SEN 2299 2 May 2017
- Category: Archive 2017
- Hits: 177
Table of Contents – SEN 2299
- CIAM PLENARY MEETING
- Corrected link for Naloev Cup Photos
- Big Als – rewired schedule
CIAM PLENARY MEETING
Ian’s report appear in FFn – Free Flight News, we include it here becase it will be some time before the official minutes appear)
Report by Ian Kaynes
The annual meeting of CIAM (the Aeromodelling Commission of the FAI) was held in Lausanne on April 27 to 29. A CIAM Bureau meeting was held on April 27, at the Maison du Sport, local to the FAI headquarters. This year the main Plenary meeting on April 28 and 29 was at the Hotel Savoy, an older and more imposing hotel up the hill towards the town centre. It was used instead of the usual location at the Movenpick Hotel because that one was being refurbished. The Savoy had similar facilities to the Movenpick, but with the advantage that the side meeting rooms had an easily connected display screen.
The Free Flight Technical Meeting (FFTM) which I chaired as chairman of the Free Flight Subcommittee (FFSC) was conducted on the morning of April 28, followed by some Plenary business and presentation to World Cup winners. The main Plenary meeting (at which the binding decisions are made according to the votes of national delegates) was on April 29th. All of the rule changes which were approved by the Plenary come into force in January 2018 unless stated otherwise.
The FFTM attendance was, as usual, larger than any other category technical meeting:
Wilhelm Kamp Austria
Cenny Breeman Belgium
Harry Ells Canada
Cesare Gianni Italy
Jari Valo Finland
Pierre Chaussebourg France
Bernard Schwendemann Germany
Andras Ree Hungary
Zdravko Toporoski FYR Macedonia
Allard van Wallene Netherlands
Ioana Dumitru Romania
Zorin Gabriel Valeanu Romania
Pavol Barbaric Slovakia
Per Findahl Sweden
Christoph Bachmann Switzerland
Mehmet Arslan Turkey
Ian Kaynes UK
Chuck Etherington USA
Rather than describing all the discussions at the FFTM and then the Plenary considerations of the same subjects, I will split the reporting into the major subjects.
Netherlands proposed that if flyoff competitors are required to provide a timekeeper to help time the flyoff then these timekeepers must be distributed randomly instead of only being used for the supplying competitor. This was accepted unanimously by FFTC and Plenary. This adds a new paragraph (c ) to para F1.2.1:
In case competing fly-off participants are requested to supply timekeeper(s) for a fly off (see a), these time keepers must be randomly distributed among the competing fly-off participants, e.g. by draw or moving timekeepers to respective neighbouring starting poles.
Use of Altimeters for timing
Netherlands had proposed the use of altimeters as an alternative source of timing information in the event of some doubt about timing of a flyoff flight. At FFTM the arguments in favour were put by Allard van Wallene and the criticisms were voiced by the meeting, such as that it was legislating flight out of sight (against the current tightening of airspace regulations), would take a long time to decide the result of any flyoff round, and would undermine the timekeepers. After much discussion the meeting vote showed 7 in favour and 7 against. The vote in FFSC, which is also reported to the Plenary had 6 in favour, 9 against. I reported both votes to the Plenary and asked for delegates to vote and they responded with 14 for and 10 against so the process has been adopted. CIAM President stated that it was required to have devices reviewed by the CIAM EDIC system (Electronic Devices in Contests). The rule will appear in Volume F1 as a new paragraph F1.2.7 (with the current paragraph F1.2.7 regarding binoculars renumbered to F1.2.8) and with an addition to the timekeeper instruction annex:
F1.2.7 In flyoffs, electronic time and altitude recording devices may be used mounted in or on a model. Such devices must be commercially available with an altitude measuring frequency of at least 2 Hz and display equipment like a computer, tablet or smart phone equipped with graphing software must be available to produce a time-altitude graph of the recorded flight. The responsibility of the use and correct functioning of such devices rests with the competitor.
