Increasing safety in F3F.

chetosmachine · May 29, 2009, 04:26 AM

Please check this:
http://www.safetyf3f.somee.com/

read it and if you agree, sign. We would like to increase the safety of our base judges, so no plane has to fly over their heads.
If we get enough support, we would like to propose it as a change in F3F's rules.
Kind regards,

Phil.Taylor · May 29, 2009, 06:43 AM

Signed
from the races I've been to - this is similar to the way the Welsh F3F course is set-up anyway

Suggestion - also post this link up on the Yahoo F3F group

Phil.

SpeedMaster · May 29, 2009, 07:59 AM

Signed!

Brian Wa · May 29, 2009, 12:42 PM

This is already covered by "safety rules" in the F3F FAI competition rules.
We've had safety lines to protect flag marshals, start marshal and other competitors for the last 20 years. So what's changed ???

see rule:
5.F.10. Safety:
Safety: The organizer must clearly mark a safety line representing a vertical plane which separates the speed course from the area where judges, other officials, competitors and spectators stay. Crossing the safety line by any part of the model aircraft during the measured flight will be penalized by 100 points subtracted from the sum after conversion, the penalty not being discarded with the result of the round. The organizer must appoint one judge to observe, using an optical sighting device, any crossing of the safety line. [Updated 01/2006]

Brian

Miguel F3F · May 29, 2009, 06:24 PM

Is true, but it does not remain clear. If the model does not allow to see from the position of the judge the organizer mast to advance to the judge, since the pilot can protest. We want that the pilot adapts the fly to the location of the judges and showing the plane to them in the bases.
In every case it is different but in some slopes in order that the judge could see always the plane they needs to be closely to of the limit of the slope.
Some compeitor likes to fly near to the limit too, and in this cases it´s posible risk situation.
Miguel

Thierry Platon · May 30, 2009, 05:33 AM

Hi

I think any organizer can use this setup if he wants. it's up to him .
But I think it can't be a new F3F rule.

One of the main interest of F3F is to adapt your flying strategy to the slope. "Feeling the slope" and fiding the best way to use the aerodynamic of the slope to give the maximum speed to your glider, is really exciting. In fact it's often the key of succes

During the last french championship we could watch many different way of doing
- some stayed at the edge and above the horizon during the whole run
- some flew more than 50m under the edge during the whole run (just over a secondary edge)
- some dived during the last 3 laps (withing the 5s rule) ending the run more than 100m under the horizon.

The interest of the race would have been dramatically reduced if pilots had to stay at the edge. Should my son Pierre get a zero cause he finished is new french record run 150m under the edge ?

The suggestion can be good in some cases but please stop rulling and keep its full interest to F3F
Let the organizer take safety into accout according to the slope

TP

Miguel F3F · May 31, 2009, 10:31 AM

I´m sure that every slope would adapt the norm to his characteristics.
The idea is to create a few basic criteria , and then every organizer must adapt to the slope.

The first idea, can go in the direction to diminish the potential of the contest. But finaly the contest safety for the people and the judges will be better, only it is necessary that the competitors accept the criterion of which it is a more important the safety than the records.
I´m sure the goot competiors now to extract advantage of the situation.
Michael

Shedofdread · May 31, 2009, 06:17 PM

Forgive me for posting this because i don't fly F3F and have only done once before (long time ago).

If you have to present the model at each end of the course, above the horizon to trigger a turn signal, then that will, as previously pointed out, prevent people flying the course 'downhill' in light conditions. Will this have implications for the models used?
Because for the flight to count, you will have to guarantee that you can be above the horizon at each end.

Just a thought,

S

Thierry Platon · Jun 01, 2009, 03:24 AM

Hi Miguel

<<< the pilot is responsible to show the model over the ridge>>>

I think there is a contradiction in your proposal.
In fact the safest situation is not when the plane is above the ridge but when it is under the ridge. In this case there is absolutely no risk to crash on the top of the slope and to hurt anybody.
So if you really want to make safety the key point (more important than the record) your proposal should be the contrary :<<< no fly above the horizon>>>.
As you say : I'm sure the best competitors will know how to extract advantage of this situation...

