SCAT Electronic News June 6 1999
- Details
- Category: Archive 1999
- Hits: 1026
SCAT Electronic News June 6 1999
Table of Contents
==================
Reply to Dave Ackery - Cowley
Why Change the Rules ?
Noise F1C and f1J - Augustus
Another Turd in the Feed Lot - Davis
Tax Deductible Team Donations - Johannes
Our e-mail address
Reply to Dave Ackery:
=====================
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
- Hello Dave, I read your piece on F1C rules, but find it hard to
understand your phrase ..."It is quite easy to specify that a muffler
cannot increase the power, " - this would surely be impossible for
organizers to process at an event. Who would specify what the baseline
power is for each individual's un-silenced engine ?
- Instead, let's keep the rules simple and allow the freedom of
imagination and innovation to those developing "silenced" engines, to
make them as good as they can be. If they turn out to be better - then
more flyers would choose for themselves to adopt this quieter approach,
instead of their current models (which they would still be allowed to fly
side-by-side in competition if they wish).
- Keep the dialog going and let's generate a better solution to
encourage more participants to get involved in the FAI classes.
Martyn
Why Change the Rules ?
======================
Following on from Martyn's last sentence we need to keep in mind
why we want to change the rules. That is to maintain
world-class Free Flight and encourage more participants.
It not to restrict "those other guys", or because we think it
should be good for them, or because it's not like it was
in Lord Wakefield's day [nothing is !] or even to make it
easier for the organizer.
We can't change the rules to make it too easy or too trival. We need
to remember that it has to be a challenge for the top sportsmen
and yet usable by the beginner. I think that the current rules
for F1A and F1B permit that.
The appeal of Martyn's suggestions was that it permitted existing
models to be flown with new models at more or less parity. This
has the big advantage in that it does not remove the current participants
before finding any new ones.
Like Doug Galbreath suggested we will have a poll on this in a few days when
we can get the questions together.
F1C Noise
=========
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Roger,
I, too, like Martin's suggestions, and think there is still a simpler
solution to the noise question.
What's the problem with tuned pipes? I think the notion of allowing pipes
which muffle but don't increase performance is flawed and overly complex.
Just like we are allowed to get the maximum out of our engines, allow us
get the maximum out of our pipes. Why not? It's a whole new, unexplored
area of design for free fliers to experiment with. If geared motors aren't
taboo (which they probably should be), why should pipes be? There is much
more validity to allowing tuned pipes than gears.
Noise is not a good thing. It is in everyone's best interest to reduce it,
and monitoring it will not be a problem. We don't need a prowling Noise
Czar with a db meter, we all will be able to tell when an engine is over
the line. There will be a general average noise level produced by engines
which comply, and the excessively loud ones will be obvious to all. We can
just check those.
The objective should not be to limit engine power, but rather to avoid
further increasing airplane performance. Why not just determine what a
typical tuned pipe weighs, then add that weight plus an additional weight
to the airplane's minimum weight rule, so the altitude gained is about the
same. By so doing, no existing airplanes or engines are obsoleted,
performance is not increased, and glide time likely will be decreased. This
will allow research and development of engine/pipe combinations, and
probably result in some better airfoils.
None of the above suggestins apply to F1J. They are substantially quieter,
and currently enjoy an unrealistically low minimum weight, effectively
allowing us to build as light as we can and never approach the minimum.
That factor, plus the lack of an area rule, contributes greatly to the
creativity and diversity seen in F1J models, where the home-builts are
consistently defeating the RTF's in competition. Since the abolition of the
BOM, F1J is the only FAI class where there are no cookie-cutter models.
Creativity, design, and building skills still determine success in F1J, and
the surest way I know of wrecking that is to impose a higher minimum weight.
Bruce Augustus
Just another turd in the feedlot
=================================
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
F1C and noise, Just another turd in the feedlot
Hello all you feisty F1C flyers
Since this is the forum for everyone to throw in their two cents worth you
might as well have mine too. I find the noise of current F1C models to
be really obnoxious (boo, boo, hiss, hiss, etc. etc.) but!!!!!!
I don't want to make life
any more difficult for power than it already is (nasty greasy things,
chopped up fingers, hard of hearing power flyers, etc. etc.) sooooooo,
whatever you power guys work out is fine. I vote for some kind of
muffler, surely it can't be that big a deal? (easy for a nordic and
wakefield flyer to say!). I used to fly some
AMA power and had fun with it but F1C is just too insane for me.
Now don't everyone in the feedlot pick up the first available cow
paddy and throw
it at me but has anyone ever brought up the idea of F1C evolving to (modern)
electric power instead of (antique) gas power? Heck, I would give serious
thought to flying power if it were electric, perhaps others would too?
Since I have been out of the loop with FAI for a number of years perhaps this
issue has already been hotly debated? From where I sit (face down in the
feedlot covering my head) electric power seems a great alternative,
maybe we could even
get away from the silly 5 second engine run, let's be honest with each
other, it is virtually impossible to accurately time a power flight at
5 seconds when more than one is in the air (always the case at a contest).
So for what it's worth there you have it, my cow turd deflector
shields are now fully deployed so don't hold back!
Jon Davis
Tax Deductible Donations
========================
Author : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Hi Roger,
NFFS has offered to help AAES cover the FAI team budget short fall by
collecting donations from individuals. Because NFFS has tax exempt staus
and AAES does not, as yet, donations sent to NFFS are tax deductible.
Any who wish to take advantage of this opportunity can send checks to:
Frank Zumer, NFFS Treasurer
801 Quaker Ridge Rd.
Mebane, NC 27302
Checks should be made out to NFFS with a notation in the memo area, US
FAI FF Team. The deadline for contributions is 1 Aug. 99.
Many thanks to Bob Stalick and NFFS for helping AAES fulfill its
committment to cover the Team budget short fall.
A status report: Last Sat, at the team meeting at Lost Hills, I gave a
check for $ 5500 to George Batiuk. That covered the first half of the
AAES committment. I currently have donations and pledges for another
$1000. We still need help from the free flight community to raise the
remaining $4500. Thanks to all who have made a contribution. To those
who may be thinking about it, please send your check today.
Roger, it was a pleasure meeting you last week end. It's always nice to
know the face that goes with a name. I'm looking forward to more
conversations in the future. Thanks again for all your help.
Our e-mail address
==================
Note that while this might appear to come from a different address -
the correct one is This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. So please you that one when
writing to us.
............
Roger Morrell