The use of an altimeter is voluntary. Prior to each fly off, participants with (reserve) models equipped with such recording devices being switched on, should position their model(s) at ground level no more than 5 meters from their assigned starting pole. Upon instruction of the contest director, the participant will have to lift the model(s) from the ground and hold the model(s) elevated a number of times, the number and duration of these movements is decided by the contest director thereby generating an unique altitude-time signature. In case of a flight-time related dispute, the competitor automatically may proceed to the following fly off round. Any dispute must be marked on the competitor’s scorecard for that fly off round. After the last fly off but no later than 30 minutes from the end of the last flyoff, the jury will ask the competitor who filed the dispute to read out the altimeter data and present the altitude versus time graph. The jury will check the signature in the graph and determine the flown time for the fly off round for which a dispute has been filed. If the moment of launch, landing and flight time can be clearly established and the correct signature is present, the flight time will be recorded for the final result. If any one of these conditions is not met, the timekeeper’s time of the disputed fly off round will be used as the score for that fly off round. If this time is less than the maximum flight time set for that particular fly off round, any subsequently flown fly off rounds will be cancelled for that competitor. In case of a protest related to the altimeter generated flight time, the altitude graphs must be made available to the jury. Failure to do so will result in the time keeper’s recorded flight time being the official score.
Number of flights
The FFSC had proposed changing the number of flights in a contest from five to “five or seven” with the number to be used to be defined in the advance information for the event. Canada and Denmark had proposed returning specifically to seven flights. In FFTM a large majority preferred the FFSC option and this was supported 28 for and 2 against in the Plenary meeting.
Para 3.1.3 (a) will read:
a) Each competitor is entitled to five or seven official flights. The number to be flown must be announced in advance in the bulletin.
This paragraph is references in 3.2.3 and 3.3.3 so that it also applies to F1B and F1C. The Plenary meeting unanimously accepted a change to F1P rule so that these also refer to 3.1.3.a for number of flights.
20 second attempt
Denmark had proposed deleting the rule allowing a second attempt after a flight of less than 20 seconds in F1ABCHJPQ, and Belgium had also submitted one just for F1C.
In the FFTM discussion included the illogicality of allowing a second attempt for a bad flight but not for a flight was just a few seconds short of a maximum, the history that removing the rule some years ago had been unpopular so that it had been returned, and that general application would have a more significant effect on less able competitors in national competition. After that the FFTM could not decide either way, the vote was 7 in favour and 7 against. FFSC had voted 6 in favour of the proposal and 9 against. When put to the Plenary meeting, delegates voted against the proposal by the narrow margin of 11 for and 13 against. So the 20 second attempt rule remains.
Duration of flights
The current rules specify that for championships the first round should be extended to four minutes and, if conditions allow, also the last round. FFSC had proposed changing this to be more flexible by specifying the first round and one other round. Netherlands had proposed changing it to the first and second round. FFTM unanimously preferred the more flexible FFSC option and this choice was confirmed by Plenary without a vote. The first paragraph of 3.1.7 will read:
The maximum duration to be taken for the official flights in world and continental championships is four minutes for the first round and, if conditions allow, for one other round and three minutes for the other rounds. In other international events a maximum of three minutes will be used for all rounds unless different durations (not exceeding four minutes) have been announced in advance in the contest bulletin for specific rounds.
The same change will apply to F1B and F1C since paragraphs 3.2.7 and 3.3.7 will be changed to say “see 3.1.7” (as agreed last year but not included in the 2017 volume).
Flyoff round time
FFSC had proposed reducing the time allowed for making a flyoff flight from 10 minutes to 7 minutes. FFTM views included complaints from some active flyers that it would increase problems for F1A towing with more action concentrated at the start of the round, but others agreed that a flyoff is a test of skill and reducing the time makes it a harder test. The FFSC had supported the idea 11 for and 4 against but the FFTM rejected it with 6 for and 7 against. With these different opinions the proposal was put to Plenary for their vote and they supported the idea with 20 for and 7 against.
The modified text for paragraph 3.1.8.(c) in 2018 for F1A will be
c) The organiser will establish a 7 minute period during which all fly-off competitors must tow and release their model. Within these 7 minutes, the competitors will have the right to a second attempt in the case of an unsuccessful first attempt for an additional flight according to paragraph 3.1.5. Starting positions will be decided by draw for each fly-off.
F1C and F1P follow the same text with “tow and release their model” replaced by “start their engines and launch their model”, but F1B introduces a new freedom to wind one motor before the start of the round:
c) The organiser will establish a 7 minute period during which all fly-off competitors must launch their model. Competitors may wind one rubber motor before the start of the 7 minute period. Within these 7 minutes the competitor will have the right to a second attempt in the case of an unsuccessful attempt for an additional flight according to para 3.2.5. Starting positions will be decided by a draw for each fly-off.
