Stuka Stunt Main Forum · 18 of 18 known posts recovered
Tnx, Mike, the "Old Harley Man" [email protected]
"As a young man I started with nothing and still have most of it"
As of Monday, the 2005 Rules are being "fine tuned" (explain that one?) and are unavailable........
See Ya
Peabody
Tnx, Mike, the "Old Harley Man" [email protected]
"As a young man I started with nothing and still have most of it"
Oy Vey!
The fact is very few people cared one way or the other about the Ztron and Windy using it. It was kind of neat, but certainly didn't give any competitive advantage.
Or is there a wave of 91 4-stroke models held back with IR controls coming at the 2005 NATs? If so, I strongly encourage Paul, Billy, David, Ted, Hunt, Randy, Bill, Richard, etc. to run out and get one right away, and if they need any help rigging it up, I offer to fly to their house and set it up for them. Heck, I'll even buy it for them if they promise to use it at the NATs!
It did violate a lot of people's ideas about what a C/L model was and I believe Tom Dixon proposed a rule that would have outlawed control that did not pass through the lines. I thought it had failed at the screening vote, but perhaps not. And as near as I can tell, it was proposed *ON PRINCIPLE* - not some sort of dark conspiracy against Windy.
In FAI, it was definitely illegal before, and will almost certainly be illegal after the new proposal. For reasons that are both technical and philosophical, but certainly not in any assault on Windy personally. No one sits around at night and thinks about "How will this effect Windy?". Aside from you, perhaps.
I thought the FAI proposals were overly conservative in terms of many aspects of "allowed controls" and I argued for more freedom, particularly in terms of engine controls, but that was rejected (with reasoning I didn't ever fully grasp in a logical sense). Claus Maikis, for example, might be able to explain it better than I could.
For the record, here is a link to the thread on this discussion:
http://www.rcmodely.sk/Controlline/diskusia.php?start=15&clanky_id=0
But at any rate, and hate to break it to you, but no one seemed to even know what Windy had done or not done in the past. Tough to argue a conspiracy if they didn't even know who they were supposed to be plotting against.
Brett
For reference, here is the official FAI rule as is expected to be ratified next March at the plenary meeting of the FAI.
4.2. CLASS F2B - AEROBATIC MODEL AIRCRAFT
4.2.1. Definition of an Aerobatic Model Aircraft
Powered control line aerobatic model aircraft in which all aerodynamic surfaces (except for the propeller plus that/those surface/s used to control the flight path) remain fixed during flight.
4.2.2. Characteristics of an Aerobatic Model Aircraft
a) Maximum total flying weight (excluding fuel) 3,5 kg
b) Maximum wingspan (overall) 2.0 m
c) Maximum length (overall) 2.0 m
d) Permitted power sources shall include any power except rocket motors. Piston engine/s shall be subject to a total swept volume limitation of 15 cm3. Electric power shall be limited to a maximum no-load voltage of 42 volts. Gas turbine engines shall be limited to 10 N static thrust.
A suitable silencer must be used on all piston engines.
The noise limit set out at paragraph 4.2.6 c) shall apply to all power sources.
e) Controls
An exception to the sentence in paragraph 1.3.2 of Section 4C of Volume ABR "No other means of controlling the model aircraft or the engine may be employed during the takeoff and flight except that exercised by the pilot through the line or lines" is allowed for automatic functions as detailed below.
Wireless remote control (electrical, optical, or any other) of any control function of, and/or of any system in the model aircraft shall not be permitted.
Control of the model aircraft's flight path shall be performed by manually activated and mechanically linked flight control elements. This function must be manually controlled by a hand-held control handle manipulated by the pilot located on the ground at the centre of the model aircraft's flight circle. No automatic control of the model aircraft’s flight path shall be allowed.
Other controls may include, but are not limited to: landing gear operation, built-in engine starters. Such functions may be controlled by the pilot only (via line/lines but not via any other form of remote control), or may function completely automatically. The frequency of any electromagnetic pulses transmitted through wires/cables to the model aircraft shall not exceed 30 kHz.
For piston engines (including "Wankel" rotary types), no outside control of the engine/s in-flight power output shall be permitted whether or not such control is direct to the engine/s or via propeller/s with variable pitch. For the purposes of this paragraph, the term "in-flight" shall mean the time between the release of the model aircraft for the Take-off Manoeuvre and the end of the Landing Manoeuvre. Active or dynamic automatic power output control based on flight parameters such as, but not limited to: model aircraft speed; angular speed; centrifugal force; line pull; flying height; or any combination or derivation thereof; shall also not be permitted. However, if not used for the purpose of active power and/or throttle control, the following shall be permitted:
- Passive or static devices controlling rate of fuel flow or fuel pressure (for example "uniflow" fuel tanks).
- Passive or static exhaust systems (for example tuned-length exhaust pipes to control engine rpm).
- Provided they are used only to end a flight, the use of engine/s shut-off systems, either operated by the pilot or functioning fully automatically, shall be permitted, subject to the restriction at paragraph e) above.
For other power source than piston engines, engine power controlling systems, whether pilot-operated or automatic, shall be permitted, subject to the restriction at paragraph above.
f) Rule B.3.1. of Section 4B of Volume ABR does not apply to class F2B.
Kim Doherty
FAI F2 Subcommittee
If I read Kim's post correctly (Thanks, Kim!), we CAN use retracts operated by an insulated-line coder/decoder system, provided there's no RF of 30 kHz or higher. The RC coder/decoder pulse train repetition frequency is much less than that, I believe.
