- Category: Archive 2015
- Hits: 1363
- Rules - update, mission and moratorium
- Wisdom from the professor
- Gob Smakcked 2
- re SEN 1965 - Tasmania
- re SEN 1965 - Stuart
- Mike the Dino on 1965
Rules meeting update , mission and moratorium
The organizers of the fab Feb events with some help are working on getting a site. We have identified one and are waiting for people to get back to us. It will probably be on Wed or Thurs evening.
We have people who have offered to chair F1A and f1B sessions but no F1C yet. Write to SEN or the organizers.
One of the key issues behind this debate is to understand the reason behind potential rules changes. If you read the emails from both Gil Morris and Stuart Darmon below you can sense a different expectation. There is no point in fiddling with the rules just because you can. The CIAM FFTSC states that they they watch performance and safety and are concerned about the ability to sucessfully run a F1ABC World Champs or World Cup event. That is very clear, others are not so clear.
I think there is no question that these are World Champs classes but also there are events that "regular" people take part in . But should they be part of a general tool to recruit more flyers ? or should they be a target for newcomers to aim for with some other class in between ? How do they fit in the Free Flight landscape? It's different country by country.
While there is a risk it might confuse the issue more I've stepped back into the corporate world and written a F1ABC mission statement. Is this what we are all about ?
The F1 ABC are the top level international classes for Free Flight Model Aviation that provide a platform for the World Championships and World Cup contests. The rules must:
· Provide the platform for national and International contests to be run in a sporting manner
· Challenge the top level sportsmen to perform at their very best
· Enable the average sportsman to have an enjoyable experience when participating in events
· Foster innovation that encourages the up and coming as well as maintaining and increasing interest at all levels
· Provide an interesting spectacle to both the enthusiast and the general public in a safe environment
· Ensure a level of stability in the rules and regulations so the participants’ investment in time, energy and money is not wasted.
There are many classes of model aviation catering to many levels, many different types of aircraft in many different geographies. These different classes suit the different personal preferences, budget, time commitments and locations of the many people that take part in model aviation activities. No judgment is made as to why a person might be interested in one particular category. F1 Free Flight is:
· For Free Flight competition model airplanes, i.e. those that fly by themselves once the flight has commenced and typically the object of the competition is duration, i.e. how long they stay in the air.
· These are competition airplanes where the rules are specified for those taking part in international competition. These rules cover both the aircraft specification (size, weight, method of propulsions, etc.) and the operational rules under which an event is run.
· Because of the international aspect there is a notion of traveling to take part in events. Part of the appeal is flying with people from other countries and because that is the only way to become a World Champion.
· The rules are very precise so that a fair sporting result will be obtained and not obscured by differences in language, culture, terrain and national boundaries.
· The highest level events are called World Championship or World Cup.
· Because of the high level of some events there are some participants who spend significant effort, time and money taking part; this is not a requirement but rather a personal choice.
· When properly adjusted the airplanes fly very well, there is much satisfaction in having a good flight so many people take part who may not have the aspiration of becoming a World Champion.
· This is a technical sporting event.
· A level of physical effort may be required that could put the events out of scope for some people.
So after doing that we are going to have moratorium on Rules stuff in SEN because we are about the start the Fab Feb events with the Ike Winter Classic, North American Cup and Bob White, MaxMen international at Lost Hills.
This is the biggest FAI Free Flight meet in the USA and the biggest USA Free Flight happening after the US Nationals. We've got lots more organizing to do. And in addition in my case I keep getting panic emails about people wanting Magic Timer stuff at Lost Hills. Incidentily the good news is that many of the people are asking are young and are at least partially building or extensively modifing thier own models
Wisdom from the Professor
From: Gil Morris
I agree with Doug's stepping stone approach to F1C. But the fact of the matter is we have that and have had it as far back as the Golden Age. That is the AMA events: Class A, Class B and Class C. Also, there are the Nostalgia events, A,B,C.
Further, there are the Classic events, A,B,C.
Somehow, we have to invigorate those events that already feed F1C.They are our roots.
