View Poll Results: F3B, F3J, F3F Proposals
F3B a) wing loading, in favor 1 14.29%
F3B a) wing loading, opposed 2 28.57%
F3B a) wing loading, neutral 2 28.57%
F3B b) loosing part, in favor 2 28.57%
F3B b) loosing part, opposed 2 28.57%
F3B b) loosing part, neutral 1 14.29%
F3B c) weather interruptions, in favor 3 42.86%
F3B c) weather interruptions, opposed 1 14.29%
F3B c) weather interruptions, neutral 1 14.29%
F3B d) valid competition, in favor 4 57.14%
F3B d) valid competition, opposed 0 0%
F3B d) valid competition, neutral 0 0%
F3B e) landing site duration, in favor 3 42.86%
F3B e) landing site duration, opposed 2 28.57%
F3B e) landing site duration, neutral 0 0%
F3B f) landing points, in favor 2 28.57%
F3B f) landing points, opposed 1 14.29%
F3B f) landing points, neutral 2 28.57%
F3B g) altimeter, in favor 4 57.14%
F3B g) altimeter, opposed 1 14.29%
F3B g) altimeter, neutral 0 0%
F3B h) altimeter points, in favor 4 57.14%
F3B h) altimeter points, opposed 1 14.29%
F3B h) altimeter points, neutral 0 0%
F3B i) AMRT, in favor 4 57.14%
F3B i) AMRT, opposed 1 14.29%
F3B i) AMRT, neutral 0 0%
F3B j) base crossing distance, in favor 3 42.86%
F3B j) base crossing distance, opposed 1 14.29%
F3B j) base crossing distance, neutral 1 14.29%
F3B k) model identify, in favor 4 57.14%
F3B k) model identify, opposed 1 14.29%
F3B k) model identify, neutral 0 0%
F3B l) landing site distance, in favor 2 28.57%
F3B l) landing site distance, opposed 3 42.86%
F3B l) landing site distance, neutral 0 0%
F3B m) safety-plane side speed, in favor 5 71.43%
F3B m) safety-plane side speed, opposed 0 0%
F3B m) safety-plane side speed, neutral 1 14.29%
F3B n) base crossing speed, in favor 5 71.43%
F3B n) base crossing speed, opposed 0 0%
F3B n) base crossing speed, neutral 0 0%
F3B o) landing site speed, in favor 2 28.57%
F3B o) landing site speed, opposed 2 28.57%
F3B o) landing site speed, neutral 1 14.29%
F3B p) safety-plane clarification speed, in favor 4 57.14%
F3B p) safety-plane clarification speed, opposed 0 0%
F3B p) safety-plane clarification speed, neutral 1 14.29%
F3B q) altimeter scoring, in favor 4 57.14%
F3B q) altimeter scoring, opposed 1 14.29%
F3B q) altimeter scoring, neutral 0 0%
F3B r) team classification, in favor 4 57.14%
F3B r) team classification, opposed 1 14.29%
F3B r) team classification, neutral 0 0%
F3B s) site drawing, in favor 1 14.29%
F3B s) site drawing, opposed 1 14.29%
F3B s) site drawing, neutral 2 28.57%
F3J t) team classification, in favor 5 71.43%
F3J t) team classification, opposed 1 14.29%
F3J t) team classification, neutral 1 14.29%
F3F ac) team classification, in favor 4 57.14%
F3F ac) team classification, opposed 1 14.29%
F3F ac) team classification, neutral 0 0%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 7. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools
Mar 20, 2017, 02:25 AM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by F3B Fly Faster
One point that I have been asking for, for years is that the F3B Speed task be set into heats the same as the distance task. It would make the scores a lot closer instead of having 1 st place 1000 points and last place 100 points. Each 1st place winner in each heat would get 1000 points and the last would get 994 if there was 6 flyers in each heat.
We fly duration and distance in groups, with the same conditions.
But in speed, we fly in a single group, which can last more than 2 hours, with absolutely different conditions.
We have to use a way to compete speed in groups , with a maximum working time of 15-20 minutes. Systems like this have already been tried, but some are still reluctant to change.
Before November 2018 we should have a proposal with broad support, to modify the speed task in F3B.
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Mar 20, 2017, 02:34 AM
Registered User
In any case, the main problem of the F3B is not duration nor speed, not even the use of winches... it's the organizational complexity, and the difficulty to attract new pilots.
Perhaps one way to facilitate the arrival of new pilots is to limit the number of winches in the field. (e.g. limit to 20 max., with the same drum diameter, and the type of line depending on the wind).
Organizers should ensure the presence of sufficient winches, as it's done at tow events with tow planes.
Mar 20, 2017, 06:42 AM
F3B
satinet's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by carlesf3b
In any case, the main problem of the F3B is not duration nor speed, not even the use of winches... it's the organizational complexity, and the difficulty to attract new pilots.
Perhaps one way to facilitate the arrival of new pilots is to limit the number of winches in the field. (e.g. limit to 20 max., with the same drum diameter, and the type of line depending on the wind).
Organizers should ensure the presence of sufficient winches, as it's done at tow events with tow planes.
Maybe at big contests but in terms of smaller contests there is plenty of space at the winch line. The problem is buzzing in distance.

