SEN 1380

SEN 1380
     
 Inbox X 
     

 
Reply
 
|

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

 to me
show details9:36 PM (38 minutes ago)
 
Table of Contents - SEN 1380

  1. Restricted Technology or Restricted Thinking
  2. Biggles on Restricted Technology
  3. Frozen Photos
  4. Dual Clubs meet.

Restricted Technology or Restricted Thinking ?


Editorial

 

I have read the UK proposals and I believe that we are confusing two objectives. A desire to control cost and a desire to return to bygone days.

 

I fully understand the concern about the increasing cost and complexity of flappers or folders or geared motors. That evolution is simple to stop by forbidding variable camber or span wings or geared motors.

 

I believe that the sentiment expressed fairly directly in Biggles article below and implied in the UK proposal against bought models and/or components is out dated and no longer valid. It has sense of amateurism against the professional that was in the beginning of the modern Olympic Games where is clearly arose from a sense of social class distinction that is not applicable in today’s world. That sentiment would also prohibit those who support our hobby or sport such as John Clapp, Mike Woodhouse, myself or any of the cottage industries from taking part because we clearly have a commercial interest.

 

The restriction on the span of the models is again an attempt to limit the use of so called exotic materials.  It has little point. I believe that if you do the cost benefit analysis comparing the cost [material and labor/labour] and effective life of a model with carbon against an all wood model, the composite model will come out cheaper over the life of the model. I’m by no means an expert builder but do not believe composite construction is beyond the average modeler. Certainly a set of modern composite style F1B wings are easier to build that a classic Bob While style Wakefield.

 

In addition it is easier to trim a model that has a number of timer operated surfaces than one with out.

 

While not an economist I believe that we are seeing a sentiment of people pushing back against the very high cost of purchased models. Any commercial model is always a compromise and picking the class that I fly, I see that both Andriukov and Vivchar models work well with many sportsmen of widely differing abilities. I’m sure that both Alex and Igor have made performance compromises to make their models more usable by a wide population and if either wanted to make a model just for themselves they would so something slightly different. In fact if we look at two of the top F1B sportsmen in the USA, Blake Jensen and Walt Ghio they both fly their own models. In the F1A class Ken Bauer who used to purchase models in now building his own, trying new ideas and making his choice on how he spends his money and time. While I supply electronic timers to a number of factories I sell far more timers to individual modelers than suppliers, not sure where these guys get there models from?

 

With increasing complexity comes the increasing ability to mess up as a long as we don’t pander the technophile with generous attempt rules and the like. It is a sporting decision that one has to make of performance versus reliability. I was interested to see Kimmo’s simple F1A with new airfoil technology beat a number of all singing, dancing and flapping models. Hmmm.

 

Flying in a world championship competitively takes a level of financial and time commitment that is impossible to understand unless you have done it. It is just not rational to say that we want a class of model where anyone build it, trim it and fly it become World Champ. No changing of the model specification is going to increase the level of participation at the top level.   On the other hand one of the huge appeals of Free flight is that one can do very well with a moderate well trimmed model and good air picking. Just as there are people who want to go back to the past there are those who like flying modern models because of the appeal of the performance, even if that sportsman does not want fly in the world champs or world cup. 

 
 

Let’s not kid ourselves, if we go back to models of yesteryear we might reduce costs, we might appeal to sports men of the past who are no longer flying at the top level but that’s no guarantee it will appeal to either the young people we want to support free flight in the future or those who support the FAI free flight classes today. Those young people are the children of today’s technology, that’s what they want , not the past. And all we do is create another series of classes that further complicates our free flight model sport.

 
 


Biggles on Restricted Technology


Roger,

Restricted Technology Input:

In reply to George’s request for input, SEN 1379, I strongly support the UK’s Restricted Technology Class FAI initiative, because I believe it could encourage more participation for a variety of creative and motivational reasons.

These Restricted Technology Classes have already been tested in the UK domestic contest scene, being run in parallel to FAI classes during the past season, even including the Stonehenge World Cup (as non-scoring entrants), and should now be adopted and tested by a wider audience.

There could be much debate about the actual characteristics of each Restricted Technology Class of rules: weights, spans, towlines, rubber and engine runs, etc are all open to debate, — as everyone has an opinion about what they consider to be fair and what isn't — however, rather than loose this opportunity and delay adoption, I would support these new rules be approved in their entirety now.  As a non-Championship (Provisional ?) event, the rules can always be adjusted as necessary in the future in the light of further experience, as the main FAI classes have been over the years.

