SEN 1689

Table of Contents - SEN 1689

  1. Finals Humor/Humour
  2. Biggles shot down
  3. Solution to TBC
  4. Another Q Question
  5. Semi-Answer for Rick
  6. Who is Biggles?

Finals Humor/Humour

It is a good sign that we are able to laugh at ourselves.  However there are a number of people who take the team selection process very seriously and try very hard.  Sometimes it is not always obvious what is a serious comment and needs to be addressed and what is humour or humor. 

So for example I do not think that it is necessary to make motel reservations for Dave Hipperson or John O'Donnell .

Aimee is the CD and she takes the job very seriously which matches the effort that serious participants make.  She had though of the issues that correspondent Biggles mentioned and has written an explanation below to show that the finals team had thought of the issues and have them under control.

While we may not like what the TSC did or how they did, it was done with the right spirit and objectives.  It is now shut up and put up time - which means stop talking about and go fly the best you can.  And if you're not flying in the Finals don't knock those who are, help them.

Finally the title of Aimee's piece below which may indicate some levity is the editor's words , not her's,

Biggles shot down**

In response to Biggles's concerns about the Team Selection winners:

For Cases 1 & 2, no winner has been decided, so there is no one to be
excluded from flying on Day 2.

For Case 3, the program has been designed to maximize the time between the
next morning FO and the start of regular rounds.  For F1A, the 10 min FO is
7:15 to 7:25, and Round 1 starts at 8:30.  We have 65 minutes to process the
1 winning F1A model, and declare the winner.  We have the entire day to
process the 1 winning F1B model.  The same situation holds for the other

For Case 4, these flyers have 65 minutes to retrieve their model before the
start of Round 1.  In contrast, they have 35 minutes during the contest.

The scales and other measuring devices are available to all competitors
prior to the start of the contest.  Competitors are welcome to bring have
their measurements and calculations confirmed well in advance of the
contest.  I have a simple paper-based work sheet to make the computations
that was used in prior Team Selection contests, as well as Alex Andriukov's
Excel spreadsheet used in the European /World Championships.  I am currently
validating the spreadsheet, prior to adopting it for use.  20% of models are
spot checked in each class every day.  It is the contestant's responsibility
to be flying with a legal model at all times, not just the FO.

When I interviewed for the position of CD, I had already mapped the
IF-THEN-ELSE flow to the contest and found the TSC  had done a very complete
flowdown.  If the weather doesn't cooperate, then things do get tricky.  I
have spent most of my preparation time doing risk-management, and I am
hopeful it will all work out to most everyone's satisfaction.


Solution to TBC

Dame SCAT,

The Biggles Conundrum (TBC) as eloquently described in SEN 1688 clearly makes attendance of myself and my fellow colleagues from GB a necessity.

Accordingly a triumvirate will be at Lost Hills to bring O'Donnell and Hipperson logic to the proceedings and make the event run smoothly. Our fee is significant but well worth the peace of mind.
PS Yes, HDA = high drag, MDA = medium drag. What happens when the drag gets even less than it is now; XLDA maybe


We have made hotel reservation for the triumvirate at the Bellagio, we got a troika to do the real work.

In the Magic factory we are working on the NDA , details of which can be seen on the signature of a NDA

Another  Q-uestion:

After watching what F1Q entails at our last Rocky Mountain Champs I backed 
up a bit....computing the motor run based upon..."what?"  Fortunately Jerry
 Murphy had electronic gear to handle the decisions.  This isn't the usual 
on the field system that a CD would carry.  FAI contest would require it 
and put a burden on contest organizers, CD's, timers...hence the"unenforced 
honors system."
The proposal in the latest SEN stated by John Oldenkamp seems to address a 
lot of things in the right direction, but....the technology improvements in
 the electronic systems are going to be the KV of the motor and battery 
power.  Is that something that needs to be addressed?  KV  limitations(?), and
when the battery power is increasing the voltage per  cell...then the rules
changes in the future will be motor run lengths,  right?
I'm just asking....when comparing F1Q to say F1C, another power event, the 
limit is 2.5 cc displacement, something rather tangible, and the fuel
straight  ethanol/oil it is easily distinguished.  Then, the motor design was the
 tech increase.  Similarly, if John's proposal also addressed the  motor
KV, the contestant only need provide a spec sheet for his motor and  battery,
right?  The battery power/voltage issue is the variable,  limited by weight.
Motor and battery technology is really evolving...and fast.
Rick Pangell

A semi-answer for Rick

The reason for putting the Energy Limit in the current rules was to control cost and manage the rapid evolution of motor and battery technology If you fly Q to the point where you would destroy a battery a flight or buy a “better” battery from an expensive source then you will have a better performance that regular guys using current hobby shop equipment. Some of the F5 R/C electric classes have reached this point and there are F1Q fliers in Europe who are almost there too.

The original proposal to do this assumed that everyone would use energy limiter but this did not permit the transition of existing models so the manual method of calculating an energy allocation was added to the rules. While significant research was done around the straight energy limiter concept before the CIAM meeting but there was no time to do the same research around the manual method during the meeting. It is now clear from experience that you get more energy when you use an EL. The British proposal mentioned in a SEN previous issue and the proposal that Aram suggested on the NFFS web site are aimed at addressing that issue. It appears that the BFMA proposal which measures the wattage after 10 seconds would give more power to the non-EL model than Aram's which measures it mid point through the probable motor run. The BFMA proposal would probably give the non-EL model an energy edge over the EL equipped model.

You identified that potential problem when you mentioned the evolution of battery and motor technology.

I do not believe that John's proposal addresses that issue.


Who is Biggles


We get questions from time to time about Biggles.


The "real" James Bigglesworth aka Biggles is a fictional aviation almost super hero created by W. E. Johns who appears in a large number of youth oriented adventure stories.  There is a very good description in Wikipedia.  A very British character, ex-RAF type right down to the mustache.  I will even bring a Biggles book to the Finals for those who want some cultural re-alignment.

There is also a UK Free Flight Club called Biggles that has a number of very good sportsmen and modellers.

Finally there is our Biggles, an aviation expert, writer, modeller,  former F1C and F1A sportsman, who even after spending most of his life in the USA retains his original sense of humour maybe someday he will figure out humor.




Roger Morrell