RunRyder RC
 14  Topic Subscribe
WATCH
 3 pages [ <<    <    ( 1 )     2      3     NEXT    >> ] 2499 views
Scorpion Power Scorpion Power
HelicopterAerobatic FAI F3C F3N Contest › Your thoughts on the new proposals
03-22-2009 08:43 AM  8 years agoPost 1
Eagle

rrApprentice

Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Hi All,

Just wondering what you are thinking on the new proposals which were voted on at the recent CIAM meeting.

Unlimited engine size
No engine off auto
Weight Limit up to 6.5 kg including batteries or fuel.
Electrics up to 51 volts
New schedule

Hopefully Wayne, Curtis, Scott and a few other top guys will offer their thoughts.

Cheers
Brendan

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-22-2009 09:02 AM  8 years agoPost 2
yapjy

rrKey Veteran

Singapore

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Where can i get the document that describe the new schedule?

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-22-2009 06:58 PM  8 years agoPost 3
F1 Rocket

rrKey Veteran

Melbourne, Florida ​USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Are these the offical voted in proposals for next year?

Danny

Danny - DemonAero Support Team

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-22-2009 09:09 PM  8 years agoPost 4
RotarSoft

rrVeteran

St Leonards On Sea​UK

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Hi Brenden,

I personally am completely against the no engine limit. The others I am not that bothered about.

The reason we went from 60 size engines to 90 size engines was because of the "smoke" issue. The belief was that by enlarging the engine size people would run less nitro and therefore less smoke would be produced.

This clearly didn't work.. what it did manage to do though was put up the price of engines, exhausts, mechanics and blades.. Therefore making F3C even more expensive and elitest than it was before!

There was a discussion at the European champs 5 years ago whether we should go to unlimited engines. When I pointed out what a failure the 60 to 90 ruling was there was unaminous agreement that we should not make it unlimited.

Currently there is a fear that the electrics have a power advantage over IC machines and that by making IC unlimited we will equalise the power levels.

When sports and economies are making cut backs in the current economic climate surely it makes sense to limit the power of the electric class rather than making IC unlimited?

I am not opposed to IC or electric. Our machines already have more than enough power to fly the current schedules so I don't see the need for more power.

F3C is already struggling for participants in all countries.. We should think long and hard before passing any rules that are going to price people out of being competitive at the top level. By this I mean we can do the schedules with a 30 size model but you will not win with such equipment.. lets not make the necessary equipment required for a win so expensive that nobody competes.

Lots of people turned to 3D because they didn't need $3000 kits to have a chance of winning.. lets not alienate people further.

Cheers

Mark

Midland Helicopters, Hirobo, JR Propo, Model Technics Fuel

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-23-2009 03:07 AM  8 years agoPost 5
yapjy

rrKey Veteran

Singapore

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-23-2009 11:26 AM  8 years agoPost 6
BigBobby

rrApprentice

Yass NSW Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Perhaps limiting the unlimited to gasser models only and leaving nitro as 15cc. This will definitely cut down the operatiing costs and at 6.5kg, would limit the models used.

Can't really see the point in an engine off auto but if they want to get rid of it, ok. If they keep it, ok

The others, yep there is plenty of grunt in the modern engine. Same with modern battery packs. New schedule is always good for a bit of variety.

How about a stock 50 option? Have a standard list of cheap helis with stock head. Dampers are the only thing to change as it is too difficult to check. Standard list of mufflers. Blades optional. Electronics optional as low end digital servos will do just as well as high end digitals. Nearly every other form of RC has one of these classes, why not RC helis. These things are expensive enough as it is.

