Jury Report on Free Flight World Championships 2013 F1A F1B F1C
FAI Jury
Ian Kaynes |
GBR |
President |
Cenny Breeman |
BEL |
Member |
Bruno Delor |
FRA |
Member |
Dates
August 3 to 11
Location
Moncontour, France
Information
Bulletin 1 was published in February 2013. Bulletin 2 presented updated and new information and was published in June. Throughout the year information was added to the organisers’ web site, including accommodation details, maps, and lists of registered competitors.
Participation
F1A 115 competitors from 39 countries. Both numbers were a record for any free flight championship. The number included the defending champion and 2 junior world champions too old to defend their junior titles.
F1B 102 competitors from 37 countries, including the defending champion and one junior world champion too old to defend his junior title.
F1C 71 competitors from 27 countries, including the defending champion.
Accommodation
Competitors were accommodated in bungalows and camp site at Moncontour and in hotels and gite in the surrounding area. The organisers’ headquarters were in Moncontour, including an outdoor area for ceremonies with stage, and a restaurant tent. Meals were available at Moncontour of very good quality and good lunches were available on the flying field on competition days. There were also café and bar facilities on the field.
Flying site
The competition was flown on farm fields. The World Cup competitions held during the week preceding the championships had problems because of late harvesting of crops. There was good weather on the weekend at the start of the championships and large areas were harvested to give much more freedom. The flying area was large, but the starting line had to be moved some times to avoid models landing in crops.
Weather
The weather had been windy during the World Cup events, but was very good for the World Championships. The wind was very light, it was dry, often cloudy and the temperature was pleasant typically 25C. There were two brief periods of very light drizzle which had no effect on flying.
Competition
Model processing was carried out over three days in the Moncontour gymnasium. It ran very smoothly according to the schedule, with the only problems arising from teams without model certificates or numbers on models. The processed models were marked with an indelible pen line across the edge of the FAI sticker and the model, following the rule which has been passed for 2014. It was noted that this did not fully identify models, so that alternative parts with the same model identification number could be used.
A timekeepers briefing was held. The jury had intercepted a proposed rule summary for the timekeepers which had been based on a very old edition of the Sporting Code, and it was replaced by a more modern copy of the code.
The team managers meeting was told that no motorised retrieving would be allowed, which was followed without problems. The large number of teams resulted in having to move 6 positions between each round in F1B and so the team managers were requested to have their F1B competitors move winding position for each round, which was generally followed. The system for calling in models for the random processing was explained. One manager asked if a competitor who had been randomly processed would avoid being processed again during the day. The Jury emphatically refused any such exemption.
A starting line with pole numbers and chairs was established well in advance of the start each day. The clock and automatic announcement system were the same ones which had been used at the 2012 European Championships in Italy. Ample speakers were positioned along the line to enable announcements to be heard very clearly. The clock was not visible from the other end of the line but this was not significant in view of the good announcements. When the starting position had to be change during a day, an alternative line was prepared before the end of the previous round. It was then necessary to relocate the public address system and this large task was usually done very quickly.
F1A Competition
The competition started promptly. Although the first round was flown to the standard extended maximum of 3 min 30 sec, the performance of F1A models is so high that 100 of the 116 competitors achieved the maximum in the good flying conditions. A Korean competitor was one of those randomly processed after the first round. It was found that her model was below the minimum weight and she was disqualified. It appeared that the team may have been unsure of the rules.
The good weather continued all day and the minimum number of maximum scores in any round was 98. 62 competitors reached the flyoff. To provide just two timekeepers for each competitor required many extra timekeepers over the number used in the rounds. This was achieved by drafting in other officials and by a good response to the request for volunteers from spectators and helpers. In order to meet the requirement for three timekeepers the teams were allowed to provide the third timekeeper.
The draw for pole starting positions took some time and the starting line was moved to a new position, but the first flyoff started close to scheduled time at 19.05. This was followed by the second round at 20.00 and the third round at 21.00 which produced a clear winner.
F1B competition
There was a more noticeable wind this morning. The 4 minute maximum for the F1B first round was a more severe test than had been seen in F1A, there were 66 maximum scores out of 102 competitors. The rounds ran smoothly, with the sixth round including a difficult period of dead air. A Bulgarian competitor was disqualified for having used an overweight rubber motor.
The number in the flyoff was 30, a manageable number, and the first flyoff was executed smoothly. However, visibility was not ideal as the models drifted over a ridge with a background of dark trees. The line was moved neared to the field entrance to improve visibility in the second flyoff. This determined the final places.
