11/29/2015 at 4:57 pm #55668
Aram In fact you are adding new events for electric models to fly in. Bye allowing them to fly in existing AMA gas powered events you are doing exactly that. I would still like to know the ready to fly weight of a 1/2A size electric model for comparison to the same size gas powered model. If you like to fly electric because you don’t want to deal with fuel,noise and starters that’s your choice and I am fine with that. Likewise the gas flyers like flying their ground pounders.
Mike11/29/2015 at 10:19 pm #55669AnonymousInactive
Hello to all! I have been reading these comments by all of you, and many comments are well placed!! The way I see this whole issue is that the proposal, by Aram , is a well proposed one from the fact of making events more likely to be joined by others! as we all know participation is not at its highest point, and electric technology is on the upwards momentum , so why not make this option available! At the same time , the issues of standardization of components and power plants is a valid issue. To start, the initial idea is great if not brilliant. Great idea that needs to be honed properly. As i see things , AMA events are based on looser, less complicated set of rules than FAI rules, so if one wants to fly a complicated class ,than fly FAI, agreed!! To solve the situation we currently are having , i worked in reverse. What is the parameter which all the AMA classes are classified by? Power plant?Engine displacement! So lets work from that standpoint, what is needed in order to simplify this transition is a chart of allowed electric motors for each event, as per class, A.K.A 1/2A Ic motor up to .054 inch or 1806 electric motor and up to 2 cell battery, ( i just made up the electric motor designation as for demonstration purpose!). This chart can be extrapolated to the other classes and can simplify the comparison of IC to Electric. Playing devils advocate one will say that this will allow better electric motors to be present, and give the flyer an undue advantage, fair, but that already exsists in the actual gas engine arena!!! Take a cox TD 049 , versus a Cyclon/Fora 049, you want a power gap, here is one!! take an O.S. 15 engine versus a Nelson .15 or a Cyclon .15 , do the math there! One will say that it still leaves the door for some one to utilize an extremely more powerful engine than others, maybe, just remember that most of our AMA models are not of the high tech construction, and have their own structural limitations, so ultimately using the most powerful power plant will cause the destruction of the model. Second, in case of electric power, as of now , the more voltage/battery power used, can garner more potential power, but at severe weight penalty, associated with battery weight, ESC weight, and additional reinforcements needed for the added power, so the balance between power and weight will still be a deciding factor! Does one want to restrict structural limitations, maybe, but I really do not think at this point we need these restriction. The main idea behind the initial suggestion was to allow similar model to be flown in both configurations! If time permits I will be making the effort to create two identical power models with the two variations of power, gas and electric, I think it will be a great comparative tool! In the mean time A chart of comparable motors/ engines chart should be devised ( now the real arguments will start!!!), but I know that is possible, A.K.A wattage comparisons of the average HP available from an average gas motor versus the motor/battery combo in electric counterpart. thanks again Yuda Avla11/29/2015 at 10:43 pm #55670ARAM SCHLOSBERGParticipant
It is rather obvious that Mike would like to have electric fliers fly with other electric fliers, gas flier fly with other gas fliers. Evidently fuel and lithium are a bad mix.
There are other possibilities such as
1. refine the space of A and B electric into smaller sub events. But this should happen once more people fly electric.
2. My own preference is to fly ALL electric events in a five flight format followed by head-to-head flyoffs. I’ve proposed this a number of times and the AMA contest board has defeated these proposals consistently with vengeance (with Art Ellis being the one exception).
