SEN issue 1127 - 24 August 2007

  • Print
Details
Category: Archive 2007
Hits: 1343
Table of Contents - SEN issue 1127 - 24 August 2007

  1. Wishbone #14
  2. When Part of the Model...
  3.  missing issues


Wishbone #14
From:This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Hello Karl,
Ike's Wishbone variants have been published  as Model of the Year
in several Sympos.
Wishbone #14 can be found in Sympo 90.
The Buntbone which Don Zink & I commissioned Vasily Beschasny
to build and sell, is the composite version of Ike's great #14.
It is still an excellent choice, winning still.
click on 'catalogue', then the camera after Buntbone, you will see a
3-vu dwg I made for Vasi's brochure.
That should be all the info you need to proceed.
Oh yes, it is possible that NFFS Publication Dept sells full size
Wishbone #14 plans. 
Caution: other earlier Wishbones used the CH-407 airfoil which is
not quite as forgiving as the B-6356 is, IMHO.
Regards,
Leeper

Re: "When part of the model...."

From: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.


From :This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
>
> “When part of the model becomes detached during the launch
> or during the flight time”. (FAI porting Code part 4a: paragraphs
> 3.1.5 (c), 3.2.5(a), 3.3.5(b) for F1A,B and C respectively).
> While understanding Aram's reasoning, I'd suggest that the rule should
be left as it stands for reasons of simplicity.
He's quite correct that, if the attempt is allowed, the model as
retrieved after the flight must still be legal. Quite apart from
arguments, and inevitable jury decisions, over whether the failure
affects a major part or merely a missing incidental bit, his change
would make re-qualifying the model's weight and projected area after the
flight mandatory. I'd respectfully suggest that this adds an un-needed
burden to the organisers, because they would now have to provide
measuring equipment and officials on the field at every contest. Yes, I
know that they should do this any way but usually they don't because the
spot checking requirement is usually ignored at all levels of
competition. This makes it very unlikely that any re-qualification would
be enforced either, potentially leading to an unsporting result.
The last contest when I can remember seeing spot checks being applied
was the European Champs at Maniago in 1996. The last time I had a model
spot checked was during the associated Open International.
In short: leave the rule [3.1.5 (c), 3.2.5(a), 3.3.5(b)] as it stands
because it works and is simple to apply.
If you must do anything, just move it up into the general rules section
rather than re-stating it for every class.
Martin Gregorie

missing issues
From : Rene Limberger

Roger,
i am not sure if this is just me, but it seems i am only getting every other sen issue. for example, i am missing 24, but just got 25.
is this something that was reported by others before? to rule out that this is my work filtering stuff out, could you add my personal e-mail to the subscription list please: .......
thanks,
-r
Rene

You can get back numbers online ... well most of the time when I get to posting them at http://www.aeromodel.com/TM/T392.

I do know of any special problems with any individual issue. Bounces get reported and your e-mails have not been marked. However having run the thought police at a large corp I can well understand how people like you such subversive material such as SEN .... maybe with some nasty keywords so IT is without doubt their duty to remove the odd issue.

Your other e-mail address is on the subscribe list, it just had not be activated.

So finally a word to those that do not get SEN by e-Mail, you can sign yourself up but going to www.scat-online.com and using the pull down menu to subscribe. Note that you will get an automated message that you will need to act on for the subscription to start flowing.

Roger



..........
Roger Morrell