F1Q Rules for 2014

Moderator: Jim Jennings

Re: F1Q Rules for 2014

Postby TEPPO S » Sat Oct 19, 2013 11:50 am

Hallo All!

Under this topic we should disscuss only one thing, and it is, how we can cancel the grazy rule for 2014 and its is, how to connect electric-wireing of EL. The rule should only tell, how EL operates. It should start counting the use of energy, when the model has released from hand and stop the motor, when the precalculated energy of use is used.

For season 2015 we can disscuss:
1. How we inspect the use of energy?
- My opinion is that we should do it in static tests with energy-data-loggers and for all models, with or without EL
- REL are ok, but dont forget the contestants without EL
2. We should define the size of model:
- 34 dm2 and energycalculation until 500g are OK or?
3, We should reduce the energy- in- use step by step:
- For season 2015 4 J/g is OK?
Yours Teppo
TS
TEPPO S
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 3:03 am
Location: Finland

Re: F1Q Rules for 2014

Postby Aram Schlosberg » Sun Oct 20, 2013 3:54 pm

Teppo,
0. Agree with you that the German rule requiring that the EL shut down the motor should be abolished. Even the members of the Free Flight Technical Committee admit they had no clue what they were voting for (3 for 2 against and the rest abstained).
1. Disagree with you that all models should be tested with a SET (static energy tester). The simple Q models without EL constitute 90% of the models flown here and they should be able to continue using the mid-wattage method.
2. Q is an open class with a common energy multiplier per weight. There are no size, weight, area limitations which is why we have so many different models in the event. It's instructive to look at the 1979 NFFS plan book; every design was different and all were scratch built. That is what Q is today where one is encouraged to design and build their own models. The spark is back.
But if you legislate an area and weight you will end up with basically the same factory model at a cost of 1000+ Euro.
3. Agree that the energy multiplier can be reduced to 4 Watt-sec/gram as models have ample performance. However, we will not be proposing it this time because we first need tp deal with issue 0.

In short, we agree on two, disagree on two.
Aram
Aram Schlosberg
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 9:40 am
Location: New York City

Re: F1Q Rules for 2014

Postby Randy Reynolds » Sun Oct 20, 2013 8:01 pm

I hope for the sale of the fledgling F1Q event in the US that we can just stop trying to make things more and more theoretical. I admit that most US flyers (like me) aren't seasoned technical competitors in this event but with all the changes in F1Q with every rules cycle we have successfully doused much of the potential interest in the event. It's a shame as F1Q can be a lot of fun to fly.

If there is to be any growth in US F1Q then there are two things needed:

1.) Get rid of the 2014 EL rule change. How can this be accomplished?

2.) Freeze the rules changes until we can develop a cadre of competitors in F1Q. Ultimately we could have excellent US feeder events with E36 and Electric A/B but right now CIAM seems to be doing it's best to destroy any interest here in North America.
Randy Reynolds
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 7:50 pm

Re: F1Q Rules for 2014

Postby Pete » Sun Oct 20, 2013 9:34 pm

xxxxx
Last edited by Pete on Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
"The best things in life are Free (Flight)"!
The proper number of models to have is...
one more!
Pete
 
Posts: 638
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 5:21 am

Re: F1Q Rules for 2015 +

Postby Austrian » Mon Oct 21, 2013 2:45 am

a) Ian Kaynes has send out some ideas on future rules changes, including some regarding F1Q. These include finally a definition of the gender of the silly 3.5mm connectors, and abolishment of the unnecessary wordings regarding who or what has to stop the motor.

b) I see no reason for a specific size of F1Q planes (sorry, Teppo), and I dont want to ask for mandatory use of an SEL as this would be a requirement for the contest organizer who does not like classes requiring complicated checking equipment. Maybe just add the option of using SEL's?. However, reducing the energy to 4J/g is long overdue and should be formulated as an official proposal.

All of you PLEASE inform your representative in FAI how to vote!

Just to throw another wrench into the proceedings: Just what exactly is the safety lock to prevent accidentally starting the motor? I consider two different actions to be sufficient for this rule. Is this correct?
Balsa flies as good!
Austrian
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 1:48 am
Location: Austria

Re: F1Q Rules for 2014

Postby Aram Schlosberg » Mon Oct 21, 2013 4:51 am

Kalus,
The good news is that we are finally in the process of selecting a representative to the free flight technical committee. The bad news is that we have no clue what Ian has been sending out since we have no representative at the moment. The same applied last year. A chicken and an egg problem.
Randy,
Completely agree with you that the Q rule making cycle has gone viral. We have a very relaxed attitude about measuring energy and as far as I know, no one here has ever tried to implement it. In contrast, some Europeans think it has to be measure down to the last Watt-sec and they can practically take a train ride to Lausanne. But if we froze rules for two years, it would take longer to fix the glitches.
Aram
Aram Schlosberg
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 9:40 am
Location: New York City

Re: F1Q Rules for 2014

Postby TEPPO S » Mon Oct 21, 2013 11:18 am

Hallo All!

