New Products Flash Sale
View Poll Results: F3B 2015 RC Soaring Proposals
a) Yes, Definition of an Attempt 8 80.00%
a) No, Definition of an Attempt 0 0%
a) Indifferent, Definition of an Attempt 1 10.00%
b) Yes, Definition of an Attempt 7 70.00%
b) No, Definition of an Attempt 0 0%
b) Indifferent, Definition of an Attempt 2 20.00%
c) Yes, Organisation of Starts 10 100.00%
c) No, Organisation of Starts 0 0%
c) Indifferent, Organisation of Starts 0 0%
d) Yes, Safety rules 7 70.00%
d) No, Safety rules 0 0%
d) Indifferent, Safety rules 3 30.00%
e) Yes, Definition 8 80.00%
e) No, Definition 1 10.00%
e) Indifferent, Definition 1 10.00%
f) Yes, Launching 1 10.00%
f) No, Launching 8 80.00%
f) Indifferent, Launching 1 10.00%
g) Yes, Launching 6 60.00%
g) No, Launching 3 30.00%
g) Indifferent, Launching 1 10.00%
h) Yes, Launching 7 70.00%
h) No, Launching 1 10.00%
h) Indifferent, Launching 2 20.00%
i) Yes, Launching 6 60.00%
i) No, Launching 0 0%
i) Indifferent, Launching 4 40.00%
j) Yes, Launching 2 20.00%
j) No, Launching 8 80.00%
j) Indifferent,Launching 0 0%
k) Yes, Site 10 100.00%
k) No, Site 0 0%
k) Indifferent, Site 0 0%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 10. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools
Old Mar 12, 2015, 07:43 PM
tedmonds is offline
Find More Posts by tedmonds
Terry Edmonds
Joined Apr 2009
35 Posts
Poll
2015 FAI Rules Proposals

Attached is the F3 RC Soaring section of the 2015 FAI agenda. There are eleven F3B proposals in the document. I am going to try doing a poll for all eleven in this single thread rather than creating many multiple polls. There are three options for each proposal, Yes, No and Indifferent. Please only USA F3B participants vote as the results will assist in forming a USA position on each one.


image icon Files
tedmonds is offline Find More Posts by tedmonds
Last edited by tedmonds; Mar 26, 2015 at 02:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Mar 23, 2015, 05:48 PM
Kiesling is offline
Find More Posts by Kiesling
Registered User
San Diego
Joined Aug 2004
2,493 Posts
Terry could use some more input in this poll. Especially for (f !?!?).

Tom
Kiesling is offline Find More Posts by Kiesling
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2015, 06:54 PM
tewatson is offline
Find More Posts by tewatson
Tut, Tut...
tewatson's Avatar
United States, CA, Orange
Joined Oct 2006
2,508 Posts
Done.

Tom
tewatson is offline Find More Posts by tewatson
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 26, 2015, 02:02 AM
Kiesling is offline
Find More Posts by Kiesling
Registered User
San Diego
Joined Aug 2004
2,493 Posts
Bump
Kiesling is offline Find More Posts by Kiesling
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 26, 2015, 09:22 AM
Kiesling is offline
Find More Posts by Kiesling
Registered User
San Diego
Joined Aug 2004
2,493 Posts
I am strongly against reducing the distance to the turnarounds to 150 meters. It does not solve the problem of duration often not being a differentiator. All it does is force people to get lighter and more expensive models. The trend is already toward lighter F3B models so already the objective of this proposal will not be met (in early morning conditions I can get over 10 minutes with 150 meter all mono launch lines with my 63 oz Fosa Lift). To provide more separation in the duration task, adopting the start height concept from F5J is the best solution in my opinion. The devices already exist for doing this, so I'm not sure why this wouldn't be possible to implement today. The only thing that needs to be sorted is what the scoring multipliers should be. Using this approach would bring the tactical aspect of duration up to a similar level as distance and speed and have a significant effect on scoring.

Reducing the distance to the turnarounds will increase the luck factor for the Distance task and especially the Speed task. The speed lottery is already a weakness in F3B. Exaggerating the discrepancy between someone who gets the air for speed and someone who doesn't would be a big step in the wrong direction.

Tom
Kiesling is offline Find More Posts by Kiesling
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 26, 2015, 10:04 AM
RetoF3X is offline
Find More Posts by RetoF3X
F3B and F3K
RetoF3X's Avatar
United States, TX, Dallas
Joined Mar 2009
1,705 Posts
I concur with what Tom said. The reduction of the distance to the turnarounds to 150m is a horrible proposal that will not achieve its aim (making duration more interesting).

It will only lead to ever more fragile, ultralight models that can do the 10minutes in morning air with the reduced launch heights. Some models already exist that can do so. The net effect is that nothing is changed in the duration task.

However, in speed and distance, thermal lottery will have even more importance, as the pilot is striped off options he would have with more launch height. In distance you sometimes have to survive bad air and stay aloft till something usefull comes on course. In speed when you have no useful air, you can at least do something with your launch height. Taking away launch height will further favor the lucky pilot who has the good air on course on his slot.

Duration as is can be made much more interesting if the CD is flexible and let duration be flown when the weather is active (or bad). Then it is plenty selective.

In calm air, it is better to fly distance or speed instead of duration, as they will intriniscally provide separation.

