Secondary Systems Control
Peter G
Please assume, just for the sake of this discussion within our Group,
that a future FAI rule defines C/L flight of all classes along the
lines I have recently published, declared as being my personal point
of view.
At this point in time, I would like to open a discussion thread on
how to comply, in terms of F2B, with a revised definition of control
line flight.
Here below is the projected definition. It prevents electronic flight
assistance/control in general and allows classes to define their own
regulations if or how to control secondary systems:
Quote:
1.3.2 Category F2 - Control Line Circular Flight
This is a flight during which the model aircraft is permanently
attached to two or more wires or cables during the flight. The wires
or cables must be attached to a handle being manipulated by the pilot
on the ground at the centre of the flight circle. A safety strap
connecting the competitor’s wrist to the control handle must be
provided by the competitor and used during all flights. A pull test
shall be applied separately to the safety strap when attached to the
competitor’s wrist. This pull test will be applied according to each
class specification concerning the lines’s pull test.
Class: F2A - SPEED MODEL AIRCRAFT
F2B - AEROBATIC MODEL AIRCRAFT
F2C - TEAM RACING MODEL AIRCRAFT
F2D - COMBAT MODEL AIRCRAFT
F2E - COMBAT MODEL AIRCRAFT WITH COMPRESSION IGNITION ENGINES
F2F - DIESEL PROFILE RACING MODEL AIRCRAFT
F2G - ELECTRIC SPEED
Primary Flight Control for All Control Line Classes
No automatic flight path control, whether done on board of the model
airplane or on ground at the handle, is permitted. The model
aircraft’s flight path may only be controlled by the pilot
manipulating the handle and by mechanical signals transferred through
the wires or cables. On board of the model aircraft the mechanical
signals arriving through the wires or cables must be, directly and
mechanically, transferred to flight path controlling elements such as
aerodynamic control surfaces/brakes and/or thrust vector control
devices.
Secondary Flight Control Devices
Permitted methods to control and/or operate secondary flight control
devices/systems such as, for example but not exclusively, power
sources, landing gears or shut-down devices shall be defined in the
specific rules for the individual control line classes. Where such
definitions are not given, no control, whether automatic or from the
outside, of secondary flight control devices/systems is permitted.
Unquote.
For F2B, the above, should it ever be set in force, initially leads
leads to two interesting questions for the F2B Working Group:
1.) Do we wish to allow control, be it automatic or from the outside,
of secondary flight control devices/systems?
2.) If yes, shall such control be limited to electric motors and
(perhaps) turbines only?
I look forward to hear your comments.
Kind regards, Peter Germann
GILB...@aol.com
2.) If yes, shall such control be limited to electric motors and
(perhaps) turbines only?
For all engines
Kim Doherty
To the members of the group,
With the utmost respect for your time and input,
I find this entire exercise disingenuous in both intent and value in its current form. Mr. Germann has stated that the Swiss
will submit a rules change proposal to deal with some as yet mythical problem dealing with control systems that has never once been encountered in any contest on any continent at any time. There is no such proposal before the group. Are we to discuss the entire range of hypothetical’s as they may come about including the hypothetical implementation of an equally hypothetical proposal? (surely only a few eons of work involved) or should we discuss matters of fact and substance and try to address this issue openly and directly?
Rather than conducting a thinly disguised marketing campaign to evaluate the acceptance of his position via this group perhaps more could be accomplished if we first got down to hard cold facts of implementing a fully functional Intelligent Autonomous Control System in a control line model aircraft. We have at our disposal (other than the developers of the system in question) some new members who are professionally qualified to speak to the realities of seeing a control line model aircraft “fly the pattern without human intervention or correcting pilot induced mistakes”.
Trying to legislate the technology that can be employed to solve a problem is a mugs game. If a person can trim his model via “mechanical” means why would you legislate the same result through a different means? It is of vital importance in this discussion to separate emotion and yearning for what is/was from the reality of our modern circumstance. Control-line IS dying. Running the same game plan year after year will undoubtedly yield the same results.
I welcome the response of all, especially those new members whom may have much to add.
I thank you for your time,
Kim Doherty
Member FAI F2 Subcommittee
Member FAI F2B Work Group
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"F2B Group" group.
To post to this group, send an email to f2b-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
f2b-group+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/f2b-group?hl=en-GB.
Igor Burger
I will speak about your questions with our guys and write you later, but I
am writing now, because I missed one important point from new rules which I
do not want open now on public and it is pull test of safety strap. I did
not read it carefully before and now I see that the safety strip is going to
be tested attached to PILOTS WRIST? Isn't it danger? The palm, fingers etc
are used for high loads, but not the WRIST. Do not you think that repeated
load of the wrist can hurt it? We will do it several times every day on
championship s. And if it will hurt what then? Who will be responsive? Why
we are going to test pilots wrist strength? We also do not test pilots body
at handle pull test, so why we cannot test the strip separately? Or in hand.
Did anyone proofed this aspect?
It is clear to me that the hand must survive accidental releasing, but it
does not mean that the wrist must be loaded anatomically improper way
several times daily.
