SEN 1248 2008
- Details
- Category: Archive 2008
- Hits: 1067
- Missing stuff
- Report from Kanegawa
- @* second Attempt - Kaynes
- Wakefield Book - Kaynes and Rushing
- FAI second serve - Schlosberg
- October Update - Mc Keever and Limberger
- More Grace note less - Wallace
- and from OZ - Murray
- Italian world cup reminder
Missing stuff..
I ran out of time to get everything in this issue - so soon - Dallas Parker's I-Phone equipped F1A ( see it or call it at the USA finals ?), New towline tech and how much you can ot cannot strched it, plus a standard model discussion
Kanegawa San takes a break - and how about Mongolia
Dear Mike,
Please send this article for SEN. I sent Roger Morell This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
but can't send it. Do you know how to send article to SEN?
Anyway I send my article.
MONGOLIA CUP 2008
MONGOLIA CUP 2 008 was held on August. This year 5 countries participated;
Japan, Russia, Ukraine, D.P.R Korea and Mongolia. D.P.R Korea sent 25
members including team manager and supporters. These are large numbers even
though this is not World Championship. Japan sent only 3 this time. One for
F1H and two for F1B.
Event was well organaized and competition was in accordance with FAI rule.
Unfortunately this has not been approved from FAI as a World Cup event since
Mongolia is not official member of FAI. Mongolia is making an effort opening
official World Cup event on 2010 year. Please visit our web site.
http://www.jmaf.jp/sub9.html
Shigeru Kanegawa
SEN Address - Shigeru and othere - e-mail to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
Or as a comment on the web site www.faifreeflight.org
I have been impressed and pleased by the number of correspondents coming to the logical conclusions that there is no rational reason for retaining the 20 sec attempt rule. The only thing that puzzles me is the comment by Walt that it "requires people in high places to listen to the flyers and not remember the past". I had no idea we had "high places" in free flight, but remember the circumstances of the brief period when the rule was removed. The removal had been proposed by the CIAM FF Subcommittee and the 1988 CIAM Plenary meeting accepted the proposal by votes of 28 for and 1 abstention (this is the national delegate vote which determines CIAM decisions and the delegates should have been briefed on what their flyers want). The rule change applied from January 1989 but in less than a year Czechoslovakia proposed re-introducing the rule. Note that this proposal did not come from any of the strange people in CIAM but came from a country with the support of at least one of their flyers. The proposal was considered at the 1990 Plenary meeting and it received only luke warm support - the free flight technical meeting voted 7 for 6 against then the Plenary 14 for and 10 against with 2 abstentions. With the absolute majority rule just one vote switching against it would have defeated the proposal. However, it was passed and the 20 sec rule returned in the 1993 Sporting Code and has been there ever since....
Ian Kaynes
Wakefield Book for the 80th
From: Ian Kaynes
Most readers will be familiar with the history of the Wakefield Cup which was compiled by Charles Rushing but now out of print. Some years ago Charles agreed to me converting it into electronic form for inclusion on the FAI web site as a valuable history of the oldest aeromodelling international trophy. This was completed and after various revisions of format and content management system, it is now available at http://www.fai.org/aeromodelling/freeflight/wakefield. It is particularly notable at this time since the first competition for the Wakefield Cup was held on September 29 1928 and this is now the 80th anniversary of that event.
Ian Kaynes
FAI’s Second Serve or Reducing the Grace Period
From: Aram Schlosberg
Why should free flight offer a grace period (20-seconds). If one mess up
with19-second flight and gets a second chance, then why not do the same
for a 179 flight as well?
A grace period has many effects. Over time, a grace period has allowed
condireable experimentation, speeding up many important technological
innovations. These range from F1C bunts, F1A bunts, F1B delayed and
feathered props and the current exciting variable camber (VC) F1A wings.
Without a grace period, FAI models might have still been in the late
eighties technologically.
Grace covers the many things outside our control. These include F1B
motors blowing just after the launch; terrible F1A launch by helpers; random
air bubbles the fuel line as well as blowing a plug or even a crank case in
F1C models. I’m sure each of us can add more unusual cases.
Grace also applies to the bumbles of our sport, allowing them a second
change when they are clocked under 20-seconds.
As Jon Somers notes - Tennis has two serves. Confining it to a single
serve (no second chance) will change the tenor of the game. Tennis would
become more defensive, lack crowd pleasing lightening (first) serves.
To a certain extent, F1B flyoffs with the requirement to wind the motor in
the 10-minute window, make it an onlookers’ spectacle.
Dropping the grace period would make more onerous for beginners, make
contests harder (“one drop and your out”) and increase the motivation to
bend rules (“it was just a test flight”). A less obvious impact would be on
teams. Managers would have to intimately know every model on the team -
watching out for any possible glitch – as any mishap could tank the whole
team. Whether their oversight is limited to the team’s models or applies to
the decision when to fly as well (the Chinese case) will depend on the
personalities involved. Teams will definitely be much more managed.
The length of a grace period has a big influence the tenor of an event.