Making organizers responsible for winches seems unrealistic.

Group speed sounds okay but in theory you can score max points without ever flying that well depending on the draw. Certainly in regional contests where not everyone is good. It will be like distance.

In a two round contest it's quite possible that several pilots would be on 6000 points.

I guess if duration becomes more difficult it could work.
May 02, 2017, 07:55 AM
another nut
So... Rules of F3B in 2018?
May 02, 2017, 10:01 AM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edgerunner
So... Rules of F3B in 2018?
As they are in the poll ...

Are KO: a) b) d) f) g) h) i) q)

Are OK (or small amended): c) e) j) k) l) m) n) o) p) r) s) t) u) v) w) x) y) z) aa) ab) ac)
May 02, 2017, 03:18 PM
F3B
satinet's Avatar
Ko?
May 04, 2017, 04:35 AM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by satinet
Ko?
withdrawn
May 04, 2017, 03:31 PM
Team USA F3F Member
ttraver's Avatar
Wow, someone proposed the one marked L, where if you didn't come back to the designated landing area you get a zero for your distance laps?

I guess that would prevent anyone landing out...

I suppose it might speed things up if it was a small contest, but I'm not sure what other reasons there are behind this one except to maybe make it harder...

Is there a time frame to make it back to the designated field? or can you finish your run a mile out, and catch a thermal and then come back?
May 04, 2017, 03:40 PM
Team USA F3F Member
ttraver's Avatar
Also, why are all the submissions for rule changes made by the germans??? (ok 2 by denmark)

What can we do to get some change suggestions in?
May 04, 2017, 04:35 PM
F3B
satinet's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ttraver
Wow, someone proposed the one marked L, where if you didn't come back to the designated landing area you get a zero for your distance laps?

I guess that would prevent anyone landing out...

I suppose it might speed things up if it was a small contest, but I'm not sure what other reasons there are behind this one except to maybe make it harder...

Is there a time frame to make it back to the designated field? or can you finish your run a mile out, and catch a thermal and then come back?
Seems like a bad proposal. Too many zeros would happen.

I don't know if it's supposed to speed things up by not having models land past base b.
May 13, 2017, 03:09 AM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by ttraver
Also, why are all the submissions for rule changes made by the germans??? (ok 2 by denmark)

What can we do to get some change suggestions in?
Why so many proposals from Germany? Because Germany has Ralf Deck and he cares about the class F3B.

Proposals for rule changes, are made by persons with ideas to improve the excisting competition format and the associated rules, and persons with interrest in doing the work.
The proces from idea to a proposal from a country, are different in each country. When the work is done by individuals with ideas and interrest in talking it over and writing it down, it is officially made by your NAC (in USA it is AMA). Your NAC sends it to CIAM in due time. The CIAM subcomitees evaluate and discuss the proposals, and if needed, a voting is carried out at the CIAM pleanary meeting in april.

Cheers
Erik


Quick Reply
Message:

Thread Tools