SEN 1382
- Details
- Category: Archive 2010
- Hits: 1091
- Don't Restrict the Talk
- New Weather station
- Limited Tech Models - is it the real ansewr?
- Re the RT Model Debate
- Testing in Tennessee
- More on FAI FF in the UK
Don't Restrict the Talk
We are 2 Swedish free flighters who support BMFA Restricted Tech.class CIAM proposal.
We hope this will be adopted at least for a trial period at first as it will take time to implement.
The proposal is not meant to compete with or change the regular FAI competition classes.
It will facilitate entry into freeflight competition for those who for various reasons cannot fill the tough
requirements of the FAI class regular competitions. We have introduced the proposal on our
Swedish internet freeflight Forum and also included an article in our National Model
Magazine. We write this in order to promote a discussion on SEN regarding this subject.
Ronald Borg E:mail This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Inge Sundstedt E:mail familjen.sundstedt@spray.se
New Weather Station ?
I have recently discovered an online weather station "MLHSCA", located in the center of
Lost Hills: http://www.wunderground.com/weatherstation/WXDailyHistory.asp?ID=MLHSCA
Map on right-hand side shows location as being central Lost Hills, with temperature and
wind vector icon. Scroll down for plots of current daily conditions, wind, direction,
temp, etc. Click on "Current Conditions" tab for daily forecasts for the coming week,
and click on "Hourly" under each day, to get prediction of daily conditions — looking
good for SCAT Annual.
— Biggles
Limited Technology Models--Is this the Real Answer?
Roger,
I find the proposed FAI limited technology events an interesting idea.
But maybe we should broaden our thinking a little. Why do we only have a
Free Flight World Championship for F1A, F1B, and F1C? Why not have a World
Championship for Free Flight Towline Glider Models, Free Flight Elastic
material (rubber)Powered Models, and Free Flight internal combustion Engine
Powered Models While we are at it we should include in the Free Flight World
Championships a class for Free Flight Electric Powered Models, (this is the
future guys, wake up),
The rules would be simple. Any FAI class of model could be flown in the
appropriate category, Glider, Rubber, Engine, or Electric Motors (Electric
are always motors) as long as the flight rules were the same, maxes, number
of rounds, and flyoffs maxes. Think about it for a moment. The limited
technology events could be flown right along side the current FAI classes.
Now, if you really want to make the FAI rules simple do away with
everything except basic things that govern model height. For the engine power
class only fuel, motor run, and maybe max engine size is specified. For Rubber
only the maximum amount of rubber is specified, for glider only towline
length is specified. For electric only maximum battery weight and motor run
are specified. No model area rules, no model weight rules. Very easy to
monitor and enforce.
This would make it simple to "adjust" the rules if a particular
configuration proved to be overly competitive or under competitive. For power simple
take away some motor run time from an over competitive configuration or
add motor run to an under competitive configuration. For gilder add or
subtract towline length to equalize the different configurations. Same for
rubber, add or subtract the allowable amount of rubber allowed for the
different model configuration.
What would we see with rules like this? I think we would see a mixture of
modeling ideas like never before. It would once again bring in creativity
into our thinking about models. Instead of feeling that it is required to
buy the latest model to be competitive you would be able to use the
various components available to you to assemble what you believe to be the best
compromise of the available models. It doesn't make any difference if you
decide that the best option to you is to buy models or build your own.
There is no compelling reason that any one configuration can't be made equal to
the other possible configurations. There would be some trial and error
looking for the best options, but that is what would make it fun and
interesting.
Jim Bradley
USA
Re the Restricted Technology debate .
As a member of a shrinking group of devotees, I think we need to be supporting any effort that is targetted at getting more participation occurring in Freeflight. Whether the RT rules are meant provide a means of competing directly with F1A, B and C, or just providing a step-up class is still somewhat unclear from the various discussions being aired. However the approach proposed by limiting functions provides an effective means of limiting the technical development of the classes, as opposed to the usual case of a "novice or beginners, or mini" class starting with all good intent, but which very quickly becomes dominated by models of a technical standard just as good as the major FAI categories.
