National Free Flight Society

SEN 4145

  1. D47 Servo Replacements – More choices and a deal
  2. It is absolutely forbidden
  3. We need to reduce performance!
  4. Dino on ideas
  5. Another performance viewpoint
  6. FF Timeline – Approximately

D47 Servo Replacements – More choices

From: Hobby Club

ChaServo (Made by KST)
Our options:
BLUE ARROW SERVOS (several options)
On this last one above, there are 3 different mounting options. Widely used on F3K (HLG) models.
We also do carry KST:
On your order, under Comments mention:  SEN to get a 10% discount

Editor’s Note Alberto is a former F1A flyer and SCAT member based in Southern California and Hobby Club is an online Hobby business running for longer than I can remember.

It is absolutely forbidden

For Non-F1C flyers to make any comment  or suggestions about F1C anything ask,  any F1C flyer and they will tell you it is so …

We have seen a number of articles in SEN talking about the need to reduce the performance of our models.  It offers some suggestions mainly for F1A and F1B and suggests that biggest issues are with F1C.   Fellow NZ team member David Ackery wrote a report on the 2023 champs that is particularly aimed at the New Zealand audience with points that particularly apply to NZ.  David did comment on the performance issue.  I was very interested to see that David came with a possible suggestion for F1C that appeared to be “better” than anything I have seen so far, it includes some  FAI wisdom that comes from another FAI class that David has flown.  But note please that David did not write this for general consumption, so don’t throw any rocks at him and  was my decision to put this in SEN, I didn’t even ask him

Reducing model performance is always a “difficult” subject, people push back, or refuse to accept the possibility that their box of models could be made redundant. Effective solutions do exist, but are not easily accepted, For example F1C , the problems are that due to escalating performance the engine run has been pared back to a mere 4 seconds, fliers will set their timers to 3.5 seconds, and this is hard to time accurately. So an easy solution would be to reduce venturi size from 10 +mm, down to 4mm, or even 3mm. With the right balance it would be possible to go to a longer engine run, and reduce performance. We know this will work, because F2D combat has been doing it for many years

We need to reduce performance!

From: Manuel Blanco
We need to reduce performance!
Several years ago when issues of limitations in F1, A, B, C were discussed, I proposed a simple and equal solution for all modalities and it was “to increase weight”. Thus the height to which one climbs could be lower and “we should not change the current models.”
Greetings to all ,
Manuel Blanco

Dino on ideas

From: Michael Achterberg
Well, think we have issues for sure for small fields that hold WCup contests. Once we decide the best way to use altimeters then that shouldnt be an issue.. Been lots of ideas what is best. Think best we can do is figure out safe distance models will travel an set dt time 3,4,or 5 min and take altimeter reading and highest model is winner. No real good way unfortunately. But its better than trashing models for redesign..This kills interest and cost a ton of money.

F1a is hard to do much too.. Yes, you can shorten line a bit. But it has developed into a spectacular event to watch. The lauches are awesome. Everybody watches! Then says OMG did you see that one! Dont like to suggest things to events I do not fly. But had a thought that might help flyoff reduction with seems to be an issue. Maybe shorten launch window. Say 7 min like flyoff. If not launched in given time period modeler gets an attempt. Must bring model back to flight line and start over again. This will make flyer a little more daring to challenge launching IMO.
Like I said just a thought.

F1B no one wants to change anything.
But for d*** sure no one wants to change model design like has been mentioned.
This event has gained popularity and is in growth cycle. Models expensive but for the most part will last for years. Here a simple fix is available. Cut motor weight to 27gr and add
10gr. Both of these together will cut  burst attitude down to get models back to 5 and 7min flyoff flights instead of 6 and 8min.

Also, this is a 10% reduction in power and will cost us 5m to 7m in burst and about 2 or 3m in power cruise. What I call the 5 to 10 sec range. Thats 10m+ and solid 30+ sec..The overall time lost will definitely make current close max flights drops instead. Reduces max outs and flyoff numbers. I believe in baby steps not event killers!!  25gr is too harsh for average flyers trying to get better, but they will improve thru better adjusting, rubber selection, and motor selection. Then maybe we can move to 25gr. Let us be careful on over fix! Just my thoughts. Hope this sounds reasonable.