A few helis, this and that

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-23-2009 01:40 PM  8 years agoPost 7
Henrik Engert

rrKey Veteran

Cedar Park, TX

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Can't really see the point in an engine off auto but if they want to get rid of it, ok. If they keep it, ok
I wonder if the engine on while doing auto rotation will cause problem determining if the engine is idling enough for it to be considered an auto in my opinion. For example some engines might run hot and never disengage. Just a thought. For me, the worst thing is to remember to make sure the engine will be turned off in the auto

Hirobo XSpec EVO
Hirobo SDX
Futaba 12Z FASST

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-24-2009 11:16 AM  8 years agoPost 8
Spacey

rrVeteran

Pretoria, South​Africa

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Henrik: No matter what you do if you don't get the motor to disengage it will eat away at the headspeed at an alarming pace. Ever done a few autos with a locked one way? It's no fun, I did about 20 of the darn things before we figured what was wrong...scary as heell! We have also had motors simply stick cause they were running too lean and what not, same story...trouble all the way down. We've taken it steps further also in dialing in motor to see what happens, no good untill you get to the point of actually having full on power onto the motor. In the cases of having assistence from the motor it's clear as daylight to anyone that's around and you will simply earn a zero. Probably same thing as far as motor's sticking due to one ways and what not but guess what you'll have a fair shot at not destroying the helicopter or doing something stupid in the moment of panic.

We've just had too many instances of guys locking up a one way, realising too late and destroying a model. Then he's completely out of the competition untill the next one 4 months down the line. I just can't see any point in cutting the motor completely, letting it idle won't do anyone any damage. Rather much more good.

Marc: I dissagree with a few things you said, although I do acknowledge your concerns and in those I agree very much. However, a few thoughts if I may. There is absolutely no reason for anyone to believe flying 3D is cheaper in a sense than F3C. The 3D guys ding a heli much more than in F3C and they all know this. 3D is simply the craze and heck I won't argue it's alot of fun. Worrying about whether keeping costs down is going to influence the current lack of interest in F3C I don't think is worth it. The electrics are more powerfull than their nitro brothers, fact.

Electric however should be our concern if we want to worry about costs? So why not just open it all up and let the fun begin, the F3A guys did away with motor limitations long ago and I didn't see anything but advances in what they did aerobatics wise. Just like the F3C they kept to a reasonable weight and that stood, still the models have come leaps and bounds and they seem to be having a ball making use of all the extra power to plough through more advanced manuevers. Saying we have more than enough power as is I have to frown? Where I fly at 4500'ASL I had to pull out all the stops performance wise to get my models to keep moving vertical after the roll up on the double rolling stall turn? If we don't time a Cuban perfectly it's a complete mess. I personally wouldn't mind having 2 times the power we do currently in the form of torque, and the electric guys aren't far off. We'll open alot of doors as far as manuevers are concerned and allow us to keep moving forward.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-24-2009 11:24 AM  8 years agoPost 9
Eagle

rrApprentice

Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Hi Mark,

I see your point regarding the engine size and smoke issue.
And yes cost are climbing through the roof. I have a young family and the models are starting to suffer. They certainly don't get the love they used to. (New engines and servos every year and new kits when the new ones come out)

The other thing with the increase in engines is the possible increase of the model which then becomes an issue for those of us who have to pack up and pay to transport our models for international events. It's an expensive exercise to do every year or 2 years.

As far as the smoke goes, maybe we should go back to castor oil...

Cheers
Brendan

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-24-2009 12:48 PM  8 years agoPost 10
RotarSoft

rrVeteran

St Leonards On Sea​UK

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Spacey,

I know of a number of guys who pulled out because they simply couldn't justify the cost of the machines anymore after the change to 90's.

The change from 60's to 90's had a dissproportionate effect on the price of equipment. For example in 1997 and Eagle 2 EX with OS61SXH and 66cm Carbon blades cost around £1800. Today an Eagle 3 with an OS91HZ and 71cm Carbon blades costs £2600. If the prices go up the same amount to cope with 120 size engines then I for one will be out.

We are struggling with competitor numbers. I don't see why we should create extra barriers to entry.

If you're struggling with power I think that's a good thing It takes greater pilot skill then to perform the manouvre well.. and this is what competition should be about.. pilot skill.. not those with the deepest pockets.