Sorry that I open it so late, but I am somehow busy these days and I missed
that proposal, I just want to know how you see this problem.
Regards
igor
-----Original Message-----
From: f2b-...@googlegroups.com [mailto:f2b-...@googlegroups.com] On
Unquote.
Kind regards, Peter Germann
--
Igor Burger
... Hopefully
Joan McIntyre
I have been unable to find your responses in Google Groups and I would very
much like to read your comments. Would you be able to resend it, perhaps to
me?
Kindest regards,
Joan McIntyre.
Australia
-----Original Message-----
From: f2b-...@googlegroups.com [mailto:f2b-...@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of GILB...@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, 18 February 2010 7:26 AM
To: f2b-...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Secondary Systems Control
Dear members of the F2B Working Group
You will find my answers in red
Regards
Aim GILBERT
____________________________________________________________________________
________
Dans un e-mail dat du 17/02/2010 15:36:08 Paris, Madrid,
peterd...@bluewin.ch a crit :
Dear members of the F2B Working Group
Please assume, just for the sake of this discussion within our
Group,
that a future FAI rule defines C/L flight of all classes along the
lines I have recently published, declared as being my personal point
of view.
At this point in time, I would like to open a discussion thread on
how to comply, in terms of F2B, with a revised definition of control
line flight.
Here below is the projected definition. It prevents electronic
flight
assistance/control in general and allows classes to define their own
regulations if or how to control secondary systems:
Quote:
1.3.2 Category F2 - Control Line Circular Flight
This is a flight during which the model aircraft is permanently
attached to two or more wires or cables during the flight. The wires
or cables must be attached to a handle being manipulated by the
pilot
on the ground at the centre of the flight circle. A safety strap
connecting the competitors wrist to the control handle must be
provided by the competitor and used during all flights. A pull test
shall be applied separately to the safety strap when attached to the
competitors wrist. This pull test will be applied according to each
class specification concerning the liness pull test.
Class: F2A - SPEED MODEL AIRCRAFT
F2B - AEROBATIC MODEL AIRCRAFT
F2C - TEAM RACING MODEL AIRCRAFT
F2D - COMBAT MODEL AIRCRAFT
F2E - COMBAT MODEL AIRCRAFT WITH COMPRESSION IGNITION ENGINES
F2F - DIESEL PROFILE RACING MODEL AIRCRAFT
F2G - ELECTRIC SPEED
Primary Flight Control for All Control Line Classes
No automatic flight path control, whether done on board of the model
airplane or on ground at the handle, is permitted. The model
aircrafts flight path may only be controlled by the pilot
Peter G
related to all c/l classes I recommend the following proceedings:
Just a couple of days ago, your national Subcommittee member has
received Bengt-Olof Samuelsson's invitation to register for the 2010
Technical Meeting of the S/C on April 15 in Lausanne. With the
invitation came a tentatative agenda and the request to answer with
further points to be added.
May I therefore suggest, that your S/C member aks the S/C chairman to
put your issue on the agenda of the 2010 Technical Meeting? It would
definitely be helpful if the safety aspect of the matter would be
highlighted and if your rep would come to Lausanne with clear
suggestions on how to change the rule.
Kind regards, Peter
> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/f2b-group?hl=en-GB.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Joan McIntyre
I am in the process of drafting a reply to this proposal and the whole
question of secondary controls, but as we put forward a proposal to exempt
F2C and F2F from the mandatory wrist strap,( and this is ongoing) I would
prefer not to have F2C and F2F included in the list of disciplines which
require wrist straps. Is it possible to simply not list the categories of F2
and to simply finish with the preceding sentence.. "This pull test will be
applied according to each class specification concerning the lines' pull
test." ? Just a thought.
From my perspective, I feel that the rules must be very specific in the
areas you mention. The disciple of F2B is all about the pilot's precision in
performing intricate manoeuvres to rule book requirements, and the skill of
the pilots in doing so is the ultimate test. As it stands now, everything
comes down to the pilot's ability to manipulate the handle and perform the
manoeuvres as accurately as possible to the best of his/her ability. Whilst
ever this discipline remains about the pilot's skill, then the rules must
define those things which are or are not permitted very specifically. This
is my personal opinion, and as I have feedback from members of the stunt
community, I will pass these on.
Kind regards,
Joan McIntyre.
Member (Working Group)
-----Original Message-----
From: f2b-...@googlegroups.com [mailto:f2b-...@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of Peter G
Sent: Thursday, 18 February 2010 1:36 AM
To: F2B Group
Subject: Secondary Systems Control
Unquote.
Kind regards, Peter Germann
--
Peter G
As the safety strap issue is of primary concern within classes other
then F2B, I would like to suggest dealing with it directly in the F2
Subcommittee. If you would like to share your related point with the
committee, you can reach all its members direct via: cia...@fai.org
The current rule to refer to is 1.3.2 in Volume 4C of ABR, page 69.
Focussing on the essential issue of how to control flight and
secondary systems in all c/l classes, I look forward to hear your
community's comments on my hypothetical definition.