FFSC had proposed a number of clarifications to the group flyoff rules in the light of shortcomings found during its first year of use. These were accepted unanimously by the FFTM and supported by Plenary voting 21 for 3 against. Plenary agreed to a later request to make the clarifications effective from June 1 2017 so that they will apply for Championships and other events later this year.
Denmark had proposed to eliminate the group flyoff option. The FFSC had supported this proposal but FFTM were 2-11 against the idea, principally in order to keep it as an option to provide a way to run flyoffs if there is a significant shortage of timekeepers at any time. The proposal was supported by Plenary with 16 in favour, 12 against, so that the group flyoff option will disappear from the code in 2018.
Motor run in F1C
Germany, Netherland, and USA had made similar proposals for dual motor runs in F1C, keeping the current 4 sec for models with variable geometry (flaps or folders) and giving 5 sec to models with fixed wing geometry. FFTM discussed the desirability of having two options and the unknowns of whether the balance was correct. If the difference was too much it would alienate all those with flappers and folders. When it came to the vote the FFTM rejected the idea 5 for 8 against, almost the same as the 5-9 vote by the FFSC.
Canada had proposed returning to 5 sec run for all models, the FFTM unanimously considered this was an undesirable return to higher performance.
All the proposals on this topic were withdrawn at Plenary.
Radio Control DT in F1C
Various proposals had been made for changes to the current rule that insists F1C models must have an RDT system but without specifying that it must also be able to stop the motor. USA proposed returning the class to option fitting of RDT (like the rule in other classes). Canada also proposed optional RDT but for DT only and removing the even the option to stop the motor. Germany and Netherlands proposed changing the rule to insist that the RDT must be able to stop the motor, but with the key difference that Germany was asking to delay implementation to 202 in order to give notice of the change. The FFTM preferred the German option voting 11-2 for that proposal. It was accepted at Plenary by 20 votes for, 6 against. The other proposals were then withdrawn at Plenary. The relevant part of 3.3.2 will be changed to:
F1C models must be fitted with functional radio control only for irreversible actions to control dethermalisation of the model. This must include stopping the motor if it is still running. Any malfunction or unintended operation of these functions is entirely at the risk of the competitor.
Power models for Juniors
Poland had proposed using a degraded F1C model for the juniors, including silencers and banning flappers and folders. The FFTM noted that this was very unlikely to be more popular for juniors than the past options: F1C when originally used, followed by F1J now F1P. One of the criticism of F1P is that there are few events for it outside the championships, but the proposed F1C would not have been competitive in open F1C events. The general view was that it would be better to change to electric. FFTM unanimously opposed the Polish proposal and it was withdrawn at Plenary
Marking Indoor models
The FFSC proposed adding requirements to require rubber powered models to carry the competitor’s FAI Identification number be on the motorstick and hand launched gliders (F1N) to have the number on the upper surface of the wing. These were accepted unanimously by FFTM and the Plenary, with application to all classes in January 2018 (including F1D which is subject to a model specification freeze in 2018, but it was agreed that this did not change the actual model).
For F1D this adds a new paragraph at the end of 3.4.2
The model shall carry the FAI unique ID number of the competitor on the motorstick written with permanent marker or other non-removable means.
with similar changes for F1L, F1M and F1R.
For F1N add a new paragraph at the end of 3.7.2:
The model shall carry the FAI unique ID number of the competitor on the upper surface of the wing.
There were several proposed changes for F1Q and these generally recorded fewer votes in FFSC, FFTM and Plenary, probably reflecting those without knowledge of the class not participating.
Denmark had proposed changing to the XT30 connectors which are more directly foolproof for polarity errors when connecting systems. It was not supported in FFTM and was withdrawn t Plenary.
Both Germany and Denmark proposed reducing the energy allowance from 4J/g to 3 J/g and a proportional change of the maximum motor run from 40 to 30 sec, and accompanied by an increase of the maximum mass considered for energy calculation from 500g to 600g. The limit had been 550g on earlier models and was reduced to 500g when previous changes were made. It was agreed that it would be more acceptable to change back to 550g rather than the extra increase to 600g. With this amendment the FFTM supported the proposal 8-2 and the Plenary unanimously endorsed this. The modified part of 3.Q.2 will read:
The motor run time will be determined by a maximum energy amount. In addition, motor runs over 30 seconds are regarded as overruns. The energy budget of each model is 3 joules per gram of the total weight. For energy calculations, weight exceeding 550 grams is to be ignored.
