was going so well that on the third flight he decided to bunt and give
it a short glide. You guessed it - Henry's glide trim was right on, there
was lift and the DT malfunctioned - Bye, Bye Birdie. An air search failed
and we can only hope that someone comes across the lost model and gives
Henry a call. Nuff Said!


Big Al's Update
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Contrary to my contest announcement, Big Al's FAI Shootout on Memorial Day
Weekend will include the "Limited Maximum", weather permitting of course. It
is understood that the America's Cup Sanction prefers this option to be used
in all Am Cup meets if possible.

[Limited maximun aka Super Max]

Roger Morrell