SEN 2560 - Looks at the CIAM agenda, talking to the big animals in corner while building a F1P

Table of Contents – SEN 2560

  1. Looks at the CIAM agenda, talking to the big animals in corner while building a F1P
  2. dt fly off
  3. DT FO Details ?!
  4. Engine Run Details
  5. Elephant in the Corner
  6. Rhino in the Corner
  7. Cutting Edge F1P?

dt fly off

From: Frédéric ABERLENC

The DT Fly off will be on the table for the next CIAM meeting.
Please note that in 2018, DT fly off was used 8 times in WC contest. If it is legal, this number will increase. Most of organiser will not use anymore the “next day” 10 mn fly off but they will organise a quick DT fly off.

I think this rule is extremely dangerous for the future of FF and I really hope that it will be rejected by most countries.
Best regards

DT FO Details ?!

From: Allard van Wallene

Dear Sen readers,

As member of the FF subcom, I have put forward some arguments against the current DT-fly off proposal:

-An angle between stabilizer and fuselage has been defined.
In my opinion this definition is wrong, as it is the angle between stabilizer and wing which gives the descent behaviour of a model under DT. Furthermore, the DT behaviour of a F1A model can be a flat descent, a spin or some funky helicoptering or looping style. Sometimes 1 degree of stab angle change can have  such a different DT (how to measure this??). And what about wing wigglers? They can be set such that the model will start rotating, with the wings spinning violently like helicopter blades resulting in minimum descent rates.

-A DT which occurs after the set maximum is penalized with a zero score.
This is discriminating all those flying with mechanical timers. It is impossible to set a mechanical timer to the exact second (e.g. 120 seconds) in particular under cooling down fly off conditions. So either the model DTs after the set max time and a zero score is a result, or the sportsman must set his timer deliberately ‘short’ to avoid a zero score. If the average DT time is, say, 10 seconds, then a model which DTs 5 seconds short, is already at a 50% disadvantage over models with electronic timers; a lose lose situation.

For the reasons above, The Netherlands votes against this proposal.


Engine Run Details

In the USA proposal on a new method of timing engine runs, it does not specify they way the time keeper will check the engine run on the ground. It could be understood that the timer just has to see that it is an electronic timer? Or look at the settings? How is the timer going to understand how the timer controls the engine, how much latency there is in servo moving in the timer and for fuel to drain or stop flowing. Does the electronic timer have to be certified and there be official documentation to show how it works ? and here to read the motor run? What about people who make their own electronic timers is that OK ? The only way is to time the run on the ground with no other engines running.


Elephant in the Corner

From: Stuart Darmon

Hi Roger,                

I read with interest the comments in SEN regarding allocation of World Cup points. Is it just me, or is the real elephant here that tweaking the points system is negligible compared to the fact that a given competitor can keep entering as many contests around the globe as they can afford until they get four good results? Let me be very clear, I mean no disrespect to those who do well in the World Cup- a scan through the results archive confirms that they are all worthy. Nor am I complaining about the cost of FAI flying; I understand the stuff about it being no more expensive than golf or firing sports cars at Mars, or the other stuff you guys do for fun over there. My only point is that worrying about the minutiae of the points system in a contest with effectively unlimited re-entry is rather like fretting about short measures at a free bar.                                   

Rhino in the Corner


The bigger item than the number of contests that a person may enter is the significant advantage that one has living in central Europe. The biggest geo-political event to affect Free Flight was the break up of Yugoslavia. This created a number of small countries with strong aeromodelling heritage and very close concentration of World Cup Events all with very easy driving distance. This is partially compensated by letting countries outside of Europe have an extra World Cup event. But this concentration is also detrimental to those on the outer edges of Europe such as the UK, where you need to include a boat or plane and places like Moscow where it is not any easy drive! In contrast while the break up of the Soviet Union created aeromodelling power houses like Russia and Ukraine, most of the countries are spread part apart so travel logistics are not so easy.

But what is more important is the service that the World Cup provides to Free Flight modelling. While the winning World Cup itself is a great objective it plays a major role in promoting Free Flight. Firstly, it lets any Free Flight Sportsman take part in a major international competition of some standing, something previous only to the few who qualified for the World Champs could do. It brings the top sportsmen to many locations that they would not normally visit and the local flyer who may not travel much benefits from that exposure. There were postings on Facebook by people who just had a good time taking part in the recent 3 World Cup events, in spite of the non-California weather and not making it to the podium. One F1B flyer told me that just making it to a fly off with a field of that caliber was a major boost to him. While inside Europe there is an additional benefit of having a major international event with the Euro Champs countries outside of Europe typically don’t have a Continental championship because of the smaller number and significantly higher cost so the World Cup gives those countries additional International exposure. In general, it creates a greater interest and exchange of ideas.

I agree with you that to many the change in the scoring seems relatively unimportant compared with the other issues. As long as it is fair and encourages participation we will all benefit.


Cutting Edge F1P?

From: George Voss

We don’t have an Astrostar F1P but if we have the plans we can laser cut one for you.  Also, we have a number of other kits that could easily be modified to fit the F1P limits.  LMK if we can be of help.


George, the “V” in D&V Laser Worx

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

Editorial observations

The Astrostar is a great airplane that did well in early F1P events and has the advantage that it has conventional construction but there are other more ‘modern’ F1Ps that perform better.

Now that “P” has been around for some time we have observed that it is not as easy to fly as the original rules promulgators thought but you can get very good performing models. Secondly while it was originally intended for Juniors we have noticed an increasing number of Open flyers doing the event (for example Dave who is asking for the plan). Perhaps this is because it is a FAI class power model that is challenging but does not have the excessive performance, complexity and cost of F1C or even F1J……..