To Klaus. I agree You, that for ex. Dean-connection is more safe, but it is from Dualsky, not neutral. Everybody have to make the addapters??? I have no influece to this. I have two kaputte batterybacks with my + and - femaleconnections of my some hundred connections. Got Sein Dank, no other damages...

Too big models are safetyrisiko!

Also, everybody have to contact Your country CIAM-Delegate, because in FFTC is something goeing on...

To Aram: I see no difference to inspect models with EL or without EL. Same procedure and more precision...
Yours Teppo
TS
TEPPO S
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 3:03 am
Location: Finland

Re: F1Q Rules for 2014

Postby Randy Reynolds » Tue Oct 22, 2013 8:11 am

Let's try to focus down to what competitors in F1Q should do in order to bring about the change needed in these rules. Just to keep things simple can we just change the EL rule back to the 2013 version and leave everything else alone including the non-EL formula. Let's not introduce ANYTHING ELSE! Let the event run for at least two rules cycles before "fixing" anything else.

How is that to be accomplished? Can we agree on the above or not? If not then nothing will be accomplished. There is no time to put a highly polished refinement of the rules together.

Who is/are the US CIAM representative(s) and can they become involved in this discussion? Hopefully non-US F1Q competitors can also focus on drawing their CIAM representatives into fixing the rules.
Randy Reynolds
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 7:50 pm

Re: F1Q Rules for 2014

Postby PeeTee » Tue Oct 22, 2013 8:52 am

Just what exactly is the safety lock to prevent accidentally starting the motor? I consider two different actions to be sufficient for this rule. Is this correct?


Klaus

As you know, the CIAM wording on the matter is this:
"Safety locks must be used to prevent unintentional restarting of motor(s)after the motor(s) have been stopped."

I and many others flying electric classes in Britain interpret it as meaning unintentional restarting by 3rd parties, although this isn't explicit. When I was working (for an aerospace & defence company), simple safety interlocks were judged to be compliant if they met what was termed the "two event criteria". This is in line with your comment, and provided two completely separate actions are required to restart the motor I would argue that it complies. A requirement to power up the system again and then press the motor/timer start button should suffice as they are two discrete events.

.............on the other hand, sometimes CIAM moves in mysterious ways :roll:

Peter
PeeTee
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 8:06 am
Location: London England

Re: F1Q Rules for 2014

Postby derekmc30 » Tue Oct 22, 2013 9:45 am

Randy, At the moment the US doesn't have a CIAM representative. The SEN Enews posted a "job description" several issues back. It's probably on the SCAT website archive.
derekmc30
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 8:04 pm

Re: F1Q Rules for 2014

Postby TEPPO S » Tue Oct 22, 2013 11:43 am

Hallo All!
Here is the list of all FFTC-members.
http://www.fai.org/ciam-about-us/ciam-o ... omodelling
CIAM-Delegate-List I dont know.
Yours
Teppo
TS
TEPPO S
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 3:03 am
Location: Finland

Re: F1Q Rules for 2014

Postby Randy Reynolds » Tue Oct 22, 2013 12:15 pm

"At the moment the US doesn't have a CIAM representative. The SEN Enews posted a "job description" several issues back. It's probably on the SCAT website archive."

You're kidding! Aram, why aren't you signing up for this job???
Randy Reynolds
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 7:50 pm

Re: F1Q Rules for 2014

Postby Charlie Jones » Tue Oct 22, 2013 12:40 pm

A point of clarification. The USA does have a CIAM representative it is George Batiuk. We are in the process of replacing George who has submitted his resignation pending the selection of his replacement . Until then he will continue in this role.
Charlie Jones
Charlie Jones
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 5:28 pm

Re: F1Q Rules for 2014

Postby derekmc30 » Tue Oct 22, 2013 3:16 pm

Thanks for the correction Charlie! That makes sense.
derekmc30
 
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 8:04 pm

Re: F1Q Rules for 2014

Postby Roger Morrell » Wed Oct 23, 2013 9:24 am

Actually the CIAM representative is usually the AMA President. The current president Bob Brown does this. Bob has FAI experience over many years with a number of disciplines, in particular F3D. As the representative of the National Aero Club, AMA for Aeromodeling, he is the person who votes.

The role George B had was the USA person on the FF technical sub committee that is chaired by Ian Kaynes. The FF sub-committee advices the CIAM on FF matters and makes recommendations.

Roger
Roger Morrell
 
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 11:39 am
Location: Redondo Beach

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Free Flight

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron