SEN 2471
- Now what was the Average Drops in 6 and 7?
- On Windspeed and Altimeters
- Altimeter determination of landing
- Altimeters and Innovation
- Euro Champs Observations
- Blog for the Junior W/C F1ABP
Now what was the Average Drops in 6 and 7?
From: Michael Achterberg
Hello.I believe a couple years ago someone went thru contests results for multiple years and found that the average drops in round 6 and 7 were in the 18% range. Also like what Arum posted and agree with idea of extending first round to 5 minutes weather permitting. This 5 minute flight will trim the flyoff down a bunch. Once again weather permitting! Thermals, Dino
On Windspeed and Altimeters
From: chris edge
Via your fine organ I would like to provide some measured data in
response to SEN 2470. In 3 minutes a typical F1A flight at the European
Champs went 1km, in F1B, 1.2kms and F1C 0.8kms which works out to be
roughly windspeeds of 12.5, 15 and 10mph respectively. So not ‘very
windy’ as has been suggested, in fact well below the FAI limit and
significantly less than experienced on F1A day last year (that was VERY
windy !).
In F1A full scores dropped from 22 to 16 between rounds 5 and 7 (18%),
F1B 29 to 20 (31%) and F1C 24 to 22 (8%) so there is a nominal
correlation between windspeed and number of drops which is to be
expected but clearly it was possible to drop a max in rounds 6 and 7 in
calmer conditions as well. Certainly the move back to 7 flights in this
one example was the right decision as all events were completed on the
day with just two flyoffs.
On another subject and without arguing for and against altimeters,
another issue came up at Hungary. For those like me who do not have an
altimeter in each model and therefore put them in an appropriate model
for the flyoff conditions at the time, I wasn’t allowed to do that.
Instead I had to choose the model in which the altimeter could be fitted
which was duly signed on the tailplane by the contest director. This
hardly seems reasonable and importantly the process does not in any way
confirm any given altimeter graph is from the stated model, a critical
deficiency in my opinion; some further thought is required.
EoB
Altimeter determination of landing
From:Allard van Wallene
About altimeters,
Pierre noted that none used the altimeter. How can he then conclude the landing is impossible to be identified?
I dare anyone to show me an altitude graph (a real one) where the point of landing cannot be identified.
Meanwhile, I invite Pierre to read the report on the test we did 2 years ago at the 14th Philippe Lepage in France (published in FFQ and Thermiksense).
I can supply a copy of the article which clearly shows the opposite of Pierre’s assertion.
These Euro Champs have also shown that the argument that the jury would be overloaded with timing disputes were also unfounded.
regards
Allard
Altimeters and Innovation
Editorial
Our rules revisions process progress hampers us in trying out new ideas. The best recent example is F1Q, where the initial rules needed changing because model performance clearly was too great. But it took a number of iterations to get to the current rules with an adverse effect on participation.
While I don’t think the “Dutch Proposal” is the best and final idea for electronic and automated timing of our events I support it because it is clearly a step in the right direction and probably the best under our current regime. It will give us very valuable practical experience.
Allard collected data from some events that showed the proposed approach was feasible. The Dutch CIAM rep submitted a proposal and it was approved.
Clearly there are a number of CDs and Jurors who are a bit nervous about it. And EoB reported what appears to be an anomaly in the approval process at the Euro Champs. But for whatever reason nobody availed themselves of it at that event.
Before we change this we need to try it at some events and see how it works. Is the signature process too cumbersome, does the organizer need to mark models during processing as they did in Hungary ?, can the officials process the data? Can an altimeter really determine the end of flight for a Free Flight model. Let’s learn from the F1Q experience to try this and gain practical experience before changing it.
The EDIC was set up to verify instrumentation used in the F5 classes, based on Allard’s experience they were not ready to deal with our needs. But it sounds like the directive from the CIAM President may have helped the conversation between the FFTSC and EDIC. I’m sure that Ian Kaynes will continue to work at that.
Roger Morrell, Active F1B sportsman, involved in embedded systems for Free Flight models (aka Timers) for over 20 years and formerly professionally involved doing and encouraging technical innovation in a complex International environment.
Euro Champs Observations
From: Leslie Farkas
I like Michael’s observation and comments about the European Champs. .
Just for the records, the reduction from seven rounds to five was approved at the CIAM Plenary in 2015. Following and based on the Ulan Bator World Championship, Canada submitted a proposal in October 2015 to return to seven rounds. However, because the five rounds rule was not in effect at that time, CIAM did not accept the proposal.and it had to be re-submitted in 2016 October. This proposal was supported by Denmark and Nederland and it was approved at the CIAM Plenary in 2017.
Our reasoning was that “Flying seven rounds will create a stronger competition, will provide more enjoyment to the sportsmen and will reduce the number of fly-off participants. The competitions are held for the promotion of the sport, participants, and not the organizers. During the 2015 World Championships in Mongolia 8% of the competitors dropped in the sixth and 8% of the competitors dropped in the seventh round. By flying seven rounds it reduced the fly-off participants by 16 percent.” The percentage may change based on the number of participants and weather conditions.
In fact regarding 3.1.3. a) Number of Flights, I firmly believe that we should have uniformed rules with seven rounds for all F1A,B and C competitions not just the World and Continental Championship. We always had the option available in the past to complete a competition by flying five rounds if the weather conditions were such and this should still stand.
It is important that in the future we are not just making proposals for Sporting Code changes but test it in reality before altering the regulations in the rule-book.
Blog for the Junior W/C F1ABP –
From:Bernhard Schwendemann
Blog about Junior W/C F1ABP started
On Sunday (5. Aug.) the Junior World-Championship will start in Pazardzhik
(Bulgaria).
The competition days will be
Tuesday, 7. Aug. F1A
Wednesday, 8. Aug. F1B
Thursday, 9. Aug. F1P
The German Free Flight Magazine Thermiksense has started the blog already:
https://www.thermiksense.de/2018-f1abp-wm-bulgarien/
Bernhard
———–