Изменения правил F-2F

Кордовые профильные гоночные авиамодели F-2F

Модератор: Sapsan73

Re: Изменения правил F-2F

Сообщение zabiyaka » Ср сен 20, 2017 3:02 pm

Виталий Владиславович, а переводик бы грамотный к сему письму, было бы замечательно! А? Не сочтите за труд. Переведите для неграмотных пожалуста. :oops:
Аватара пользователя
zabiyaka
Пользователь
 
Сообщения: 70
Зарегистрирован: Вс мар 23, 2014 8:07 pm

Re: Изменения правил F-2F

Сообщение Sapsan73 » Ср сен 20, 2017 6:23 pm

Я бы с удовольствием НО
1. Не имею возможности так как занят по основной работе
2. Не имею права бежать впереди паровоза ( то есть комитета )

Надеюсь в ближайшее время в нем ( комитете ) появятся грамотные люди которые справятся с этой задачей
не хуже как это делал я , незаметно для всех на протяжении нескольких лет....
Sapsan73
Активный
 
Сообщения: 281
Зарегистрирован: Пт янв 30, 2015 5:06 pm

Re: Изменения правил F-2F

Сообщение Sapsan73 » Чт сен 21, 2017 10:20 am

Для тех кому интересно продолжение истории об изменении правил F2F

Ниже письмо ответ на эти самые изменения наших коллег из Австралии (Robert Fitzgerald)


Hi Rob and F2F working group members,

I have been doing quite a bit of investigation on a Standard Fuel for F2C and would like to pass on my comments for your consideration for this implementation in F2F.

1. Carbon build up within these engines can be quite significant especially when using a first pressing castor oil. Cleaning engines is time consuming, required at the end of each day’s running and can also damage engines when not performed in the correct manner. I see this as an unnecessary burden on competitors when there is the option to use later technology ingredients that reduce the amount of carbon produced to almost nothing. My suggestion here would be to allow products like Maxima 927 at 15% or Motul 800 at 3% with 12% castor. I am sure that there are also other products that will do the same job. Why make preparations more difficult and engine life shorter?

2. The implementation on race day. I would like to question the benefits of selecting competitors at random for testing settings against a standard fuel, this would add time to the running sequence of the event and could also present fairness problems with one team getting a disq and another being allowed by a judges discretion. Who is going to measure needle and compression thread pitches or even needle tapers and contra piston diameters to determine how much change has been made? My suggestion here is that every competitor brings their own fuel, the fuel is poured into the competition container and mixed together. The competition container must be used to fill each competitor’s refuelling system before a race or practice. Competitors will normally fill their refuelling system before each race so there is no extra burden on each race preparation. At the end of the competition any remaining fuel can be given back to the competitors who wish to take it.

3. Has anyone tested fuel at the nominated component percentages to ensure that the best running characteristics are achieved? I understand that the fuel is the same for everyone but that doesn’t mean that we have to make it more difficult for people. My main question would be with the DII percentage when running 15% oil, there may be a better % but as long as this has been tested thoroughly to achieve the best outcome before this becomes the rule then it is ok.

4. As far as I know D60 and Jet A1 are not available in the USA, do they need to import this before they can compete in their country? If we refer back to my point 2 then the actual individual component from a competitor is less critical because the % difference in that component is reduced by the number of competitors. I don’t think that a competitor will bring anything largely different for this reason, every other competitor would receive the same benefit.

I would also question the 5 minute time limit, for new competitors this time limit can be difficult to reach, I would not like to see a team to have their race be recorded as a dnf when they only had a few laps remaining at 5 minutes. I think it would be better for them to receive a time even if it is anything up to 6 or 7 minutes. This situation would not occur very often during the competition so I don’t see it a burden on the organisers.
I will think more about the proposal of points scoring when I have a little more time.
Regards,
Rob.
Sapsan73
Активный
 
Сообщения: 281
Зарегистрирован: Пт янв 30, 2015 5:06 pm

Re: Изменения правил F-2F

Сообщение Sapsan73 » Ср сен 27, 2017 8:38 am

Именение правил - продолжение .....

