Class F1E proved as a class of big potentials for promotion of aeromodelling in general. It is accessible for very young juniors and for very aged seniors, which ensures excellent participation. It is not very demanding in technical, organizing nor financial sense, but excellent flyability of the models presents an excellent means for attracting both public and sportsmen to the flying fields. It is also good for joining of new countries – a good example is Serbia, where only in several months many modellers joined F1E. The FAI Jury suggests to CIAM FF SC to pay more attention in encouraging new countries to join this class. Therefore, regardless of problems noticed in close obstacles like trees, weather inconvenience (frequently changed wind direction, strong wind, temporarly down slope wind etc), too much demanding maximum for juniors in the first round etc. this event was in general a positive move in DAeC and CIAM activity.

There was a full day excursion by three comfortable coaches to an eco-vilage, to a big farm near Kaltensundheim and to the famous Gliding Museum, Gliding School and a sports airfield at Wasserkuppe, the venue where gliding started in the world back in 1911. These premises should visit every aeromodeller because an impressive part of the Gliding Museum is dedicated to history of aeromodelling.

The FAI Jury made the following remarks during these events:

1. There was only one man from DAeC (the Contest Director) to run the event, without participation DAeC officials in ceremonies. Cooperation between DAeC and local personnel seemed not very good at the beginning of the events, but later improved. That was the reason why on the registration day even two of the jury members were engaged to do model processing. It was acceptable in this class because model processing did not require any measurements, which could require Jury intervention or decisions. Such things must be avoided in future.

2. Before the beginning of the competition Jury noticed that the organizer bought erroneously all mechanical instead of digital stopwatches and that tripods were missing. It was not possible to replace the stopwatches and provide the tripods because of shortage of time and the Jury required the organizer to inform participant of this fact and to make an agreement with all the teams to use these stopwatches and to watch models without tripods. The teammanagers agreed with that reluctantly at the first briefing.

3. A map of Kaltenwestheim surroundings distributed to the participants was not enough precise, so access to the slope was not easy for everybody. Also there was not a list of the officials posted, so for the foreign participants it was not easy to find who is in charge for some tasks.

4. Presentation of the results on the first day was in German style (up100% for each round and also up to 100% for total), which was strange to the foreign participants so the Jury requsted the organizer to adjust his PC program to the generally accepted style of results presentation (up to 100% for each round and up to 500% for total). Some problems with photocopying of the score lists at a distant town instead at the spot caused that they were prepared for distribution just before the prizegiving ceremony.

5. General weather forecast was not very helpful, because of a big influence of local wind-systems. Therefore, selection of the slopes was not always adequate in relation to the wind direction. Distances between the alternative slopes did not allow acceptable relocation times and senior competitors had to agree in last rounds to fly in relatively inconvenient flying conditions. It was noticed especially in the last round (side wind or very slow down slope wind), but it did not affect flights so much to require conclusion of the competition on the reserve day.