Best,
Reto
RetoF3X is offline Find More Posts by RetoF3X
Last edited by RetoF3X; Mar 26, 2015 at 01:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 26, 2015, 01:39 PM
FLY F3B is offline
Find More Posts by FLY F3B
or F, J, K, or even TD
FLY F3B's Avatar
Joined Jun 2007
2,940 Posts
Done
FLY F3B is offline Find More Posts by FLY F3B
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 26, 2015, 02:45 PM
David Olson is offline
Find More Posts by David Olson
MCS / NCSS / SVSS / LSC / SAM
David Olson's Avatar
United States, CA, Santa Rosa
Joined Jun 2010
2,358 Posts
Done
David Olson is offline Find More Posts by David Olson
RCG Plus Member
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 26, 2015, 07:41 PM
Kyle Paulson is offline
Find More Posts by Kyle Paulson
Registered User
Joined Nov 2004
2,095 Posts
Done
Kyle Paulson is offline Find More Posts by Kyle Paulson
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 26, 2015, 09:35 PM
mlachow is offline
Find More Posts by mlachow
Registered User
Joined Oct 2005
1,438 Posts
Don't fly duration task during neutral conditions.

A few point tweak would be f3j landing tape. But if you have 150m, then it is starting to look like f3j to someone who doesn't understand everything.

We haven't seen anyone demonstrate a contest with the 150m lines.

An alternate would be to back off winch power a little like 25 milliohms.
mlachow is offline Find More Posts by mlachow
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 27, 2015, 05:46 AM
F3B Flyer is offline
Find More Posts by F3B Flyer
Registered User
Joined Jan 2015
3 Posts
Absolutely agree that reducing the distance to turnround to 150m is a bad proposal and will not solve problemm. Agree F5J system scoring in Duration is the way to go go if can be made to work.
Mr Decker says no system is available? Suggest wait to next rule change in 2 years to allow system to be developed.
GB will be voting against this at CIAM Hope most others will do the same
F3B Flyer is offline Find More Posts by F3B Flyer
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 27, 2015, 07:14 AM
Alex Hoekstra is offline
Find More Posts by Alex Hoekstra
Alex Hoekstra's Avatar
Hurdegaryp Netherlands
Joined Feb 2007
417 Posts
Just a suggestion. I haven't flown f3b since 1997 but stil interested.....

What if you would have to choose 1 flying/take-off weight and do all 3 task with the same weight. This would lead to heavier thermal planes or lighter and slower speeds. Do you take the risk to go heavy or less risk and go light. It could make things interesting. You could allow a 10 or 20 gram trim weight for CG change but for there rest stay like you started the round.
Alex Hoekstra is offline Find More Posts by Alex Hoekstra
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 27, 2015, 09:41 AM
tedmonds is offline
Find More Posts by tedmonds
Terry Edmonds
Joined Apr 2009
35 Posts
Thanks for jumping in with more votes. You guys make it a lot easier for me with a pretty clear majority on most items.
Terry
tedmonds is offline Find More Posts by tedmonds
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 27, 2015, 01:41 PM
roydor is offline
Find More Posts by roydor
In F3J size does matter!
roydor's Avatar
Israel
Joined Nov 2006
966 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Hoekstra View Post
What if you would have to choose 1 flying/take-off weight and do all 3 task with the same weight. This would lead to heavier thermal planes or lighter and slower speeds. Do you take the risk to go heavy or less risk and go light. It could make things interesting. You could allow a 10 or 20 gram trim weight for CG change but for there rest stay like you started the round.
What if a minimum wing loading rule of a higher value was introduced?
The current low wing loading rule is so low that it doesn't limit designs at all, if it was to be raised to 40 g/dm^2 or even to 45 it would make duration more difficult without affecting the speed and distance tasks (most are around 32-35 for duration today). Cheaper materials can be used ("regular"carbon in the skins for example) and lower skill level will be required to build the models.

Just a thought

Roy
roydor is offline Find More Posts by roydor
Reply With Quote
Old Mar 27, 2015, 02:44 PM
RetoF3X is offline
Find More Posts by RetoF3X
F3B and F3K
RetoF3X's Avatar
United States, TX, Dallas
Joined Mar 2009
1,705 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Hoekstra View Post
Just a suggestion. I haven't flown f3b since 1997 but stil interested.....

What if you would have to choose 1 flying/take-off weight and do all 3 task with the same weight. This would lead to heavier thermal planes or lighter and slower speeds. Do you take the risk to go heavy or less risk and go light. It could make things interesting.
Hi Alex

This has been done in Fly offs in F3B Eurotour contests. It was actually well received and fun ( the winner flew all tasks empty and still squeezed out a good speed!).

It worked for a small group (10 pilots), but for a large contest (100 pilots), where a complete round can take a day, the choice of model weight would not be based on knowledge, but pure luck ( it may fit depending when you will fly or not). There is no way to predict the weather for a whole day beforehand.

It would also not be fair. Say pilot A is early up in duration and speed thus will be able to fly light, pilot B who is first in duration and last in speed ( say in now strong wind) will have no chance.


Best,
Reto
RetoF3X is offline Find More Posts by RetoF3X
Last edited by RetoF3X; Mar 27, 2015 at 02:50 PM.
Reply With Quote


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Poll 2015 FAI F3B Rules Proposals tedmonds Multi Task F3X 1 Mar 12, 2015 08:10 PM
Download Brand New 2015 FAI Sporting Code - Effective Jan. 1st, 2015 David Olson NCSS (NorCalSlopeSoarers) 0 Mar 09, 2015 02:09 PM
Discussion FAI published new F3K 2014 rules Fly2High Hand Launch 156 Aug 12, 2014 02:09 PM
Alert 2014 FAI Rules Proposals (revised polling) tedmonds Multi Task F3X 0 Mar 04, 2014 08:58 PM
Discussion FAI F3K Rules and Telemetry Dale Thompson Hand Launch 5 Nov 04, 2013 03:19 AM