SEN 1207 - 30 April 2008

Table of Contents - SEN 1207

  1. John Warren - Secor
  2. F1J Sporting Code Anomally - Markos
  3. BFMA FF Forum in USA - Stalick
  4. BOM from another Point of View - Jahnke

John Warren

From: Randy Secor

The Freeflight world has lost another one of the good guys..John Warren passed away Wednesday April 23...
Many of us came to know John in the 70's, after along absence from the hobby John returned in the 90's to F1C....after a number attempts over the years John made the power team with his flying buddy Kenny Happersett and WC Randy Archer.
They went on to the WC in Argentina and brought home the F1C team gold medal....
He will be greatly missed...

F1J Sporting Code anomally

From: Chuck Markos

On reviewing the FAI Sporting Code for the F1J event, the maximum engine run has been reduced to 5 seconds, but in section 3.J.5.b) an unsuccessful attempt is defined as one where the engine runs for more than 7 seconds.   An editing oversight, I'm sure, because it doesn't make much sense otherwise.  If it is not changed, some legalistical contestant will probably try to take advantage of it.  If this has been mentioned before, I missed it and apologize for bringing it up again.
Chuck Markos

BMFA FF Forums Available from NFFS in USA

From: Bob Stalick

To all who are interested in buying the 2008 BMFA FF Forums, they will be available from the NFFS within the next three to four weeks. Our usual arrangement with Martin Dilly and Ian Kaynes will have them printed here in the USA with royalties to BMFA as in the past. The cost in the USA will be $25 per copy plus shipping. Currently, the cost for shipping is $5.00.
When the US copies are printed and ready for delivery, you will read about it here on SEN first.
Bob Stalick, NFFS Publications Services

BOM from the other Point of View

From: Ross Jahnke

I would like to disagree with Gil Morris' characterization of FAI vs. AMA modellers, and to advocate for the removal of the BOM rule.

First to Gil's point: I don't think that the BOM rule is the primary characteristic that attracts more laid back modelers to AMA events. The single rule that makes AMA events more approachable is more likely the two minute max.

Also, many AMA events are designed in such a way that sufficient performance can be achieved with a less than optimum design. For example, the difference between F1C and A gas, beside the two minute max, is the lack of a wing loading restriction. Those two variables mitigate much of performance advantage afforded by high tech materials and auto surfaces. Other events dictate a compromise like limited wing span, fuselage cross section, DT only, or ROG that tempers or prohibits the advantages of complex technologies.

We award trophies based on flight performance alone (except in the scale events). Why impose a rule that has nothing to do with the contestant's ability to fly the model?

I don't think most AMA guys fly because they know there will be more trophies than contestants. But perpetuating such an atmosphere over time through rules like the BOM is not healthy for those who already fly.

Today free flight needs to overcome a cultural barrier. The sport was born in the age of flight, and we are now past the space age and a whole generation into the computer age. Even when our technology is "cutting edge", our sport is viewed as "retro". Leisure time, especially in American culture, is at a premium. For those of us who still work full time and have children at home, just getting to the field is a scheduling challenge. The sport is also geographically isolated (much more than RC) to a very few, extremely rural flying fields. We are very much out of sight and out of mind to the populace. If an individual manages to transcend these obstacles and shows up at the contest with a model, why impose a rule that turns them away?

I ask that you please vote yes for proposal OFF-09-4.

Ross Jahnke

Roger Morrell