Logo
Builders' Plan Gallery  |  Hip Pocket Web Site  |  Contact Forum Admin  |  Contact Global Moderator
November 12, 2019, 06:30:57 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with email, password and session length
 
Home Help Search Login Register
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: BMFA Scale Nationals 2019  (Read 3358 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Indoorflyer
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 14
Online Online

United States United States

Posts: 1,097




Ignore
« Reply #125 on: September 03, 2019, 10:29:27 AM »

An autopilot not only keeps an aircraft "stabilized" or in equilibrium, but it also navigates the aircraft along a specific trajectory. An aircraft could be in stabilized flight, circling and climbing while drifting downwind. An "autopilot" would keep it circling over the field. The autopilot would make the necessary corrections adjusting bank angle and pitch to keep the plane at a set altitude, orbiting within the confines of the flying field.
Logged

Make the same mistake on both sides; nobody will notice...
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 52
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,703

Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #126 on: September 03, 2019, 10:30:18 AM »


If it means that some currently pure RC flyers like the idea and we get 5, 10 or more new competitors in FF scale than that can only be a good thing.  A number of people have had a word with me about starting in FF scale who have never been anywhere near FF except when they were kids with KK rubber scale models 30/40 years ago
That would be remarkable indeed. If two, 5, 10 new competitors arrive, flying models all in identical  patterns but 10 pack it in because it is no longer the hobby they joined, is that a good thing?
Logged
Pete Fardell
Palladium Member
********

Kudos: 123
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 4,975




Ignore
« Reply #127 on: September 03, 2019, 03:56:51 PM »

I would quite like to send my views to the STC as suggested, but I haven't entirely decided what they are yet. That's where this kind of forum discussion helps. I'd particularly like to know what the people who've actually used gyros in competition (Steve Glass, Ivan, anyone else?) think should happen regarding the way their own models are flight judged. I do want to keep seeing Steve's gyro equipped models flying at contests because they are just brilliant to watch, but whist I doubt the presence of a few gyro equipped models would ever stop me competing (assuming they find their way into rubber models too) I'd ideally prefer not to have to set my own limited trimming skills directly against them.
Logged
Jack Plane
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 35
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1,502




Ignore
« Reply #128 on: September 03, 2019, 04:16:27 PM »


I would quite like to send my views to the STC as suggested, but I haven't entirely decided what they are yet. That's where this kind of forum discussion helps...


I agree with this.

I also have my own initial views, but I'm not an outdoor FF scale competitor so I won't put on my waders!
Logged
Squirrelnet
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 34
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 637




Ignore
« Reply #129 on: September 03, 2019, 04:22:45 PM »

I agree too the forum is very helpful in these matters

Steve outlined his method a while ago on here which my be a useful reminder about the technology. The results speak for themselves

https://www.hippocketaeronautics.com/hpa_forum/index.php?topic=23024.0
Logged
FreeFlightModeller
Russ Lister
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 67
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,870


Russ Lister



Ignore
« Reply #130 on: September 03, 2019, 07:22:06 PM »

I agree too but in a similar way to Jack Plane, I can only give an opinion from the perspective of a fan of outdoor scale.
Logged
DavidJP
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 45
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2,889




Ignore
« Reply #131 on: September 04, 2019, 06:33:59 AM »

Hmmmm...... I am not a competitor - I am not knowledgeable in electronics - I am not au fait with how these things work - I am not really qualified I do not think to put a case to the STC nor sit on such committee.  I admire the ability of people who do understand electronics and can use gyros for example.  In the same way I also admire someone who can build trim and fly a FF Scale model in the old fashioned way.   Were I to enter a contest one day - which I keep intending to do- I would do so in the spirit of it all - accept the rules which are clear and reasonable and take my chances without protest.   How can I do anything else.  If I don't like the game I should not play.