To my opinion today 5.F.10 rule is sufficient : the safety line and judges can be as far as the organizer wants and when a judge has to move forward cause the plane is too low, there is absolutely no danger for him. So the only justification of your proposal seems to be judge confort rather than safety.

Please don't reduce F3F interest and let pilots flying under the ridge if they need.

Another proposition could be to increase safety plan penalty ( even going to pilot exclusion from the contest... )

(question : is it possible to vote against the proposition on your website ?)

TP

Miguel F3F · Jun 01, 2009, 11:34 AM

If we guarantee than the pilots fly below the edge the slope, the juror cannot see it, in many cases, if not It´s locate joust to the vorder.
Since , we can guarantee that the following pilot does not fly in the vorde and puts in risk the judge?.
I propose you write us ,another solution. Our intention is to improve the safety and till now it is better that we know.

I have seen to break the bases with a plane, to strike the protections placed for the base judges, and also to go on behind the judge to a meter of distance. Always with pilots who fly near the limit, not flying out.
Today the norm not alow an montage of the proposed form, for which the judges will not see the part of below.
The idea is to make prevail the distance of protecion of the judges before that the visualization completes of the slope edge.

Thank you of all forms for the interest that you demonstrate for the topic.

carlesf3b · Jun 01, 2009, 02:12 PM

What do you think of the cages used in F3D/F5D?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/1821288...74522/sizes/o/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/1821288...90707/sizes/o/

http://www.speedworldrcf.com/picture.../DSC_4733.html

http://www.flickr.com/photos/18212882@N03/3271889817/

Phil.Taylor · Jun 01, 2009, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carlesf3b

What do you think of the cages used in F3D/F5D?

Bit difficult getting cages like that up onto a (UK) F3F slope!
Phil.

jcosta · Jun 01, 2009, 06:08 PM

I heard this proposal personally from Espen and Miguel. I still don't feel confortable with it as it will eliminate many slopes.
Does anyone know of any serious accidents? The only accident I know happened at La Moo and the plane was practically stopped when it hit the base, the judges were not hurt or, AFAIK, even hit by the plane.

F3B speed is far more dangerous and I never heard of any problems either, even if I saw planes hitting the bases 3 times.

It must be said that, at our slope, it would be easy to install a metal cage for the base judges, as the bases are fixed.
But with 4 races every year, I have never heard of any accidents since the 90s...

Finally, it does not need a rule change, it can be implemented by local contest regulations.

prondel · Jun 02, 2009, 01:59 AM

Hi all,

To be honest, I tend to agree with Thierry and Joao. Some slope are not suitable at all to install the bases A & B like recommended. Why not consider this as a strong recommendation in a addendum to the F3F rules but not make it mandatory ?

Pierre
www.planet-soaring.com

target · Jun 02, 2009, 10:46 AM

I agree with PR above; we all should just do whatever we can when it comes to safety for F3F. We have some similar slopes that make it tough here in SoCal, but from what I can see, being reasonably back from the turns is a advantage in many ways for the man at the base.