Ответ спорсменов и производителей из Голландии (Ferenc Orvos)

Dear All

reading the rule proposal or changement proposal I have the following comments to it.

1.Specification for the plane

As a competitior and model and engine builder for this class i have different perspectives to it.
the Majority of the competitors are flying with custom made models ,bought from different suppliers Like Matthieu ,North ,Me and others .I see most the french youngs are flying Matthieus models. I assume may be 10 percent of the current teams flying home made own built models.I do not see any sign that people have problemes with airplanes or airplanes prices.But of course those who find the costs are high are freely allowed to build their Own at home.I will assure if i look the material prices of balsa , glass foam ,epoxy and all the accessories like wheels LG titanium legs and so on they will not reduce the costs significant.They will ending up to buy parts from the above mentioned suppliers.Not to mention the invested times and hours.I see all the Juniors and young entries are coming at clubs or societies where are experts .To be ownest i didnt see any of new teams just turned up from the nowhere.
-Minimum weight restriction leads nowhere.Or you should rewrite frequently the rules.Materials and technologies are developping year by year.weight limitations is no way or you must make a material list to allow to use for model buildings.Then we will ending up at Vintage A rules where only dope and varnish and silk cover are allowed.
In my point of view this is nonsence.
-Use of standard Fuel is not to realise .different continents different ingredients etc.not to mention the pain ass for the organisers to check fuels .Just a waiste of time for it.The F2F classes are f lown together with other categories at Competitions and time schedules are always tight. Impossible to do that like in Landres GPs or any other places.
Not to mention this somehow a racing class even if its a limited version .Any attempt in the past for standard fuel went to dead end..
-What is complicated cylinder cover i.e Cooling duct? steel plate front of the engine? tube on the engine with in and outlet? balsa block shaped cooling duct etc?
any cooling duct should be allowed which are safe and eliminate injuries.My opinion is that cooling duct is just helps for the teams to have consistent setup and increasing the quality of the flights.Metal versions are a bit dangerous in case of miscatches ,shout cut pit man hands or fingers.
-Tank cover : iv you place your tank included in a balsa block on the wing or glued on the fuselage should interpretated as a shaped tank cover. But it doesnt effect anything in airspeed in models may be only eliminates vibration on the tank so no foaming in the fuel line.
Assuming, tank cover cooling duct must be unregulated except forbiding using metal ducts.
If we go to limit props than i would reccomend only 1 type unmodified prop should be used for everyone.which one ? I would reccomend apc 7x6 which keeps the revs ( noises) lower and slightly slower than then the current 6,5x6 or lighter props.
Retracts should be banned which really increasing model costs but the gain is so small with F2F models that makes really no advantage.
My above comments also regarding that by changing model specification will result a new revolution and people have no sense to invest new models ,just they stop flying.
with the current existing rules i see in the past the number of F2f flyers are increased a lot by drawn in ex F2C teams . The rules are as good as they are with small fine tuning needed.
ranking by points is seems a good idea just need to simplify as possible
I hardly reccomend for organisers that 3 heats must be flown at competitions in the class of F2F.people travelling by high cost to competitions and 2 heats is over.Need more satisfy and challenge for tehm too.
My opinion that only a prop limitation will give the sufficient result of equalise the level between teams.
My Best Regards
Ferenc Orvos
Sapsan73
Активный
 
Сообщения: 281
Зарегистрирован: Пт янв 30, 2015 5:06 pm

Re: Изменения правил F-2F

Сообщение Sapsan73 » Ср сен 27, 2017 2:55 pm

И вот мнение французских коллег (Matthieu Perret)


Hello everybody,

Here's my point of view on this proposal, as model producer, (ex)competitor and teacher for newcomers/youngs:

As Ferenc said, nowadays, almost every team flying F2F uses bought model(s), from any supplier. Two reasons for this: They're pretty cheap (250-300€ and you have the RTF model, built to your tank and engine selection), fly well because they're made by people who know about CL racing, and are therefore more competitive.
When I started F2F, a while back, we were using self built models, it was impossible for example to glide above previous pitting segment. Because model were heavy, airfoils were bad etc etc. We were happy to be 3rd choice because we knew we could be behind the 2 other teams, and take off was so slow that who cares about wind. Nowadays, from my experience, bought models fly just as a F2C model.

Now to take the same points as Ferenc does:

- Minimum weight: Why not. To me weight only makes the model easier to pilot on gliding / take off phase. I built and sell models around 315-320g, fully painted wing, and I never look at weight during building. My fuselage are basic: poplar crutch, balsa fuselage, hand covered with fiberglass, same I was doing 15 years ago. If tomorrow you ask me 400g minimum or whatever, okay I will just make the wing stiffer by doubling the fiberglass, and maybe I'll do the whole fuselage in poplar, and a big weight at wing tip... Even there, I'm not sure I'd be at the 400g mark. But except if it's forbidden, I'll still mold my wings as it is much faster and cheaper to make (as I have molds) than an old style balsa wing.
So yes it would be fair for people who build their own models, but wouldn't change much except flying quality. Don't forget that weight only has very few incidence on speed, but many on acceleration/deceleration phases, and gliding = less incidents on pitting phases.

- Cylinder cover: We were in France the first ones to use this cover (wind shield), since the beginning of F2F in late 90s. Reason: we were all using Front Exhaust Vorobievs, and we are still using these same engines for 20 years! Try to restart this engine after 1.5 lap gliding without a cover, you won't start at first flick for sure. That's all, not even a question on performance. We've never tried real cooling, or o'rings between cylinder thins or anything else. By removing it, only change for us is that we can throw away about 12-15 models and engines which we won't be able to use anymore. Now, I agree that with recent engines and sophiscated fuel like we see more and more (oil mix, lead etc etc), it can make a huge difference on performance because the engine won't be able to get warm enough if you remove them. But well, change fuel, fly slower and it should do.

- Tank cover ?? I haven't seen this point in the rule proposal.

- Prop limitation, I agree with Ferenc. Unmodified standart propeller would be easy to check. We almost all use 6.5x6 or 6.5x6.5 APCs right now, if you want to slow down the category you can say 7x6, shouldn't be a problem. Just a choice.

- About the ranking system based on points, I agree with it as for 3-4 years now, our youngs in the club come to tell us: How can we compete with these old guys flying 3'45s? Well, the answer is you can't, but do your best. It's not in my logic to buy and provide them brand new OMs, or Profis or SVs or any engine to fly F2F. If I or they have money for an engine, I will recommand them to invest it in F2C gear later, which is the absolute goal of F2F, don't forget it!
Only "dark" point to me, is that you are fully dependent on the other teams performance or luck during their race. Maybe if we had a bonus to the team(s) who achieved the best time in a complete round, it could preserve the time attack aspect. As to make the best time, they'll take risk, and if they take risk, they can fail their race.

- Standart fuel, always the same problems: Can't be the same anywhere in the world, so how to be sure what works at home will work when you arrive at competition site. Rob's idea is not bad, but have to be sure that all entrants are reliable on what they supply. Can't say if there's a real solution about fuel.

That's all my thoughts for now,
Best Regards,
Matt

Вот такие новости.

А что же мы ???
Sapsan73
Активный
 
Сообщения: 281
Зарегистрирован: Пт янв 30, 2015 5:06 pm

Пред.

Вернуться в Комитет F-2F

Кто сейчас на конференции

Сейчас этот форум просматривают: нет зарегистрированных пользователей и гости: 1