Here are relevant sections from sub paragraph e. of Kim's quote: (emphasis added)
>WIRELESS remote control (electrical, optical, or any other) of any control function of, and/or of any system in the model aircraft shall not be permitted. Control of the model aircraft's flight path shall be performed by manually activated and mechanically linked flight control elements. This function must be manually controlled by a hand-held control handle manipulated by the pilot located on the ground at the centre of the model aircraft's flight circle. No automatic control of the model aircraft’s flight path shall be allowed.
Other controls may include, but are not limited to: landing gear operation, built-in engine starters. Such functions may be controlled by the pilot only (via line/lines but not via any other form of REMOTE control), or may function completely automatically. THE FREQUENCY OF ANY ELECTROMAGNETIC PULSES TRANSMITTED THROUGH WIRES/CABLES TO THE MODEL AIRCRAFT SHALL NOT EXCEED 30 kHz.
... and further down the same paragraph:
>- Provided they are used only to end a flight, the use of engine/s shut-off systems, either operated by the pilot or functioning fully automatically, shall be permitted, subject to the restriction at paragraph e) above.
For retracts or engine shutoff, we'd still have to deal with insulated lines of about 150% the thickness of their wire/cable core, installation, operation and maintenance complexity, "unclean" leadout to flying line connections and retraction caused vertical CG shift problems (at the very least.)
\BEST\LOU
(Probably Steve Kaluf) explained that wording changes answer the question of which controls and auxiliary functions may be controlled in flight, and by what. The answer is broader freedom of choice for us to develop alternatives. The rules to date were unclear.
In the new rules, specific wording allows control surfaces and aux functions to be operated by the primary flying lines \OR OTHER METHODS EXCEPT R/C\. (Approximate wording -- it included the thought that the alternative systems were \NOT\ to interfere with or endanger other persons or flying activities in the vicinity. That should also free OUR models from interference from RC ballpark fliers, other RC, etc.)
Unless Windy's Z-Tron uses a laser powerful enough to cause eye damage, it sounds like a definite go -- next year. Of course, for PA the current ambiguous rules don't prohibit it. The coder-decoder systems Fred Cronenwett describes in his excelent little book \DO NOT\ transmit over radio frequencies, the pulse train is just physically conducted to the plane through the primary or secondary control lines themselves. That should also be a definite go -- next year.
We could use comments, from FAI-only fliers, on upcoming FAI CL rules. Previous(?) rules banned any method of controlling PA (at least) models other than by the primary (elevation) lines. FAI F2B has a 7 minute, start signal to roll-out, time limit, so alternate means of cutting the engine in time would be nice... The new ruules may change that... or not...
\BEST\LOU
Tnx, Mike, the "Old Harley Man" [email protected]
"As a young man I started with nothing and still have most of it"
I was under the impression that the Z-Tron system was considered radio control albeit an exeptionally high frequency. The only allowable methods would be through the control lines or autonamous on board control.
Anyone have more up to date info?
Don
Turkey Day, y'know...
I hadn't heard optical systems called RF before. Z-Tron is optical, just not at frequencies visible to us. Another post referred to our TV remotes(superimposed pulse train information on an optical carrier)... Quite apt.
Z-Tron's other considerations got quite a working over in this thread, didn't they.
\BEST\LOU
"I don't know about this tuned pipe business. I practiced on that thing until my lips turned blue, and I still can't play a stinkin note."
"Homer J. Simpson"
Milton Graham\Proparc
See Ya
Peabody
Right - as I recall the "full-throttle" setting on the Z-Tron was about 60% on the actual throttle.
The system itself works like a charm. It was designed by Sergio Zigras. Windy's application of it was quite effective, but as I said, I really don't think it did much of anything aside from be pretty cool. Certainly, not enough to support the theory that anyone would launch a conspiracy to keep it out of stunt.
You can read about it here:
http://members.aol.com/Lecisifly/ztron.html
>No one is really ever
>going to use the Saito 91 to any degree. It really is a
>brute. I will probably be pursuing the Saito 91 for a
>Tournament of Champions style stunt ship which is already
>designed.
Hence my position on the new possibility of being able to use a 91 TWO-STROKE - that has the potential of about 50% more ponies than a Saito 91. You can do it, but I really can't see why you need to. We are running 61's at maybe 20% of capacity, and getting it to "hook up" effectively is really the only problem, not power capability
Brett
I beleive that the Z-Tron would fall in the "Optical" catagory of part E.
As I understand it, the system operates in the infrared spectrum and used optical sensors on both ends. As such, it would be outlawed under the new regs.
If the rules commitee wanted to outlaw all remote control and did not intend to include the Z-T unit under "Optical", they really missed the ball. (Unless , of course, they wanted to allow some kinds of remote controls to remain legal, while restricting others.)
Prehaps we need more info.
BIGS
" What constitutes the dignity of a craft is that it creates a fellowship, that it binds men together and fashions for them a common language. For there is but one problem - the problem of human relations."
Saint-Exupery
Right! The FAI section bans WIRELESS systems. But keep in mind that that's FAI F2B, not AMA 322-326.
The rf-NOT-included coder/decoder system a la Fred Cronenwett and several top scale fliers carries the control info THROUGH the wires, so should be OK in FAI F2B.
\BEST\LOU
I suppose people would run it at 14% of capacity (i.e. blubbering rich) so they can have a better "stunt run".... 
I guess that Fox .90 Stunt might not be too far off.. I can imagine it chuffing around, spewing out huge quantities of oil.