F1C competition:
It was rather dark and cloudy at the start time. There was little air movement and 60 of the 71 competitors scored a maximum in the first round. Models were landing near crops and so the line was moved for round 2. During the morning the drift changed to take gliding models towards the tents and car parks at the field entrance. The worst incident was when a Russian model’s motor did not stop; it continued to climb for a while and then dived on to a car in the car park. It is not clear if system failure prevented the use of radio DT to stop the model. During lunch it appeared the wind had shifted, but when restarting rounds some models were still gliding towards the car park. The starting position was moved a long distance across the field to remove any risk. The weather continued to be benign for F1C flying and a massive number of 49 competitors reached the flyoff. Again extra timekeepers had to be acquired and the flyoff could start at 19.00. It was spectacular to see a steady stream of models climbing into a sky crowded with models circling overhead in the very light wind. The first flyoff eliminated only 7 people, the next flyoff cut the number to 26 and the third one left 2 people reaching the maximum. The third and fourth place models were processed that evening. The final flyoff was held next morning to a maximum set at 12 minutes to ensure that a decision would be reached on the first flight. Both models were easily seen and the result was clear.
Timekeeping
The required large number of timekeepers were provided by the organisers, augmented by some entered by teams. In general the standard of timekeeping was very good. Some problems would be expected over the large number of flights in the rounds, but there were only a very small number. More problems arose during the flyoffs, in particular when the timekeeper provided by the team claimed a maximum but the two officially provided timekeepers recorded a shorter time. In these circumstances all times were used and the resulting average was below the maximum. In the large power flyoffs there were a number of problems with apparent over-runs when many engines were running at the same time. These were generally resolved by giving the competitor the benefit of the doubt. In the third F1C flyoff the timekeepers of one competitor recorded times with a large variation. The Jury decided to reject one time because the timekeeper appeared to have been influenced by external comments.
Opening and Closing Ceremony
For the opening ceremony the teams gathered on the playing field and then marched through Moncontour to the ceremony site. The teams then stood in the sun during the opening speeches by local dignitaries and championships officials and subsequent dance displays, followed which drinks were served.
The prize-giving and closing ceremony were held at the same site, but delayed to 16.00 from the advertised time of 14.00. For each class, all the FAI awards for the class were presented by one jury member. After closing the championships the FAI flag was ceremonially handed to the 2015 organiser, Mongolia.
One of the two trophies for F1C team had not been returned by the previous holder, reported to CIAM secretary and to be resolved after the event. The organisers had modified the F1B team trophy as requested to include space for more winner names. The new holder, USA, were requested to add the name of the 2011 winner as well as their own.
Protests
There were no formal protests. Some complaints were made with regard to timekeeping problems and these were resolved by discussions between the jury and organisers.
Observations
The following items should be considered by the F1 Subcommittee:
The very good weather emphasised the excess performance of models over that required to achieve the standard maximum flight time. Performance limitations and an increase in the first round maximum for F1A should be considered.
The danger of F1C models crashing is clear. Radio DT is allowed to help reduce the danger but not always used. Action could taken against competitors whose models hit the ground with the motor running. Changes in the starting area should be considered, such as increasing the current 25m limit to a considerably larger distance. Helmets could be advised or made mandatory for the people allowed in the starting area (competitors, helpers, team managers, timekeepers, other officials).
The characteristics of F1C include the definition of the fuel composition with the option of castor oil or synthetic oil. To save cost and potential confusion the organisers usually provide one standard fuel, rather than offer a choice. This action should be clarified in the rules and the Championships bulletin should define which option of lubricant will be supplied.
The calculation of flight times when near the maximum should be reviewed, whether a timekeeper can record a time greater than a maximum before the averaging of time and whether the rounding down method is unduly harsh in guaranteeing that a maximum cannot be scored.
General CIAM consideration should be given to:
There was some discussion about the format to be used on FAI Diploma for team events, this should be resolved to a standard format across CIAM.
Clarification is required of the people allowed at the starting position. This has commonly been quoted as competitor, helper and either team manager or assistant team manager. However, the only statement in the Sporting Code (B.3.4.a) is for Junior Championships which allow competitor, helper and the team manager and/or his assistant. There is no statement for Championships which are not for Juniors. In order to minimise the number of people in the area, the Jury recommend that the number be limited to competitor, helper and either team manager or his assistant.
Conclusions
This was a very successful event and the jury thank FFAM and the local organisation team for their work.