SEN 1380

Details

Category: Archive 2010

Hits: 1117

 

Reply

 

|

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.  to me

show details9:36 PM (38 minutes ago)

1. Restricted Technology or Restricted Thinking
2. Biggles on Restricted Technology
3. Frozen Photos
4. Dual Clubs meet.

I have read the UK proposals and I believe that we are confusing two objectives. A desire to control cost and a desire to return to bygone days.

I fully understand the concern about the increasing cost and complexity of flappers or folders or geared motors. That evolution is simple to stop by forbidding variable camber or span wings or geared motors.

I believe that the sentiment expressed fairly directly in Biggles article below and implied in the UK proposal against bought models and/or components is out dated and no longer valid. It has sense of amateurism against the professional that was in the beginning of the modern Olympic Games where is clearly arose from a sense of social class distinction that is not applicable in today’s world. That sentiment would also prohibit those who support our hobby or sport such as John Clapp, Mike Woodhouse, myself or any of the cottage industries from taking part because we clearly have a commercial interest.

The restriction on the span of the models is again an attempt to limit the use of so called exotic materials.  It has little point. I believe that if you do the cost benefit analysis comparing the cost [material and labor/labour] and effective life of a model with carbon against an all wood model, the composite model will come out cheaper over the life of the model. I’m by no means an expert builder but do not believe composite construction is beyond the average modeler. Certainly a set of modern composite style F1B wings are easier to build that a classic Bob While style Wakefield.

In addition it is easier to trim a model that has a number of timer operated surfaces than one with out.

While not an economist I believe that we are seeing a sentiment of people pushing back against the very high cost of purchased models. Any commercial model is always a compromise and picking the class that I fly, I see that both Andriukov and Vivchar models work well with many sportsmen of widely differing abilities. I’m sure that both Alex and Igor have made performance compromises to make their models more usable by a wide population and if either wanted to make a model just for themselves they would so something slightly different. In fact if we look at two of the top F1B sportsmen in the USA, Blake Jensen and Walt Ghio they both fly their own models. In the F1A class Ken Bauer who used to purchase models in now building his own, trying new ideas and making his choice on how he spends his money and time. While I supply electronic timers to a number of factories I sell far more timers to individual modelers than suppliers, not sure where these guys get there models from?

With increasing complexity comes the increasing ability to mess up as a long as we don’t pander the technophile with generous attempt rules and the like. It is a sporting decision that one has to make of performance versus reliability. I was interested to see Kimmo’s simple F1A with new airfoil technology beat a number of all singing, dancing and flapping models. Hmmm.

Flying in a world championship competitively takes a level of financial and time commitment that is impossible to understand unless you have done it. It is just not rational to say that we want a class of model where anyone build it, trim it and fly it become World Champ. No changing of the model specification is going to increase the level of participation at the top level.   On the other hand one of the huge appeals of Free flight is that one can do very well with a moderate well trimmed model and good air picking. Just as there are people who want to go back to the past there are those who like flying modern models because of the appeal of the performance, even if that sportsman does not want fly in the world champs or world cup. 

Let’s not kid ourselves, if we go back to models of yesteryear we might reduce costs, we might appeal to sports men of the past who are no longer flying at the top level but that’s no guarantee it will appeal to either the young people we want to support free flight in the future or those who support the FAI free flight classes today. Those young people are the children of today’s technology, that’s what they want , not the past. And all we do is create another series of classes that further complicates our free flight model sport.

• Prev
• Next