Very Respectfully,
Target

May 29, 2009, 04:26 AM	#1
chetosmachine stay frosty Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Madrid, Spain Posts: 835	Increasing safety in F3F. Please check this: http://www.safetyf3f.somee.com/ read it and if you agree, sign. We would like to increase the safety of our base judges, so no plane has to fly over their heads. If we get enough support, we would like to propose it as a change in F3F's rules. Kind regards,

May 31, 2009, 10:31 AM	#7
Miguel F3F Registered User Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 7	Safety F3F I´m sure that every slope would adapt the norm to his characteristics. The idea is to create a few basic criteria , and then every organizer must adapt to the slope. The first idea, can go in the direction to diminish the potential of the contest. But finaly the contest safety for the people and the judges will be better, only it is necessary that the competitors accept the criterion of which it is a more important the safety than the records. I´m sure the goot competiors now to extract advantage of the situation. Michael

Jun 01, 2009, 06:08 PM	#13
jcosta SlopeHead Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Lisboa, Portugal Posts: 2,962	I heard this proposal personally from Espen and Miguel. I still don't feel confortable with it as it will eliminate many slopes. Does anyone know of any serious accidents? The only accident I know happened at La Moo and the plane was practically stopped when it hit the base, the judges were not hurt or, AFAIK, even hit by the plane. F3B speed is far more dangerous and I never heard of any problems either, even if I saw planes hitting the bases 3 times. It must be said that, at our slope, it would be easy to install a metal cage for the base judges, as the bases are fixed. But with 4 races every year, I have never heard of any accidents since the 90s... Finally, it does not need a rule change, it can be implemented by local contest regulations. Last edited by jcosta; Jun 02, 2009 at 02:45 AM. Reason: spelling, doh

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Discussion Schulze Receivers in F3F?	Markf3f	Slope	9	Aug 07, 2008 10:41 AM
Discussion Increasing trend in hobby shops going out of business	AndrewsJr	Electric Plane Talk	82	Jan 25, 2008 10:28 AM
Discussion Increasing interest in gliding	dayhead	Sailplane Talk	60	Jan 24, 2008 07:02 AM
Discussion Wing Loading in F3F	jofo1	Multi Task F3X	11	Jun 22, 2007 12:21 PM
Curly Tip Design in F3F	Wingtech	Slope	2	Aug 16, 2004 09:52 AM

May 29, 2009, 06:43 AM	#2
Phil.Taylor Chuck it off a cliff Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Devon, UK Posts: 2,078	Signed from the races I've been to - this is similar to the way the Welsh F3F course is set-up anyway Suggestion - also post this link up on the Yahoo F3F group Phil.

May 29, 2009, 07:59 AM	#3
SpeedMaster UAV Test pilot Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Norway Posts: 764	Signed!

May 29, 2009, 12:42 PM	#4
Brian Wa Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: UK Posts: 868	This is already covered by "safety rules" in the F3F FAI competition rules. We've had safety lines to protect flag marshals, start marshal and other competitors for the last 20 years. So what's changed ??? see rule: 5.F.10. Safety: Safety: The organizer must clearly mark a safety line representing a vertical plane which separates the speed course from the area where judges, other officials, competitors and spectators stay. Crossing the safety line by any part of the model aircraft during the measured flight will be penalized by 100 points subtracted from the sum after conversion, the penalty not being discarded with the result of the round. The organizer must appoint one judge to observe, using an optical sighting device, any crossing of the safety line. [Updated 01/2006] Brian

May 29, 2009, 06:24 PM	#5
Miguel F3F Registered User Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 7	Is true, but it does not remain clear. If the model does not allow to see from the position of the judge the organizer mast to advance to the judge, since the pilot can protest. We want that the pilot adapts the fly to the location of the judges and showing the plane to them in the bases. In every case it is different but in some slopes in order that the judge could see always the plane they needs to be closely to of the limit of the slope. Some compeitor likes to fly near to the limit too, and in this cases it´s posible risk situation. Miguel

May 30, 2009, 05:33 AM	#6
Thierry Platon Registered User Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 114	Hi I think any organizer can use this setup if he wants. it's up to him . But I think it can't be a new F3F rule. One of the main interest of F3F is to adapt your flying strategy to the slope. "Feeling the slope" and fiding the best way to use the aerodynamic of the slope to give the maximum speed to your glider, is really exciting. In fact it's often the key of succes During the last french championship we could watch many different way of doing - some stayed at the edge and above the horizon during the whole run - some flew more than 50m under the edge during the whole run (just over a secondary edge) - some dived during the last 3 laps (withing the 5s rule) ending the run more than 100m under the horizon. The interest of the race would have been dramatically reduced if pilots had to stay at the edge. Should my son Pierre get a zero cause he finished is new french record run 150m under the edge ? The suggestion can be good in some cases but please stop rulling and keep its full interest to F3F Let the organizer take safety into accout according to the slope TP

