- Category: Archive 2015
- Hits: 1235
- Plan books for sale
- The Doc on C and P
- East on C
- Where is the tipping point tipping us?
Misc Planbooks for Sale
From: Martin Dilly
A very belated congratulations and thanks for the first two thousand. Looking at some of the recent contributions which you felt needed a bit of editing to calm things down, one wonders what on earth the bits that ended on the cutting room floor were like!
The Doc's POV on C and P
From: Glenn Schneider
I'll take this opportunity to comment on the F1C debate (debacle). I don't think F1C should have been changed. The four second rule plus the RDT requirement has squelched any thoughts I had about building a F1C type model. I have been flying F1P for the past four years as a low cost alternative to F1C. F1P has been a failure to attract juniors and any one else. There were a total of seven sportsmen in the US who flew F1P in 2014, three juniors and four open fliers. F1J is in a similar pickle.( Where does one get a new .061 these days? ) Here is where change is needed and will not disturb high tech F1C. Here too is where a simpler, buildable, reasonable cost model can be competitive in its own class that is almost F1C. Perhaps combine F1P and F1J with a 2.5cc engine limit, no flaps, no folders, no gears, 2 or 2 and a half meter span and allow bunt. Engine runs in the 5 to 6 second range, regular fuel and standard weight and area restrictions. The juniors could handle it as they do with F1A and F1B complicated models. Such an event would likely attract F1C dropouts, the remaining F1J fliers, the potential F1P fliers who didn't want to fly a junior event and juniors. A shorter set of wings for an otherwise obsolete direct drive fixed geometry airplane would do nicely. Small power event would be F1S. No one flies F1J anymore any way and there is no WC for F1J. So what to call it, F1PJ (a real sleeper). Any hope such a thing will happen, not much, but another solution to several problems that might be considered. Thermals, Glenn Schneider
F1C Rules - Bill East
From: William East
Hello fellow SEN readers.
The 4 second rule will decimate F1C that is apparent by what has been penned so far.
My thoughts are that the shorter the engine run the greater risk of accidents occurring because models will be closer to the ground giving other flyers/supporters less time to scramble – remember we are all getting older and consequently slower with reaction time.
I would like to put forward this set of ideas - this could possibly mend some issues and provide some "Wiggle room". The 4 second engine run (although I am against it) would be more appropriate for the Latest High Tech models because the majority would be electronic and have a better chance of being controlled with less error. RDT is a wonderful thing but it would turn a model into a missle and due to anything being ripped off of it could easily change its direction when it crashes.
This was Simon Dixons idea which sounds OK to me anyway:-
F1C - 5 sec for direct drive / fixed wing models
4.5 sec for direct drive / fixed wing models [editors comment - do you mean geared fixed wing ?]
4 sec for direct drive or geared flappers and folders
However what I would propose is :-
(based on 5 rounds - fly-offs use the generic time for their group)
5 Rounds allotted 25 seconds for direct drive / fixed wing models
5 Rounds allotted 22.5 seconds for direct drive / fixed wing models
5 Rounds allotted 20 second for direct drive or geared flappers and folders
The flyer would have the option of using this flight or request an over-run.(this can only happen once per round).
1. Every person gets to fly there chosen design.
2. Timing is up to the competitor but based on the timers watch.
3. The person needs to be mindful of his on-going aggregate.
4. The inclusion of other models (like Nostalgia etc) would be allocated by the FAI a time span - Say 30 seconds over 5 rounds.
The above is just an option a way around a difficult situation personally I would be against 4 seconds across the board it would be a retro-grade step do not let the faceless men control the destiny of our hobby we are the people who fly it therefore we MUST be THE people who GOVERN IT.
And YES I do/have flown F1C admittedly nowhere near as good as our current F1C flyers here in Australia but I do intend to return after my 4 year sabbatical and would like to return to a growing and happy formula.
Cheers and Thermals
Land Of OZ
Be careful where the tipping point is tipping us
From: Ross Jahnke
The 4 second motor run in F1C seems unnecessary and I agree that it will
result in more complex models rather than less. The RDT rule seems more
benign, though I'm not sure that activating it while the engine is running
will result in more or less safety on the ground.
I again disagree with Doug about the benefits of a limited F1C event.
Nostalgia is not just a class, its a mindset, one that is not in keeping
with the spirit or history of FAI competition, which has always sought the
cutting edge. The F1C designs of the past were innovative for their time,
some were considered radical. The FAI rules of any given era challenged the
abilities of the modeler and the available technology more than other
events. When this ceased to be true, the rules became more restrictive and
the cycle of innovation renewed. Modelers who didn't/don't aspire to
innovation and radical approaches didn't/don't fly FAI events.
Maybe F1C has reached some kind of tipping point where 4 seconds makes it
impossibly hard, or impossibly unsatisfying to fly...we will see. But the
decline began long before today, even before the engine run was reduced to
5 seconds, and it would likely continue without the rule change. Finally,
there is no evidence that the classic or nostalgia event are attracting new
flyers, rather they are a haven for old flyers for whom the past has become
preferable to the present.