Denmark proposed removing the option (b) to measure power and calculate a motor run as a means of meeting the energy requirement, instead it would insist on an energy limiter (the current option (a)). This was discussed in FFTM, noting that the motor run calculation provided an easy introductory route for newcomers to F1Q flying other models such as F1S. FFTM voting supported the proposal 5-3 and Plenary followed that accepting the proposal with a 6-4 vote in favour. Germany had made a similar proposal but with the return of an architecture requirement for the energy limiter to be independent of the timer, such as had been removed a few years ago. This was opposed by FFTM and withdrawn at Plenary.
USA and Germany had proposed energy reductions for the flyoff. The USA proposal had graduations to 3.5, 3.0 and 2.5 J/g but the normal power had already been reduced to 3 J/g so it was easier to adopt the German proposal. That had specified any reduction down to 2 J/g but it was decided it was more appropriate to specify a single value of 2J/g. Whether or not to use this reduction in the flyoff is an option available for the Jury to decide. The proposal was accepted by the FFTM voting 8-1 and passed by Plenary 9 for and 3 against. The change deletes 3.Q.8.e), which states the run and energy remain the same in flyoffs, and modifies 3.Q.8.d) to read
d) In the event of exceptional meteorological conditions or model recovery problems, the Jury may permit the maximum for a round to be changed that given under 3.Q.8.b. and decrease the maximum energy amount to 2 J/g and the motor run time to 20 seconds according to conditions.
A proposal from Denmark to remove the 3.Q.9 item on timing the motor run was rejected by the FFTM mainly on the grounds that there is a rule limiting the motor run and it is not otherwise observed. It was withdrawn at Plenary.
World Cup events
Poland had proposed to limit the number of foreign-organised events in any one country to just one. While there was some support for a limit, it was felt that this was much too extreme and FFTM rejected it unanimously. It was withdrawn at Plenary.
Poland had proposed to raise the maximum age of a junior from 18 to 21. This had been discussed in the Bureau meeting. Control Line are studying the progress and continued activity of the juniors who have flown in their championships. I will endeavour to undertake a similar one for free flight. My basic view is that the specific championships held for juniors in free flight is a much more effective and distinctive way to involve juniors than the approach of control line and most of the radio control class which add a single junior to the 3-man team at ordinary championships. Our championships appear to work well with all the competitors being of school age, whereas expansion to 21 would introduce people who are effectively adults and either working or in higher education. A majority of FFTM opposed the Polish proposal and at Plenary Poland agreed to it being referred to the Bureau.
Submission of proposals
Canada had proposed bringing forward the date for submission of proposals to CIAM from November 15 to July 31 and included distributing proposals for opinions. It was considered unpopular to change the date to the middle of the flying season and I worked towards getting immediate availability of proposals after the submission date instead of having to wait for the formal agenda. There was agreement for this, but a complete visibility of the submitted files might have to wait in view of the current plans to totally revise the FAI websites. The proposal was referred to the Bureau.
Events for accepting a class for Championships
USA had submitted two proposals to change the required total number of competitors per year for an event to qualify for Championship status. One was for cutting the present 60 to 50 and the other reduced it to 40. Both quoted F1Q as an application, largely with a reason related to the high cost of an FAI Licence in the USA (which has recently been reduced from $100 to $75 per year). However, they did not propose to change the requirement for there to be at least six countries participating in each contest, and that would be a much more significant hurdle for F1Q. The proposals were not supported at FFTM and were withdrawn at Plenary.
There were six nominees for the CIAM Scholarship and the final selection from the free-flight dominated list was Taron Malkhasyan from USA.
At the World Cup awards there was the usually handful of individuals present to collect their awards, including Florian Winker for second in F1E Junior and Bojan Gostojic for first inF1B. Senior F1E was exceptional for having all three recipients present and, as well as the medals and diploma, this is an event with trophies for each place. The Winkers had specially driven from Germany that day and were returning home immediately afterwards.
The 2019 Championships were selected at this Plenary meeting.