As I read the proposed rules, the construction of the models is not material limited so the classes can benefit from the advantages of modern materials (stronger structures less prone to warps and trim changes), and due to defined numbers of function, mechanical timers will be pretty well universal unless the servo drives a scroll, although there is nothing apparent stopping you from using RDT to get the model down (a good thing).
The RT rules are not about trying to change or better the F1A, B and C rules, they are about getting more people out to enjoy open paddocks, fresh air and trying to find that next boomer thermal. Whether you do that with a chuckie or a techo-super model is just personal preference, the more pressing issue is how we keep people doing that beyond the next twenty years that is the real test.
Regards
Ted Burfein
Testing in Tennessee?
Hi Roger,
Does anyone know of any test/trimming sites in Tennessee or adjacent States?
Thanks, David Halliday
FAI Free Flight in UK - A Thought or Two for Husbands Bosworth conference
Where are the UK FAI contests?
British Free Flight has had a skittish relationship with the FAI classes; praising our world champions - Elton Drew, Mike Fantham & Peter Watson in recent decades - but studiously ignoring these classes in favour of far more 'British' competitions domestically. This is as true today as at any time in the last five decades.
Now we are bemoaning the lack of entries in the 'Trials' but the failure of FFTC to encourage FAI competition is a major part of the apparent problem.
Lack of 'Trials' entries is due to a number of factors including:-
- lack of interest
- a small FAI clique tending to discourage aspiring entrants
- lack of FAI contests to compete in
- cost of three weekends entries, accommodation, timekeeper-helper (essential, don't even think of coming without one), then the cost of getting to the contest and flying with the rest of the team.
- boredom, or rather sheer boredom; 'Trials' are the most boring contests with just one flight every few hours.
All of these are minor considerations compared to the 'Culture Problem' of free-flight competition flying in UK. FAI classes are seen as elitist by both flyers and FFTC so, like the media generally, the contest programme is organised for popular interest rather than long term goals of international success. UK has a two-tier contest programme; FFTC events and Club organised rallies - of which there are plenty, including SAMS, whose entries rival (or exceed) the national programme organised by FFTC.
As I won't be at the HB bash here are a few facts that might have been overlooked in the run up to the 'Trials' debate:-
FFTC organise a domestic competition program consisting of:-
15 domestic contests (including the Nationals) covering 21 days.
1 international contest (Stonehenge Cup) covering 2 days.
3 team trials, over three weekends, covering 6 days.
That's a lot of 'official' contests for 2010 but looking at the classes flown in the 15 contests/21days domestic program, how much of this is for the FAI classes?
Just 4 days of FIA, FIB, FIC, FIQ contests out of a 21 day program, and that includes the new FAI Gala introduced in 2010 - its pathetic, plus none of these contests are run to an FAI schedule of seven rounds to a 180secs max.
Club organised rallies have exactly zero F1A/B/C/P/Q competitions.
There is no domestic FAI competition scene from which entries would feed into the 'team selection' system - whatever system of selection is chosen. Its all very well having combined classes but these have a negative effect on FAI flying by handicapping FAI spec models.
How to increase the opportunity for FAI competition flying:-
- more FAI contests
- reduce Trials to a one day shoot-out to FAI rules and use the other five days for FAI plus other classes contest days.
- require FFTC Galas to include FAI class events.
These simple changes would immediately increase FAI contests from the present miserable 4 days a year into a considerably more encouraging 14 contest days a year.
That should make it worthwhile for a number of flyers to produce F1A/B/C/Q models with which to compete in a proper FAI contest schedule; then with the increase in FAI flyers generally perhaps we might get more fliers interested in entering the Trials - QED!
Judging by the interest shown in the HB debate, as I heard at the 2nd Area (Barkston), the general concensus is that:-
- reduce the trials to one day/weekend by having the Stonehenge Cup and Nationals as part of the qualification process.
- put the savings in costs and resources into more domestic contests catering for the majority of fliers.
- forget about the new generation, there simply isn't one.
Have a great time at HB.
David Brawn
..............................
Roger Morrell