It is however natural for people want to use this forum for example to discuss things - particularly if they are keen on free flight scale.  The depth of their feelings and to some degree "qualifications" should determine how far they take things.  My view is those who participate are sensible enough to behave accordingly.  I have seen no sign of a tantrum - no frenzied remainers etc. throwing toys out the pram.

As I understand it non scale dihedral is penalised - so then should any other method of combating the affect of instability by non scale dihedral or other circumstances arising due to the size of the model in relation to the full size version - and also the absence of a pilot controlling things.  A "fighter" aeroplane (full size) will be unstable by design to perform as required in use.  But it has a pilot to help keep it in the air.  So is a set of electronics in an otherwise FF scale model a substitute for a pilot? And thus allowed?   So you see there can be endless views put forward to justify ones view.  Either way.

So far then it comes back to Bill's suggestion as being certainly a compromise for the moment.   I hope this will ensure that people will not walk away from FF Scale.  Appeasement might attract new entrants but not sure - certainly if they find that use of electronic gizmos can count against them.

Maybe I am a dinosaur (good happy with that I think)  but to me FF Scale model aircraft should be as near as possible to imitating the original in all respects but retaining the concept of free flight as it has been known and largely loved for most of my life anyway.  Why? Because of "tradition". People can nonetheless play with technology as it comes along and thus "progress" - or not as they are so inclined.  If they want to enter the established FF Scale competition circuit they can do so but if the model they enter is dependant upon "gizmos" to perform as it does then penalties apply.  And is that not already accepted?

Perhaps by this discussion things have got too distorted and complex.  Give Bill's idea a chance to show one way of the other. That way we don't start re- writing the rules - just a tweak?
Logged
3view
Silver Member
****

Kudos: 14
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 194



Ignore
« Reply #132 on: September 04, 2019, 04:03:43 PM »

Just got back from our holidays.  After the nats, we had a few days in York and then boozy few days in Masham in North Yorkshire visiting the Theakston and Black Sheep breweries.





Oh dear, I don't know what to say?

I only started this stabilisation nonsense so we could all fly the aeroplanes that really inspire and maybe to attract new blood?  Did you see the the RC scale flightline? The younger chaps were all flying jets and warbirds.

I would like to take some credit for the way the Chipmunk flew- you can't blame it all on the gyro.

The Typhoon might well have tip-stalled? after the motor suddenly cut? possibly from the rc cutoff going into failsafe?........Work in progress.

I don't like the idea of a tag-along event.  A suitably punitive penalty for using a gyro should be enough to stop gyro-users from darkening the podium steps.

Steve

P.S.

P.M. me if you are interested in exploring ff stabilisation

Steve

 

 
Logged
FreeFlightModeller
Russ Lister
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 67
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,870


Russ Lister



Ignore
« Reply #133 on: September 04, 2019, 04:27:14 PM »

I agree Steve .... the number of subjects that stabilisation makes viable is too great to ignore.
Perhaps a sliding scale of penalties could be arrived at .... with a small penalty for "difficult" subjects? eg. Low wingers.
I certainly enjoyed watching your models at the Nats ... and I certainly wouldn't want to see them "outlawed"!
Logged
DavidJP
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 45
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2,889




Ignore
« Reply #134 on: September 04, 2019, 05:05:18 PM »

I don't see any intention to outlaw models like Steve's?Huh  Is it not no more than another method of stabilising a model that otherwise would be difficult to fly acceptably?  And so it needs looking at to assess what to do about it?  But that said some people have clearly mastered the art of getting models that years ago would not have been considered as a project, to fly acceptably without gyros? 
Logged
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 52
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,703

Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #135 on: September 05, 2019, 02:46:52 AM »

Many people are suggesting a points penalty. Could someone please tell me  why?
Bill
Logged
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 52
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,703

Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #136 on: September 05, 2019, 03:44:19 AM »

By all means keep debating it on here, but it won't get heard at STC - where the decisions are made on behalf of all competitors and for the best way forward and to good of the sport.