There exists a big chasm between pure FAI followers and dedicated "Open” class Free Flight modelers, who are also competitive in their own right, yet do not aspire to the all-out commitment of FAI.  We are currently faced with declining numbers, and proliferation of model event classes, often with few entries in each class.  This proposal may come as a shock to many FAI purists, but I do believe this is the most creative idea to reinvigorate both FAI and “Open” (AMA) classes, by combining both events in the same competition, where everyone will benefit.  I also think it will benefit newcomers, including Juniors, to be able to start with less than state of the art models, but with reasonable performance prospects, while they gain experience and learn about contest flying, by competing alongside both the FAI and other Restricted Technology enthusiasts.

I also agree with Louis Joyner, SEN 1377 — that ..."the individual contestant should be able choose to fly both FAI and Restricted Technology models within the current 4-model limit", when competing in a joint event.  But such an observation should not prevent the adoption of the Restricted Technology class ASAP, if that's what it takes to vote yes now.

A further point, and just as important for the future of competitive F/F, is that I believe that the Restricted Technology Class will also help stimulate Designers and Builders.  There was a time when ALL modelers flew their own designs.  Creativity and modeling skills were an inherent part of the attraction and motivation to fly models, to compete not only on the flying field, but also as a designer and builder.  Now there are literally only a handful of modelers (manufacturers) worldwide who actually design the currently available F/F models in use.  There are many who simply walked away from FAI, because they cannot compete financially, or as designers and builders versus the fantastic quality and complexity (and price) of flying FAI.  Consequently, it simply does not make sense for anyone to build their own FAI model — You either buy a ready-to-fly model, or give up FAI and go back to the Open / AMA classes.  The Restricted Technology class re-opens the opportunity to design and build your own creation, one that can at least stand a chance of being competitive through the virtue of "simple rules", with some built-in “performance enhancing offsets”, that will encourage hands-on participation in a head to head comparison.  Indeed, many may have existing models, which could once again be flown competitively under the more relaxed specifications of the Restricted Technology Class.

But one interesting question remains — should the Restricted Technology Class enforce the Builder-of-the-Model rule ?  If not, is it the intention that this Restricted Technology Class will it end up as just another "manufacturing" class ?  If there should be a vote for BOM — I would vote Yes for the Restricted Technology Class.

  Biggles

 
FRozen Photos

We had a professional photographer, Juha Salovaara, at the Bear Cup
contest on Saturday, and he took a number of pictures of the nice
weather and happy people:
http://picasaweb. google.fi/ kuvakorppi/ BearCap16231080#Tapio


 

DUAL CLUBS

FREE FLIGHT BONANZA
*A National Cup Event*
SAN DIEGO ORBITEERS 52nd ANNUAL - CLASS AA, CATEGORY 2
SPONSOR OF AMA, CLASSIC & MINI FAI EVENTS
*

FRESNO GAS MODEL CLUB 71st ANNUAL – CLASS AA, CATEGORY 2

SPONSOR OF NOSTALGIA, TEXACO & OLD TIME EVENTS
* MAY 15th& 16th   2010  *
* LOST HILLS, CA *
SATURDAY ONLY
7 AM – NOON, 1 - 5 PM LUNCH BREAK W/ ICE CREAM SOCIAL 
EITHER DAY

MUST FINISH EVENT THE SAME DAY

SUNDAY ONLY
7 AM – 3 PM
 
 
 
 
½ A GAS (1)
SMALL OT RUBBER STICK
EARLY ½ A NOS. 
FIJ (POWER)
C/D GAS
SMALL OT RUBBER CABIN
.020 REPLICA
FIG (COUPE)
P-30 (1)
LARGE OT RUBBER STICK
A PYLON
F1H (TOWLINE)
F1Q (ELECTRIC)
LARGE OT RUBBER CABIN
B-C PYLON
A GAS
VINTAGE FAI POWER
¼ A NOSTALGIA
A FUSELAGE
B GAS
CATAPULT GLIDER (1)
½ A NOSTALGIA
B-C FUSELAGE
HAND LAUNCH GLIDER (1)
½ A TEXACO
A NOSTALGIA
RUB/WAKEFIELD NOS
FULL SIZE TEXACO
DAWN P-30
B NOSTALGIA
CLASSIC TOWLINE
MULVIHILL
NIGHT GAS (COMBINED)
C NOSTALGIA
½ A CLASSIC POWER
DAWN MULVIHILL
 