The fear of electric models over taking IC is the only reason the debate on unlimited engines has come up. If that is the fear why aren't we regulating the electric models more then to limit their total power?

Brendan,

I agree totally with transporting the models. I'm about to start looking into boxing my machines up to take to the USA in August. We have enough problems with excess baggage. An unlimited size engine machine with 80cm blades is going to need a bigger box.. more weight.. more cost..

If people are struggling with power to weight ratios of their models then maybe they should lighten their machines rather than search for more power? I know my Aurora in fuselage is about 1kg ligher than the equivalent Sylphide in a fuselage...

Cheers

Mark

Midland Helicopters, Hirobo, JR Propo, Model Technics Fuel

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-24-2009 01:28 PM  8 years agoPost 11
Spacey

rrVeteran

Pretoria, South​Africa

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Hallo Mark,

Glad to see you guys are gearing up for the worlds. We are looking a team of youngsters, all excellent pilots barre me. Hehe. Still having a dreadfull time though trying to get some funding together to actually make it all happen on my part, hopefully we will find a way. I'd love to go play with you guys again.

I don't think the cost of the machines as such could really be contributed to the increase in engine size? As time goes by the demand for better technology along with basic costs of things all played a part. I do believe things will be much different this time around either way as far as getting helis to run the bigger motors. Guys are already putting bigger motors in much smaller helis so either way I don't think we really need bigger helis as such to accomodate the bigger motors, all we need is more torque so we can push a little more pitch really. The pattern guys were all on the limit as far as weight is concerned already when they opened up the motor restrictions, back in those days they were still running 1.40's. Now their up to running 2.10's and still in the weight limit. There's many ways to look at the idea of a bigger capacity motor, doesn't always mean more weight and bigger size really.

As far as more piloting skill relating to power problems I can't say I agree fully, to some degree you are correct but it's very make or break right now. Either you're doing the manuver decent or it's a disaster as a whole, more luck than skill I'm afraid. But ok that's a very debateable one. Hehe

We also need to remember now tackling the issue as far as the current electric flock being more powerfull than current nitros we have another HUGE problem. The current electric guys plucking the fruits have already made their investment, for the simple reasons that it's so much better and more powerfull than nitro. They've bit the bullet already and had to justify the whole ordeal also with good reasons. To now go limit them will simply put show all these guys the way to the exit now. The whole issue was unfortunately left too long, so now we need to come to a compromise. Give the electric guys a few more volts and grams to play with so their happy, get the nitro guys in on the rat race?

As far as lightening up the machines are concerned, I for exactly this reason in order to enable me to fly a decent C-shedule (Like I'll ever need to I know ) took my Sylphides out of their bodies and went back to good old pod and boom, took a little tinkering to get things awesome but I've done the hard work now. Changing mechanics simply isn't an option, there aren't other reliable, affordable options locally. We'll see what the new Vibe SG has in store though, I might look into that in the next few years.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-24-2009 02:00 PM  8 years agoPost 12
Henrik Engert

rrKey Veteran

Cedar Park, TX

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Spacey:

I have not had that happen myself. I was more thinking that an engine on might help you with headspeed if the engine does not go down to idle until you basically land, at least that is my experience.

Hirobo XSpec EVO
Hirobo SDX
Futaba 12Z FASST

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-24-2009 02:07 PM  8 years agoPost 13
RotarSoft

rrVeteran

St Leonards On Sea​UK

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Spacey,

You're not going to get me to change my mind you know?

Seeing as currently 70% of the entrant are flying IC still it would have far less impact changing the electric limits than the IC limits.

As I said before the change from 60 to 90's pushed people out of F3C.. going from 90's to unlimited will do the same.

Your comment about the price change being advancement of technology I would have to disagree. The Eagle 2 EX came with titanium screws.. the Eagle 3 doesn't.. step back in technology if anything. The 91 engines feature no new technology nor do the blades. However all the parts of the machines had to get bigger (and more expensive) to handle the extra power.