The F1A F1B F1C World Championships had received bids from Serbia, USA and Macedonia. The bid from Macedonia was withdrawn and presentations were made by Serbia and USA. Serbia had chosen to follow the Italy 2012 schedule with the day of rounds for a class followed by a morning flyoff as the only event on the next day. The Zrenjanin schedule extended over 9 days excluding any additional World Cup events. The USA had followed a traditional timetable for the first week in October at Lost Hills. The Plenary voting awarded the event to USA by 27 votes against 14.
China had also signified an intent to bid, but since this was after the closing date for bids, I told them that it would be unlikely to the considered against the three valid bids. They are now considering a bid for 2021.
There had been some complaints that the USA bid had not been shown on the agenda. It was submitted just before the deadline of 45 days before the meeting, but the agenda is produced on the same deadline so that must be published by 45 days before the event. The deadlines are to be adjusted in future, but it is still better than years ago when bids were only submitted at the meeting.
The 2019 F1E World Championships had two bids, both of which were submitted late. Since there had been no bids made in time, the two late bids were considered. Both bids were for the regular sites, Slovakia at Martin and Romania at Turda. Slovakia was chosen with 24 votes against 15 for Romania.
The 2019 F1A F1B F1P Junior European Championships was awarded to the only bidder – Macedonia.. The F1D Indoor European Championships also went to the sole bidder, in this case the Czech Republic.
Corrected link for Naloev Cup Photos
In the last SEN the link to Sergey’s phots from the Naloev Cup contest was not correct – most figured it out but here it is again
Big Al’s rewired schedule
From : Walt Ghio
I had scheduled all of the electric events on Sunday for the Bissonnette Memorial, which is scheduled for May 27th and May 28th at the Lost Hills flying field. Several of the electric flyers have asked me to separate one of the events from the Sunday schedule as they felt it would be a challenge to fly all three events in one day. So, I have elected to move the F1Q event to Saturday.
Lost Hills-Bissonnette Mirage Field May 27 / 28, 2017
America’s Cup Contest
Lost Hills Association membership required.
Timers This is a fly one flight, time one flight contest. Please buddy up with another flyer for each event. If you are new to Lost Hills and do not know any other flyers please see me and I will set you up with another flyer. For all fly-offs you need to bring a timer to the line and a random pull of the time cards will select your timer for the flight. Thank you in advance for your corporation on this subject.
Saturday, May 27
Round 1 8:00 - 9:00 F1A - 210 sec, F1B / F1C / F1P / F1Q - 240 sec
Round 2 9:00 -10:00 180 sec for all following rounds
Round 3 10:00 -11:00
Round 4 11:00 - 12:00
Round 5 12:00 - 1:00
Round 6 1:00 - 2:00
Round 7 2:00 - 3:00
Fly-offs start at 5:00 pm. Ten minute rounds with ten minutes between events. Each contestant that is in a fly-off must provide a timer for the timer pool for that round. No timer, no can fly! Please bring a timer and help out with all the events.
Sunday, May 28
Prize giving for F1ABCPQ at 8:30am
F1GHJS and Vintage FAI Power will have Round 1 timed to the ground. Round one will be used to determine the winner if two or more are tied after the second fly-off round.
Round 1 7:30 – 8:00 One flight timed to the ground
Round 2 9:00 -10:00 120 sec for F1GHJS all rounds
Round 3 10:00 -11:00
Round 4 11:00 - 12:00
Round 5 12:00 - 1:00
Using standered rules you will have from 8 am to 1 pm to put your flights in. For those who max out you will continue flying per the rules till we have a winner. Max time is 120 seconds and motor run is 10 seconds.
Vintage FAI Power
Round 1 7:30 – 8:00 One flight timed to the ground
Round 2 9:00 -10:00 180 seconds all rounds
Round 3 10:00 -11:00
Round 4 11:00 - 12:00
Round 5 12:00 - 1:00
Two round fly-offs starting at 1:30 pm for F1GHJS and Vintage FAI Power. Ten minute rounds with ten minutes between events. Each contestant that is in a fly-off must provide a timer for the timer pool for that round. Please bring a timer and help out with all events.
Entry Fee: $15.00 Open/ Senior for first event, second event $10.00. $5.00 Junior per event. Lost Hills Association membership required.
CD- Walt Ghio Phone: 209-478-8225