May 31, 2009, 06:17 PM	#8
Shedofdread Stay calm and carry on Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Derbyshire, UK Posts: 864	Forgive me for posting this because i don't fly F3F and have only done once before (long time ago). If you have to present the model at each end of the course, above the horizon to trigger a turn signal, then that will, as previously pointed out, prevent people flying the course 'downhill' in light conditions. Will this have implications for the models used? Because for the flight to count, you will have to guarantee that you can be above the horizon at each end. Just a thought, S

Jun 01, 2009, 03:24 AM	#9
Thierry Platon Registered User Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 114	Hi Miguel <<< the pilot is responsible to show the model over the ridge>>> I think there is a contradiction in your proposal. In fact the safest situation is not when the plane is above the ridge but when it is under the ridge. In this case there is absolutely no risk to crash on the top of the slope and to hurt anybody. So if you really want to make safety the key point (more important than the record) your proposal should be the contrary :<<< no fly above the horizon>>>. As you say : I'm sure the best competitors will know how to extract advantage of this situation... To my opinion today 5.F.10 rule is sufficient : the safety line and judges can be as far as the organizer wants and when a judge has to move forward cause the plane is too low, there is absolutely no danger for him. So the only justification of your proposal seems to be judge confort rather than safety. Please don't reduce F3F interest and let pilots flying under the ridge if they need. Another proposition could be to increase safety plan penalty ( even going to pilot exclusion from the contest... ) (question : is it possible to vote against the proposition on your website ?) TP

Jun 01, 2009, 11:34 AM	#10
Miguel F3F Registered User Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 7	If we guarantee than the pilots fly below the edge the slope, the juror cannot see it, in many cases, if not It´s locate joust to the vorder. Since , we can guarantee that the following pilot does not fly in the vorde and puts in risk the judge?. I propose you write us ,another solution. Our intention is to improve the safety and till now it is better that we know. I have seen to break the bases with a plane, to strike the protections placed for the base judges, and also to go on behind the judge to a meter of distance. Always with pilots who fly near the limit, not flying out. Today the norm not alow an montage of the proposed form, for which the judges will not see the part of below. The idea is to make prevail the distance of protecion of the judges before that the visualization completes of the slope edge. Thank you of all forms for the interest that you demonstrate for the topic.

Jun 01, 2009, 02:12 PM	#11
carlesf3b Registered User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Martorell-Catalunya (Spain) Posts: 25	What do you think of the cages used in F3D/F5D? http://www.flickr.com/photos/1821288...74522/sizes/o/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/1821288...90707/sizes/o/ http://www.speedworldrcf.com/picture.../DSC_4733.html http://www.flickr.com/photos/18212882@N03/3271889817/

Jun 02, 2009, 01:59 AM	#14
prondel Registered User Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: France Posts: 374	Hi all, To be honest, I tend to agree with Thierry and Joao. Some slope are not suitable at all to install the bases A & B like recommended. Why not consider this as a strong recommendation in a addendum to the F3F rules but not make it mandatory ? Pierre www.planet-soaring.com

Jun 02, 2009, 10:46 AM	#15
target Builder/Flier/Thinker Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Harbor City, CA Posts: 14,374	I agree with PR above; we all should just do whatever we can when it comes to safety for F3F. We have some similar slopes that make it tough here in SoCal, but from what I can see, being reasonably back from the turns is a advantage in many ways for the man at the base. Very Respectfully, Target