½ A COUNTRY BOY
DAKOTA
 

(1) Junior & Senior/Open Event                    

 

See Special Instructions on backside

 

** AN ORBITEER TRADITION LIVES ON **

JOIN US FOR SATURDAY ICE CREAM SUNDAE SOCIAL ON US (NOON – 1 PM)

AWARDS FOR FIRST 3 PLACES (except as noted)

$20 REGISTRATION Sr. & Open / $2 Jr

Ceremonies at: 5:15 PM Saturday

$5 per Event Sr. & Open / $1 Junior -

                               3:15 PM Sunday

Optional: $40 for Registration & Unlimited Events

 
For Information Contact:
 
Larry Bagalini, CD-Orbiteers
John Oldenkamp, ACD-Orbiteers (FAI)
Bill Booth, Sr., CD-Fresno GMC
 
15423 Barona Mesa Way
1625 Fern St.

2937 E. San Gabriel

Ramona, CA 92065

San Diego, CA 92102

Fresno, CA, 93726

(H) 760-788-1858
(E) This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
(H) 619-233-4837
(E) This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
(H) 559-227-7217
(E) This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

LOST HILLS MODEL AIRFIELD ASSOCIATION CARD REQUIRED ($20 AT FIELD TO JOIN)

***** BE THERE *****

Also on the field . . .

JAY SLOAN’S FINE DINING HALL ALL WEEKEND 

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS

SATURDAY NOON to 1 PM LUNCH BREAK & SUNDAE SOCIAL

The contest will be suspended for 1 hour for lunch and the San Diego Orbiteers famous ice cream social. This is a great time to relax, cool off, have lunch and enjoy the ice cream sundaes. We will provide ice cream, & sundae fixings, napkins, plates and plastic ware.

PRIZE DRAWING

The Fresno GMC once again has collected an enormous amount of model stuff for their drawing. For each event entered that is sponsored by them, the contestant will receive a drawing ticket. The more events entered, the better your chances. Drawing to be held right after Sunday’s award ceremony. 

HAND LAUNCH GLIDER & CATAPULT GLIDER

Hand Launch Glider & Catapult Glider will to be launched from an established glider pen on the field. Max’s are 120 seconds and all flights count. 

NIGHT GAS FLYING

All engine classes combined. Event window between Dark – 10pm. Engine runs in accordance with aircraft classification; i.e., AMA or Nostalgia for Cat II.

DAKOTA

Target time 45 seconds. Score based on differential of actual flight time to target time. Least score of 3 flights combined.

½ A COUNTRY BOY

Nostalgia qualified ½ A engines or .049/.051 Cox TD. Nostalgia engine runs apply.

FAI EVENTS                         

F1Q – Five rounds. Round 1 starts at 8:00 AM. 15sec motor run, 180sec max. Fly-off in ½ hour rounds starting at 1:00 PM. 15min rounds in sequence. 15 min between end of round and beginning of next one. 180sec max for all fly-off rounds. Motor run reduces by 5sec each fly-off round starting with fly-off round 1 with a 10sec motor run. Fly- off rounds may be compressed by consensus of the participants and the CD.

F1G, F1H & F1J: First five (5) flights must be flown between 7:00 – 12:00 AM. 120sec max. Fly-off in ½ hour rounds starting at 1:00 PM. 15min rounds in sequence. 15min between end of round and beginning of next one.   Fly-off round max: 1st 150sec, 2nd 180sec, 3rd 210sec, 4th 240sec, 5th 300sec, 6th 360sec and so on. Fly off rounds may be compressed by consensus of the participants and the CD.

VINTAGE FAI POWER
For rules, please go to this website:http://faipower.com/vintage-fai-power.htm. A copyof the rules will be available at the CD’s table.
DAWN P-30

Saturday morning 7:15 AM exactly, mass launch from glider pen, one flight, no max, winner’s plane may be processed.

DAWN MULVIHILL (Timer can ride with contestant)

Sunday morning 7:00 – 7:20 AM launch window, one flight, no max.

TEXACO (Timer can ride with contestant)

1/2A Texaco: Saturday 7:00-10:00 AM launch window, 8cc fuel;       Full Size Texaco: Sunday 6:00-10:00 AM launch window, 1/4oz per pound – max 1.75oz fuel.

NOSTALGIA EVENTS

CATEGORY 2

1st 3 Flights

Flyoffs
Max. Duration
Hand Launch
12 seconds
8 seconds
180 seconds
VTO
15 seconds
11 seconds
180 seconds
 
 


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