Gob Smacked 2
I'm equally gobsmacked by the comments you refer to. As far as I know the basic facts you quoted are correct and, as a UK flyer, I felt totally "disenfranchised" by the way that this was handled. The first that most of us heard of "our" proposals was when they appeared on Facebook! For one of the originating group to now complain about discussions being proposed elsewhere is incredible!
I'll only comment specifically on the first stage UK F1A proposals. The thick towline proposed will generally be fine in the usually windy UK conditions but I know that I can't currently even tow on the approx 1mill rod line when we get the dead air and flat calm that occurs quite regularly overseas, hence 1.75mill will be a disaster in calm conditions. The proposal to ban releasing the line will simply result in electronic 'bottom opening' hooks - an easy fix at a price! Hence all these proposals, if implemented, will do is stop the older / less fit flyers from competing in calm weather and will push the price of models up. How this helps the future of F1A is beyond me.
Re: SEN 1965
Re your editorial response to Stuart Darmo ("Meeting Caution" item): Well said!
Gerry de Groot
Re SEN 1965
From: Stuart Darmon
I'm gob smacked that you are gob smacked by my suggestion. I cannot understand where you get the idea that I am opposed to a meeting, since I stated categorically that I welcome it, and that exchange of views is always good. For the record, I am no longer a member of the BMFA FFTech Committee- if I was, I would have said so-, and the views I express are entirely personal. You are correct that I was at the meeting(s) where the proposals originated, so it would not be proper to say whether or not I agree with them, but that's irrelevant. The point is that whatever you may think about the BMFA, German, or any other proposals, they were the product of a national body, submitted to CIAM for consideration, and to imply that this is somehow underhand is hardly fair. You say ,"and you think it’s wrong that those who fly those events talk about it ? They are the most affected. " I suggest you re-read my brief note, because I said no such thing. I think you're outraged by what you'd like me to think, not what I ACTUALLY said.
The repeated reference to "those affected" are also disingenuous. I fly F1A, not terribly well I'll admit, but I've put every bit as much time and effort into it as most of your readers, and probably a much higher percentage of my income.I still build a fair proportion of my models too, but because you don't see me at Fab Feb each year, you naturally assume I don't fly FAI. And that is precisely the point I WAS trying to make. I DO think a meeting at Lost Hills is a good idea. A great idea even. What I do NOT think is that such a meeting should be used as a 100% reliable indicator of the mood throughout the whole global FAI F1 community, because it is a self-elected demographic. That's all. My concern is that there will inevitably be a vote, which will place CIAM in the position of either falling into line, or losing credibility due to the collective celebrity of the meeting. Perhaps this is what you meant by " We all know that the rules changes are voted on at the CIAM meetings. Sometimes the process seems a little mysterious and confusing, we need to make it better. "I would not disagree with this as a statement, and a vote at Lost Hills would at least be democracy of sorts, even if the electoral college consisted of the western USA plus a small elite of wealthy globetrotters.
As you wisely say, ours is "a world sport, hobby or pastime" . That was really the only point I was trying to make, and I find the hostility of your response both puzzling and a little hurtful.
Mike, the Dino on SEN 1965
Ok Roger. Thanks for update. It's a good idea to continue the conversations on web page. Everyone is so apathetic about this in our group. Then people who don't fly the event make unnecessary changes that no one wants or likes.. Logic goes out the window.. When had a meeting at Hungary in '95 @ Wc and everyone was there concerning power. Sandy an Ian also attended. 5 sec motor discussed at length. I proposed 6 and stated reasons why we don't want 5. I said if we go to 5 we will build new models, develop gears, flappers an folders and then we will have a mess. Everyone agreed. Even Sandy said logical approach to get us out of 9/ 10 fly off flights, which was the purpose. Then Koster went to CIAM meeting an went around an lobbied countries who didn't even fly the event, like Moldavia, and others to vote for 5 sec. We were all shocked. And here we are today.. Gears, flappers and folders. And nobody flying.
It can happen to F1b also.. People wont like 25gr., but they could end up with something far worst. An event killer. Like 20gr , no moving surfaces and who knows what else.. People think oh no that wont happen. But it can! Event killer.. Thanks for ur web site and what u do for our sport/ hobby.. It is appreciated.