John M
As others have said, debating on here is the only way I know of comparing views. When the STC discuss this, the only views that should be considered are those of the sixteen or so blokes who flew at the Nationals, plus experienced flight judges. Very few of them come on here, but they have been asked to comment to the STC.
Logged
FreeFlightModeller
Russ Lister
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 67
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,870


Russ Lister



Ignore
« Reply #137 on: September 05, 2019, 05:00:46 AM »

I don't see any intention to outlaw models like Steve's?Huh 

Nor would I like to see any intention to outlaw them introduced in the future, David.
Logged
cvasecuk
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 5
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 268



Ignore
« Reply #138 on: September 05, 2019, 05:31:29 AM »

Bill, A points penalty system was proposed by Steve on 18th March 2018. I quote....

For free-flight scale competition I would like to see modern stabilisation allowed, however, with a negative bonus system in place.
Something like this..............
1 axis stabilised ............ -15% flight score deducted
2 axes stabilised ...........  -30%
3 axes stabilised...........  -45%
K factors remain unchanged.............. simple!
What are your thoughts?
Steve
Logged
DavidJP
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 45
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2,889




Ignore
« Reply #139 on: September 05, 2019, 08:13:34 AM »

A bit lost again - sorry!  Don't we have a form of  points penalty/handicap'negative bonus system already? 

Sorry Russ - did not mean to suggest you did - but it is a bit complicated for me and I wanted to be sure that no one had suggested outlawing "stabilised" models like Steve.
Logged
FreeFlightModeller
Russ Lister
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 67
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,870


Russ Lister



Ignore
« Reply #140 on: September 05, 2019, 08:56:47 AM »

No need to apologise, David .... we are in agreement!
No, wait a minute ..... Bostonians at dawn! ... or peanuts if you win the toss ;-)
Logged
Squirrelnet
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 34
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 637




Ignore
« Reply #141 on: September 05, 2019, 09:45:57 AM »

Quote
A bit lost again - sorry!  Don't we have a form of  points penalty/handicap'negative bonus system already? 

No, currently there is no penalty for using gyros
Logged
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 52
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,703

Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #142 on: September 05, 2019, 11:50:38 AM »

Bill, A points penalty system was proposed by Steve on 18th March 2018. I quote....

For free-flight scale competition I would like to see modern stabilisation allowed, however, with a negative bonus system in place.
Something like this..............
1 axis stabilised ............ -15% flight score deducted
2 axes stabilised ...........  -30%
3 axes stabilised...........  -45%
K factors remain unchanged.............. simple!
What are your thoughts?
Steve
Hello Ron. My thoughts are keeping me awake at night so I am trying to sort them out.
The first dichotomy seems to be between those who want penalties and those who do not because gyros represent the future. My question ´why penalties´has elicited no responses thus far but the only possible answer is that those asking for them acknowledge that gyro models have a significant advantage. Which they do.
The next question would be, at what level do you set the penalty and what do you want to achieve? Stop them winning? Make sure they come halfway down the results?On what basis do you assess this advantage and turn it into a %? I´ve seen proposals ranging from -5% to -45%. You can play with these using the results on the STC website and see where the gyro models would come: which FF entrants would be pushed down the list. Furthermore I suspect the % effect will vary with the weather conditions, so please let´s have no more talk about level playing fields. Any results featuring penalised gyro models would have even less credibility than the current free for all. It´s certainly a bigger problem than I can see my way through.

