SEN 1198 - 1 April 2008

Table of Contents - SEN 1198 - 1 April 2008

It's not actually 1 April, but I'm traveling to New Zealand for the World Cup Contests and will not get to do a SEN for a few days, so every publication has to have a 1 April Edition ...



 Tan Super Sport January 08 - How good is it ?

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


I just purchased 10 lbs. of January 08 Super Sport. Is there any energy storage data on this batch?

Also I am trying the Sil-Slick lube, any recommendations? Is it much different to use than Son of a Gun?

Ross Jahnke



In quest for a fair approach to competition flying.


Recently the attention of our free flight authorities has been directed to a blatant un-sportive situation, that appears to be present, even if still in a reduced amount, in all three classes of our sport.

As you all know, our sport has seen rapid development in recent years, thanks to the welcome arrival of a free market approach to our sport, and the presence of a number of reliable suppliers of high quality competition "machines".

This has generated a number of high performing competition modellers, who finally can compete at high level with the right tools.

We all know that in many sports is not, per se, the use of special sport equipment that should heavily determine the final result: the launch of the javelin, or throwing of the weight, or the different classes of fencing are not depending of special javelins, heavy balls or special foils to help an athlete to show his capabilities.

We are reaching a similar situation in free flight, where the capability of a flier to use his model and choose his air are today key factors in determining the final result.

This stabilized situation is also a fertile ground for our suppliers for investing in ever more refined and performing tools, available to everybody, and rapidly acquired by everybody willing to keep his chances unchanged, so the quality level of the tools available and used by the flyers remain stable.

This positive development is today put in danger by the stubborn approach of a few modellers, unwilling to understand the positive influence that such a normalisation has brought in our sport.

Those people, unfortunately present in all classes, keep insisting on the use of unregulated models, models that do not come from well recognized official producers, but are put together, in an amateur like approach, by themselves !

This unprofessional behaviour is distorting the "fair chances situation" we should have among all the flyers, giving unjustified advantages to the users of those tools, unavailable to the large majority of the other modellers.

Think, for instance, to F1C, where, for a while, gearboxes and folders where not accessible to the large majority, creating a performance difference for the advantage of the few developers of such new systems.

In due time this situation has been corrected, and now these systems are widely available.

We see now some try, in F1A, to unbalance the fair chance situation with the use of flappers, to reduce the drag in the ballistic climb.

Again this new technology could create a disturbing unevenness in the possible final altitude of the present F1A models, leading to unfair results in competition.

For all these reasons it appears that some kind of intervention is now necessary, in the form of a limitation of this unfair differentiation in our models.

The clear way further is a definitive decision to forbid the production and use of self built models.

Only models coming from well defined and recognized factories should be allowed, they should be clearly identified with approved stamps, with the right level of protection from forgery.

In order to give the offenders the right time to re-enter into normality, their self-built models should still be accepted for the coming year, then phased out in a three year period, during which the amount of standardized parts on the model should increase from 55% to 70% to 85% (in weight) every year, to reach 95% after this grace period.

Even if the recommended way to realise any repair should be to send the damaged model or part of model back to the factory, or simply to exchange the part with a fresh one, a limited amount of self repair, according to well established and accepted procedures, should be allowed.

For this reason an allowance of 5%, by weight, of not-factory-built material should be accepted.

It is felt that this decision would bring a fair and healthy situation in our sport, with a fair chance to win for every serious competitor.

Any support for this healthy development can be voiced to the undersigned.

Anselmo Zeri




Roger Morrell