If we are really talking about fuel and lithium then a different entity, made up of electric fliers should control the development of electric models in the AMA framework.11/30/2015 at 1:19 am #55671
I am not against electric models. My interest was to find some common ground between gas vs electric. I have seen the latest all carbon fiber electric models and with their extreme lite weight, “which some seem to minimize”, they are very fast. Matching horsepower vs. wattage and prop sizes in endless charts and graphs misses the point I was trying to make. If you take a 4.5 oz. model and fly it against a 8 oz. model with the same power, the lighter model will out perform the heavier one.I have been asking for the weight for a 1/2A size electric model to compare it to a 1/2A gas model. But for some reason, there seems to be a reluctance to share that data. I do not fly electric but I enjoy watching them and I harbor no ill will against anyone who wants to promote the sport. As far as addressing the comparison of the performance of a T.D. .049 vs. a Cyclon .049, of course there is a difference in performance, since the Cyclon was a much more modern design then a T.D. Its apples vs. oranges, but it brings up a interesting point. You have the ability to set your rpm in a electric motor thru the use of a ESC. So in your graphs and charts of rpm and prop sizes, what do you set the power and rpm range too, if you fly against someone using a Cyclon instead of a T.D. You have no ESC on a gas motor so you can’t really lower its performance and since performance is key in free flight where do you go for equality. This not a simple way to add more contestants to AMA events, because there are so many unanswered variables. I can see why the Competition Committee turned down the proposal.
Mike11/30/2015 at 2:56 am #55672
Righty, righty.. lithium and methanol would be a bad mix.
This whole idea makes about as much sense as saying we should fly rubber and gliders together or rubber and gas, well,you can see where I’m going.
Cheers!11/30/2015 at 2:57 am #55673
Righty, righty11/30/2015 at 3:21 am #55675
Pete its kind of ironic you should mention flying gas, rubber and glider in the same event. Someone told me that is exactly what they want to do to increase participation. they want to limit engine runs to 9 seconds on gas and rubber models and limit the time someone can tow a glider up to 9 seconds. I guess the 3 flyers in their club want to compete against each other.11/30/2015 at 3:25 am #55676
That must have been a deal worked out by the power flyer.
I can see it working for a glider if the wind is really blowing.11/30/2015 at 3:30 am #55674
Just thinking about it makes you wonder.
Inquiring minds want to know how you limit the motor run time on a rubber model.12/01/2015 at 11:03 pm #55677AnonymousInactive
Leave it to Aram to stir-up what has been a moribund forum!
I think trying to make two different types of free flight equal is perhaps too stiff a challenge. Another way is to simply fly what we know in the Colorado MMM club as a Scramble. This is where any model can fly to it’s max which is usually two or three minutes. Then the number of two minute maxes are multiplied by 150 percent to equal the three minute ships. It isn’t perfect but it works surprisingly well. Fly-offs just keep flying the normal max times without escalating times or reducing motor runs. This allows a club to at least have a competition where otherwise 8-12 contestants might be flying in 8-12 different events. MMM has been using this format successfully for going on seven years and is the standard format for monthly contests.
Now to be sure there are some issues but they are easily solved ahead of time and it does allow any event to fly against any other with a fair measure of equality. So I have a pretty hot performing Electric A/B and while I don’t think it is as fast climbing as a Nelson powered Satellite 450, if we flew in a Scramble format we could both have a lot of fun without having to sort out a way to equalize power output.12/01/2015 at 11:30 pm #55678
An excellent narrative which makes several good points about implementation.
And, a proven track record of success.
Essentially we don’t need any complicated rule stuff to have fun.
This is a hobby, not a profession or business.
God save us from any more bureaucratic complexity than the clear, simple AMA rules we already have in place.
For those otherwise inclined there is always the f.a.i. format.
(“Q” was fun when it started out.)12/02/2015 at 12:39 am #55679
Any club can host a special event in any matter they want already without going thru a whole bunch of rule changes and complicated performance parameters. A club event seems to be the best option for mixing electric vs. gas, if that’s what you want to do.
Mike12/02/2015 at 1:42 am #55680DAN BERRYParticipant
CIA club worked this out years ago.12/03/2015 at 6:10 am #55681Gilbert MorrisParticipant
I just checked into the Online Forum after a long absence and found Electric Free Flight was about the only one in motion. I should have expected what I read. The title “Electrifying All Land-Based AMA Power Events” was enough to crack me up. The last person to try something of this magnitude was Adolph Hitler. Carry on.
Gil12/03/2015 at 1:53 pm #55682ARAM SCHLOSBERGParticipant
He actually gassed many of my clan. Instead, we should stick to technicalities.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.