It's not so bad for the fixed wing guys because they were already at the weight/dimensions limit. We aren't.. the models can get a lot bigger than they are now (80cm blades). If they do get bigger some machines such as the Sylphide will have to start to use exotic materials to get the weight down.. hence the price will go up.

Also for a fixed wing machine to cope with the larger engines they simply needed to use a bit more materials to strengthen the airframes at the appropriate place.

If it were just a case of us needing bigger blades all would be well.

However we would need to increase the tolerances/sizes of Mainshafts, spindles, blades, blade bolts, clutches, one way bearings, tail shafts, cooling systems, and so on.. You talked about having one way failures on the Sylphide.. we know how much the K&S upgrade for that is.. imagine the cost of one to cope with a 1.20 engine!!

As for being able to pull some more pitch.. my YS91's are already swining around 12 degrees in the aeros on 70cm blades.. much more pitch than that and you're going to start suffering from blade stall which will actually make you worse off!

As far as I am concerned unlimited engine regulations is a money pit waiting to finish of what little interest there is in F3C..

The 60 to 90 rule change was proof enough that the well intended changes were a complete failure.

But then history has a habit of repeating itself...

Mark

Midland Helicopters, Hirobo, JR Propo, Model Technics Fuel

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-24-2009 02:37 PM  8 years agoPost 14
GM1

rrElite Veteran

Tallahassee, Florida​US

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Thoughts.............

I am opposed to unlimited motors. Cost of larger equipment will drive me out of contesting as it did in F3A.
I am also opposed to 12S batteries. I can get 4 1/2 HP out of 10S now for 8 minutes. With 12S I can get 5-6 HP for 10 minutes. I don't mind giving electrics an even playing field, BUT I can barely get 3HP out of my IC motor so it surely sounds like the electrics would have a distinct advantage in power in addition to less noise, smoke, and vibration.
I certainly don't want to try and learn FOUR new schedules.............
Just my thoughts.

On a dog sled team, if you're not the lead dog, the view never changes.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  BLOGAttn:RR  Quote
03-24-2009 02:38 PM  8 years agoPost 15
Spacey

rrVeteran

Pretoria, South​Africa

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Hi Mark,

We agree to dissagree on the matter, nothing wrong with that.

We can argue the electric guys are in the minority although I might dare say I'd rather wait for the worlds before I completely pin that one. Regardless however the effects of limiting them would have had devastating effects still. It would have been a sure shot way to lose a whole lot of guys that just went out and spent money in the regions of brand new machines to simply convert old machines over to electric etc.

We already have machines with 12mm mainshafts etc costing less than current top FAI machines still using 10mm shafts etc. Is it really accurate to say we will see an increase in price simply because we need slightly stronger parts here and there? A slightly longer boom and a longer set of blades? On the same note, isn't blade stall directly related to relevant airspeed into the rotorhead, wouldn't that pitch stall figure change as forward speed and airflow supplied changes?

We still have alot of weight to play with even on something like a Sylphide, my current machines without fuel's only 5,2kg. So I'm looking at around 5.8kg with fuel ready to go. That means I still have another 700grams to play with to add weight of heavier motors etc if needed. Some 3D machines are even lighter. Wayne Mann at last years worlds from what I heard were flying awfully heavy machines just just clearing the 6kg mark without fuel and his helis were performing incredible.

Opening up the motor size the first thing that popped into my head when I read the whole deal was 1.60 sized 2-stroke motors. 5% or less nitro, lower revving motors so we need smaller gears in fact. Few hundred grams more to take up motor/parts needed for the additional torque. Fun fun fun because as we all know, the lower the motor revs the less demanding they become. Less full of poo if you will.

We also need to remember now that the 3D guys are just as much in demand of bigger and better things, so there's a huge market fueling developement this time around. It won't be long for the price war gets in on the battle.

