SEN 1467

  • Print
Details
Category: Archive 2010
Hits: 1235
Table of Contents - SEN 1467

  1. F1Q Power
  2. Simple, Direct, Democratic, Dukie
  3. that F1A Trophy
  4. Dilution
  5. Editor/Moderator Comments

F1Q Power


Roger,
 
Just to comment on the proposed motor weight limit of 8% of total model weight. I agree with Peter T. that the proposed limit is too low.
 
As a point of reference consider the super ships developed by the Finns. They use geared Neu motors which are listed at 125 grams. When connectors are added the motors are about 130 grams. It's been reported that their model weights are 600 grams. So, the motor weight ratio is 21.6 %. This is for models that have demonstrated "too much performance", with the ability to climb 150 meters in 5 seconds.
 
At the other extreme I have a prototype E-36 electric model with a 17.5 gram brushless motor, 2S lipo battery, and with a weight of approx.150 grams. This gives a motor weight ratio of 11.6%. This model, and other similar prototypes, can easily fly the required 2 minute max on a 15 second motor run, but they cannot do 3 minutes with the same run. Yet, we are being asked to consider a FAI rule with a motor weight ratio of only 8%.
 
I'm not opposed to a motor weight limit, either a ratio or a fixed max motor weight. However, F1Q is a power event, so I feel we need to keep the power allowance as high as possible within practical limits. Otherwise, we end up with feeble, rubber power like models with drab performance. My hope is, that someday, F1Q will become a World Champs event. To be worthy of that goal we need power.
 
Dick Ivers

Editorial Comment - It seems to me that Dick and Pim are almost aligned, its a question of what % of the model weight - don't wimp it down it , after all it is a power class. The proposed 8% is too little.

It also look likes the E-36 or maybe E-1 would a good mini event or maybe it is just a little too good , perhaps a 10 or 12 second run?

I saw Dick's F1Q model flying at Ingleside and would think that you would not want anything more wimpy than that for a World Champs level class.  Any non-Geezers to support Dick?



Simple Direct, Democratic, Dukie


Hi!
Here's a simple team selection method.
1. Pay 100 bucks (or maybe 200) to get in the pool.
2. Have everyone in his  F1 class get 2 votes for the team. Only 1 vote can be for him/her-self.
Then, maybe more flyers that are serious might get out and compete for two years (or more).
Dukie


That F1A Trophy

I believe there's a CIAM budget for trophy maintenance and repairs. It would be worth Sergey contacting Massimo Semoli, the CIAM secretary, to ask whether some funding could be made available to reimburse the specialist who did the repair work.

Martin Dilly

Dilution

Hey guys;

  This is going to turn into a dilution scenario, if we don't work out a consensus. Everyone, including me, has an idea of the new program. If we have 5 to 10 ideas, we will end up with the same demotivating program. Although many ideas are interesting, the fact is that we have to get on board with one. I believe the simple multi contest format with 6 contests and 2 of them in Muncie is the easiest approach. We can modify it after the first cycle and fine tune it, but lets get there first so we can fine tune it. One easy mod might be to count 3 contests instead of 2.

  After all, we have 2 World Cup contests in each one week period and everyone will attend these contests. We will have an "Endless February" and  an "Endless October". These will be like mini World Champs and the since everyone goes to these contests already, we will have a solid basis to get the team selection contest series going. There a lot of interesting mods being presented, but we have a couple weeks to get this done and the 6 that have been proposed are the ones that 90% plus go to anyway, so it is the easiest to convert to. Nothing against Florida, Connecticut, Texas, Arizona , Colorado, but the timing is short as the TSC meeting is in Dec. and we only have time to get a consensus on the 6 that almost everyone attends already. If we want to massage the program in the next cycle and add or swap out contests we will have time to do so, just not now.

  Hope we can come together and get this done. With so many ideas, it is hard in a short period of time to do so, but if we do not, the choice will end up a 14 rounder at Lost Hills or Muncie. And it seems evident that the majority of team selection participants would like to try another system.

Please consider the options and timing and lets all come together for once. The time is now!!!

Thermals, Michael Achterberg

 

 

 

Editorl / Moderator comments

 

Mike,  you are reiterating what I've been trying to say.   If people what to change the current way of selecting the team, they need to come to some more of agreement quickly in time to present a united or at least majority front to the TSC for their up coming in person meeting.

Aram's suggestion of a regional selection is more contraversial as any regional suggestion is always contentious because of the imbalance in number or participants and sites by region.

Bill did raise a valid objection to the multi-contest approach in that it is more expensive in terms of travel cost and tougher for people working or at school to get time off. The counter argument is that we have chosen 6 events that most serious people attend anyway.  It could favour the rich geezer with a flexible time table.

For Mike the geezer, you have a bike at Lost Hills as do many other, including those a number of those  s*****s from the other side of the Rockies, you can use your car or even rent a golf cart ! and while at Munice the AMA provides the ideal geezer mobile in the form the rental golf carts.



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