That´s why I think separate classes is the only honest way to go. However, I have sealed an envelope containing my prediction that nothing will be done and gyro models will continue to be allowed unpenalised.
Bill


« Last Edit: September 05, 2019, 12:51:25 PM by billdennis747 » Logged
Pete Fardell
Palladium Member
********

Kudos: 123
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 4,975




Ignore
« Reply #143 on: September 05, 2019, 11:57:12 AM »

Why are they penalised in RC scale?
Logged
Indoorflyer
Platinum Member
******

Kudos: 14
Online Online

United States United States

Posts: 1,097




Ignore
« Reply #144 on: September 05, 2019, 12:06:00 PM »

Having n-axis stabilization where n=1 to3, is a form of mechanical doping!
Logged

Make the same mistake on both sides; nobody will notice...
FreeFlightModeller
Russ Lister
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 67
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,870


Russ Lister



Ignore
« Reply #145 on: September 05, 2019, 12:18:51 PM »

Bill,
I was waiting for clarification on your own stance to have full understanding of your question.
If these models are to be ran in a separate class, then no penalties are required.
If included inside existing competition then something must be looked at to "appease" competitors that prefer to do things in the time honoured fashion.
My own view is that a separate class could have a great future.
Logged
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 52
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,703

Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #146 on: September 05, 2019, 12:37:21 PM »

Why are they penalised in RC scale?
Pete, it´s a totally different scenario. In RC, gyros are used to smooth  out manouevres, not to make the model fly in the first place - the pilot does that. For years they were banned but at WC level, it was well known that cheats were using them, so we gave in. They are easily hidden on a big model
Only in one section of the flying schedule is there a penalty - smoothness of flight - and it is a very small part of the total
Logged
billdennis747
Titanium Member
*******

Kudos: 52
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 3,703

Topic starter


Ignore
« Reply #147 on: September 05, 2019, 01:24:39 PM »

Having n-axis stabilization where n=1 to3, is a form of mechanical doping!
Indoor, that´s exactly what I was going to say but for the sake of everyone else who doesn´t understand, could you explain please (!!!)
Logged
Squirrelnet
Gold Member
*****

Kudos: 34
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 637




Ignore
« Reply #148 on: September 05, 2019, 02:01:58 PM »

Quote
My question ´why penalties´has elicited no responses thus far but the only possible answer is that those asking for them acknowledge that gyro models have a significant advantage.

 Well yes it is clear that gyro models have an advantage.

The very difficult, you may say impossible task, is to add a penalty to using them so that the advantage is reduced to the point where they have a near equal chance of winning. I can see that  anything but calm conditions would play even more to the favour of the gyro models so some account would have to be made for wind speed as well .  It is also worth noting that at present the gyros have been used on models that would be difficult to trim without them and that should be factored into any points system to favour their use on unstable designs

 Such systems of handicapping work well in simpler disciplines with less variables such as motorsport ( or any Top Gear Challenge on the telly) but I can see this may not be a sufficient answer for the complexity of free flight.

This is all unknown territory, we don't know how many modellers will adopt their use and what sort of model they will be fitted too. The danger I can see once the systems are finessed further and more readily available commercially is that it may become a way of buying your way to flight stability and destroying the need for the trimming skills we've all taken time and effort to learn and with it much of the love and enthusiasm for the hobby.  The role of points system would also to be to prevent this becoming an easy way to victory..

..so it's all sounding rather complicated. Running the class as normal and then splitting out the results suggested by Bill seems the simplest solution so far, particularly in the short term when the number of gyro users is small.

After the Nationals I think doing nothing is not an option

As an edit to this.

 It may be relevant that the most popular FF Scale discipline at present is Kit Scale - a return to traditional modelling and trimming skills. The hi tech approach may be a turn off for some... look at the current state of some of  the FF Duration classes
« Last Edit: September 05, 2019, 02:17:07 PM by Squirrelnet » Logged
Pete Fardell
Palladium Member
********

Kudos: 123
Online Online

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 4,975




Ignore
« Reply #149 on: September 05, 2019, 03:54:47 PM »

Why are they penalised in RC scale?
Pete, it´s a totally different scenario. In RC, gyros are used to smooth  out manouevres, not to make the model fly in the first place - the pilot does that.
Thanks- I'm sure that's true, although when I asked my dad if his model having a gyro meant he could fly more comfortably in conditions he'd previously have considered too windy, he said yes.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!