For example, AMA events prescribe a 40-seconds grace period.
Coupled with a 2-minute max, it make AMA events rather uncompetitive
(in my humble opinion). The 20-second FAI grace period actually worked
well in the pre-RDT days – when F1As accidentally DTed at launch,
it would typically take 21-2 seconds to land.
The legalization of RDT beyond F1C has raised some ethical concerns.
Although what Per Findahl did at the Bulgarian Cup was perfectly legal,
it left uneasiness among participants in the ensuing SEN discussion.
Even if everyone had a RDT at the tips of his/her fingers, I surmise that
the uneasiness would still remain. Why? Because RDT – designed for
safety reasons (protect the model or spectators) was de-facto used as a
means to overcome a poor launch. But, as we are all know, it’s impossible
to practically distinguish between the two. Neither is this issue confined to
F1A, as F1B fliers could also use RDT for second attempts – at the cost
of destroying a pair of blades.
Eliminating the grace period, as noted above, would completely change
the tenor of FAI events. Indeed, an attempt to abolish it the past raised a
wide rebellion. On the other hand – rolling back the clock and confining
RDT to F1C again will forego RDT’s legitimate benefits – the ability to fly
in small or tiny fields, save models and protect spectators.
The problem could be mitigated (but not completely fixed) by shrinking
FAI’s grace period. A shorted grace period would make it riskier to use
RDT as a back door for second attempts while hopefully preserving its
good attributes (allowing random events and retaining the relaxed tenor of
FAI events). A grace period of 5-seconds, for example, is definitely too short,
spilling out the baby and the bath water. It would make RDTing for a second
attempt almost impossible, eliminate of almost all random events and
most importantly, change the tenor of FAI into an onerous sport.
Since the length of the grace period is such a fundamental variable, with
associated unforeseen consequences, reducing it should be done very
carefully. A 15-second grace period should be tried before reducing it
to 10-seconds.
Aram
October Update
I'm busy checking off the lists for Livotto, Sierra Cup and the Finals. Have a pretty good turnout for Sierra Cup but it's not too late to sign up, just drop me an E-mail and let me know you're coming. We have a little more time to get ready this year so I'm not in as big a rush to get the poles assigned. Remember A,B C and P on Tuesday Oct 7, with Minis and FAI Nostalgia Power on Wednesday. Banquest Wednesday night at Elks. I like the shirt this year and if you want to see it, it's at: http://gallery.me.com/rlimberger/100176/DSCF5304/web.jpg
Looking forward to it and see you all in Lost Hills!
Mike
More Grace not Less ..
From: Rob Wallace
Hi Roger,
I have been watching the debate on RCDT and the 20 second rule with interest.
The 20 second rule I would personally like to increase to 25 seconds after my trip all the way to the Ukraine to have my model DT in the fifth round on launch in F1A and take 22 seconds to reach the ground.
It would have been nice to have had a sporting chance to get another flight to try and get a placing after that mishap after travelling such a long way at high cost to compete and I noticed others who had mid airs etc suffer the same fate.
Re the RCDT I use it either for trimming or a test flight but not for the competition.
I believe it to be a good safety feature on F1C models in the event of a serious mishap where the model starts hurtling towards the ground and could cause serious injury or damage but am opposed to people using it deliberately to get another refly for tactical reasons or having the ability to adjust the trim in flight during a contest.
I am bound to have provoked some discussion on the first part at least. I would like to know what others who have experienced that situation think.
Cheers,
Rob Wallace
New Zealand
And from OZ
From: Neil Murray
For my money,the rules as they are at the moment are just about right, if you think through the potential scenarios.
The idea that one can perform a bunt launch, observe the model for a few seconds, decide it is in sink and DT for a refly all within 20 seconds is nonsense – you would be lucky to achieve this in 30 secs. Try it for yourself
The two most common F1A RDT emergencies both result from undetected unlatches, usually in wind. The worst is what happened to Per, you unwittingly initiate a circle within the bunt bail out time, and the model bunts in. Without RDT, you get a flight of about 3 seconds, and a reflight – but with a second model as your first is usually shattered. Sometimes the model manages to pull out of the suicide dive at very low level – still better to RDT than mow down the spectators. Rules that let a competitor save his model and live to fly another day have to be good for the sport..
The second scenario occurs when you tow through the bail out time and launch. Instead of bunting the model now loops on release ending up at about 40m instead of 70+.Usually it takes a few seconds to comprehend what has just happened and by the time you have found the RDT button the chances of getting down in under 20 secs are far from sure. It is very easy to get 21 or 22 secs from this situation and is usually better to hope your air choice was good.
The 20 sec attempt rule has stood the test of time – let’s leave it alone. And RDT will keep more of us flying and later in life than would have been possible without it – let’s not fetter the use of it.
Italian World Cup Reminder..
World cup Event in Capannori
lasts days for inscriptions FAVLI wc in ITALY
http://www.favli.it/
see you
Maurizio Tomazzoni
.....
Roger Morrell