In closing though, I still don't really see the need for bigger as such helicopters, to swing bigger blades all we need is longer booms. I've done it, easy. We can only go so much bigger before we hit the size limit and it's really not much we can go. I think on a Sylphide head the biggest blade you can fit is a 840mm before you hit the size limits? That's what the gasser guys are using right.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-24-2009 04:04 PM  8 years agoPost 16
pchristy

rrApprentice

Devon, England

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

First, let me state that I am not an F3C pilot, though I am a former team manager.....

(And yes, I do fly competitively, but not at the top level - too old and slow these days!)

Mark is absolutely right in his analysis of what is likely to happen in the UK. Furthermore, all is NOT sweetness and light in F3A since the engine restrictions were lifted.

Initially the manufacturers came out with 120s, and everyone rushed out to buy them in order to remain competitive. Two years later they came out with 140s, and again, those who wished to remain competitive bought them, but a lot dropped out. Another couple of years and 160s came along and yet more pilots were unable to afford the "must have" engines. I believe they are now currently running 180s, and entries are lower still!

This decision has NOTHING to do with competition. It is driven purely by commercial interests and should be resisted at all costs!

It has taken at least one major manufacturer until now to produce a reliable 91. If they continue to drip feed ever larger engines into the system, how much more junk will competitive pilots have to buy before something reliable emerges this time? And since the Judges are forever complaining about the difficulty of separating the top level pilots - which is why a more dificult schedule was introduced - why negate that by making the schedule easier by lifting power restrictions?

If anything, we should be considering REDUCING the engine capacity back to 61s again. Then we would really find the best - rather than the richest - pilots!

(Gets down off soap-box!)

--
Pete

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-24-2009 04:22 PM  8 years agoPost 17
Henrik Engert

rrKey Veteran

Cedar Park, TX

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I am totally against unlimited motors. I just can't afford to switch engines now, I did when they increased from 61 size to 91 size, and it hurt my wallet (I even had to switch helicopters to support 91 size at that time).

Just stick with the 91 size (15cc) engines.

I don't know anything about electric helicopters so I don't have any suggestions on that front, but they seems to have a ton of power with the current specs.

Hirobo XSpec EVO
Hirobo SDX
Futaba 12Z FASST

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-24-2009 06:03 PM  8 years agoPost 18
steverobertsuk

rrApprentice

London, England

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

GM1 & Henrik.

Did you get a chance to have your say about these matters to your CIAM rep?

Steve

Team JR, Motors & Rotors, OptiPower

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-24-2009 06:32 PM  8 years agoPost 19
cstoneman

rrApprentice

Colorado

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I haven't done any competition for many years. My first try was a .30. With wind, that didn't work well, so I spent a good bit of money on a bigger bird, so I could be competitive.

Now, it costs even more for equipment to stay competitive. To consider increasing equipment cost even more, makes no sense.

To me, flying skill should be the main part of winning or losing, and not deep pockets.

It may sound strange, but in my view going to a .50 limit would get FAI on the right track of increasing the numbers of people involved.

Want more people involved? Lower the price of admission.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-24-2009 06:33 PM  8 years agoPost 20
GM1

rrElite Veteran

Tallahassee, Florida​US

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

CIAM

I sent a much more extensive report to my CIAM representative. I sat down and went through each proposal and gave him my thoughts for what they are worth.
Personally, I don't want to change schedules again for this next two years but I do understand that this is just me.
Gordie

On a dog sled team, if you're not the lead dog, the view never changes.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  BLOGAttn:RR  Quote
WATCH
 3 pages [ <<    <    ( 1 )     2      3     NEXT    >> ] 2499 views
Scorpion Power Scorpion Power
HelicopterAerobatic FAI F3C F3N Contest › Your thoughts on the new proposals
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 14  Topic Subscribe

Thursday, November 23 - 7:43 am - Copyright © 2000-2017 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online