F1c has smaller numbers but has had a rebirth of growth. Damn sure dont want to hurt its growth. But flyoff numbers are smaller than other events generally % wise. Lets use Etimer
for timing motor runs. Show pole timer who checks model numbers to check Etimer setting also. An good to go. Set for 3.5 sec motor run. Some will push it to 3.6 or 3.65 shooting for the 4.09 legal run time in flyoffs. Kind of forcing pole timer to make a call as to good or overrun. Its impossible go make call if motors running near by, which is almost always the case, especially in flyoffs. But this will reduce performance a little I believe. Just a thought.
Also, we can add a little weight to further cut performance. The load carrying model straight up is more than most realize. 10gr to 20 gr to model weight hurts climb and is more than people realise. Once again just my thoughts.

We have big fields available for World Champs and Euro champs so lets not go crazy with quick changes to current models that the competitors love flying. The small field issues can be handled with altimeter flyoffs. And lets approve altimeter timing for all contest flights.
This fixes the biggest headache for organizers. Especially if perfect day with large flyoffs. Hard to get 50, 70 or more timers to get to poles to start 7 min window.. Getting one timer to pole isnt such an organizational problem. Verify altimeter and go.

Hope people realize that massive changes always cost us flyers and hurt our sport.
Then we somehow have recovered in growth and another hit.. We can use altimeters and not radically change model specs…IMO.
Thermals, Dino

Another performance viewpoint

From: Ross Jahnke
Once again there is a call to “reduce performance” in F1A,B,C. Klaus makes the familiar arguments for a reduction and poses a combination of  novel and well trodden rule changes. Like every previous argument on SEN, there are holes in the logic.

1. It’s not just the models that are high performance, it’s the competitors. As we’ve seen over the decades, rule changes are quickly overcome because the serious F1 flyers are creative problem solvers and very competitive.

2. Yes, there are fewer and fewer fields that can handle a full blown FAI competition. That is not a problem caused by the models, it’s a problem caused by developers who are building on once open land, and the free flight community, who are not  securing new fields as fast as they are going away. This is the hardest problem for us to solve because it involves a huge expenditure of time, money, and energy that we either don’t have enough of, or would rather spend on other things. If we don’t put our creative problem solving skills to work solving this issue, all free flight events will eventually have too much performance.

3. Even in the days of Rossi engines, Perelli rubber, and balsa construction, long flights were a problem, even at the largest sites, and chasing was done without the aid of GPS, trackers, and RDT, and fewer of us had motorbikes. The components of models were  less expensive in inflation adjusted dollars, but more expensive in time to build. One underrated variable  is that in those days we were much less risk averse on and off the field. We smoked, we drank beer during rounds, sunscreen (what’s that?), we flew in conditions that today would bring a contest to a halt today.

My counter proposals are:
1. Fly F1G,H,J,S with 2 minute maxes on smaller fields, and F1A,B,C on larger fields. Shorten maxes when conditions warrant.

2. Fly old models or vintage models under the current rules, thus achieving your desired performance reduction, without making everyone do it. It may cost you a trophy, but is that why we fly models anyway?

3. If #2 is unacceptable then take more risks, you have GPS, RDT, military grade binoculars, motorized transportation, and cell phones after all. Beer and cigarettes totally optional.

BTW, I write this as our flying site of 15+ years is transitioning from sod to beans and solar over the next two years. Instead of changing our models, we’re trying to secure a new sod farm.

FF Timeline – Approximately

From: Fred Morris

Subject: FF Timeline (Approx)
1796   Sir George Caley, father of aviation
1821   Stopwatch invented
1928   Lord Wakefield competition [way before then 1911?]
1930   1930 FF aeromodelling swiftly gained popularity
1933   First gas powered model airplane
1936   FAI aeromodelling commission began
1937-1945   WWII
1940   Outdoor modelling became massively popular
1941   Fuselage cross section rule withdrawn
1950   Fluffies & bubble machine
1970   Flapped wing
1972   Schnuerle-ported engine  [ 1960s]
1980   Thermistor thermal detector
1995   Folding wing
2000   Builder’s rule withdrawn  [well before then]
2000   Electronic timer [well before then – 1990?]
2000   Geared engine
2015   Remote DT [well before then  ]
2015   Low drag airfoil [Bob White and Bill Bogart had them 1980s?]

This is my recollection. Correct as needed, but I thought it would be of some value to reflect on it in anticipation of judging our future.

Editor – [and few quick tweaks]