Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

RE: [combat-l] The MORAL aspect of shutoffs

Expand Messages
  • Bryce Gibson
    I totally agree. The strategic aim of flying combat is to win the contest by being the last person with a life . The tactical aim is to give your opponent a
    Message 1 of 28 , Nov 10, 2007
      I totally agree.
      The strategic aim of flying combat is to win the contest by being the last person with a "life".
      The tactical aim is to give your opponent a loss in the match.
      The "Double DQ" for a fly away would mean that a fly away gives your opponent a loss. If you are doomed anyway, why not try to get a DQ for the opponent? If he's on the bubble and you aren't, you would be stupid not too.
      The refly rule isn't perfect either. The one fly away I have had in a contest in 27 years was at the 2002 worlds. When Don cut me off when he was 5-2 up and going for a sixth. Free flight is a thing of beauty, particularly when the model lands undamaged in wheat 20 yards out from the fly away line.
      The large number of fly aways in 02 was I believe a result of the deliberate use of marginal line so that a fly away was possible as a tactical option.Bryce GibsonDictator for LifeNOCLASS MAC


      To: combat-l@yahoogroups.comFrom: bradlf2d@...: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 08:31:31 -0500Subject: Re: [combat-l] The MORAL aspect of shutoffs




      Exactly ,whack the other guy-win by DQ.Remember if you change the rules not everyone will interpret them in an altogether altruistic way.Running headlong into this change may make the problem much worse than it is now!I tried to make this point about a year ago,This one is for all you NASCAR fans "if ya ain't cheatin' ya ain't racin' " or winning .Changing the rules can open it up to those who may be inclined to take any advantage.Brad----- Original Message ----- From: "atopunov" <atopunov@...>To: <combat-l@yahoogroups.com>Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 2:31 PMSubject: [combat-l] The MORAL aspect of shutoffs> Just want to "cut and past" shutoff info that I found interesting. It> has a big point to it. Especially from F2D pilot point of view,> because it seems like that F2D rules makers forgot about their> opinion.>> Text :>>> The MORAL aspect of shutoffs>> Some fliers don't want to spend their time and effort to play with> shutoffs and make them work 100%. It is easier to have something> that looks like a shutoff and works like a shutoff on the ground, but> has unknown effectiveness in the air. If the pilot has one flyaway> per year and gets disqualified once per year, it is definitely not> worth the effort to spend time, money, and possibly crashed models> for testing. Just simple look back to previously introduced> restriction in F2D and there are clearly some analogies between them.>> The same thing is going on Wright Now with mufflers. I am running> analysis for new muffler configuration every year, to improve> existing mufflers. It means that we are looking for muffler that> won't work as muffler. We are looking for configuration that will> take lass power away from the engine. Was that original intend of> introducing mufflers? I don't know any F2D pilots who will look for> muffler that will slowdown their engines.>> Form pilot perspective:>> If one is losing a match and knows that his opponent's and his own> shutoff are not 100% reliable, will that person try to cutaway> opponent plane to get his opponent disqualified if opponent shutoff> may not work? Yes of course!!! This will not necessary happen by> sawing the lines, but just cutting the opponent lines> by "accidentally" crashing in opponents inboard wing if it is> possible. ( 99% reliable shutoff will not work in this case, because> there is 1% chance to win) In this case shutoff will increase number> of flyways in F2D!>>>> --- In combat-l@yahoogroups.com, "Gordon Price" <gordon.price1@...>> wrote:>>>> Before the last CIAM meeting about shutoffs I sent the stuff below> to>> the UK CIAM delegate. I was concerned that they were making a> rushed>> decision and that they at least needed some input from combat> flyers>> who were not directly represented. The eventual outcome was to> delay>> the implementation to 2009 and that that they would evaluate> shutoffs>> and invited people to demonstrate at the Euro champs in Belgrade.>>>> I was the only one who took something to show to Belgrade, what> were>> the rest of you doing apart from Henning who did not go to> Belgrade?,>> You can see it in the photos section under 'Gordons Shutoff'and the>> previous message about it.>>>> I had a good chat to Henning Forbech in Moscow and interestingly my>> conclusions are similar to Hennings, hard to do something reliable>> and suitable for the heat of a full on F2d battle where the pitcrew>> and pilots are already stretched.>>>> On re-reading what I wrote below the only bit that is not right is>> that you can fly upwing with a line tension shutoff, I have now>> prooved that, however it is a very fine balance between the force> to>> shutoff against a full set of lines versus the little line tension>> you have when flying to keep the valve open. I also had more> success>> arming with full down rather than line tension so I can get them to>> take off reliably now.>>>> You will see Jeffrey Rein is mentioned below, he answered a lot of> my>> questions a year ago as he had already worked out some of the> forces>> involved , and has monitored the performance if shutoffs in fast at>> the bladder grabber. Thanks Jeffrey.>>>> Thsi should give you something to read and debate. Before you flame>> me note that I really have done some testing and measurements so do>> have a bit of a grasp of things.>>>>>> Gordon>>>>>> *********************************message to UK delegate*********>> Shutoff discussion at CIAM>>>> I email you with some of the information that I have accumulated,> as>> you are the UK CIAM delegate. By way of background I have an>> engineering degree and prefer facts to wild rumour and speculation.> I>> hope that by providing you with some information and my conclusions>> based on that information you will be able to help the CIAM come to> a>> sensible decision.>>>> I started investigating shutoffs a year ago and so far have flown>> with two different version on a F2d model. I have made some>> measurements of my own and got some information from some americans>> who have worked with shutoffs for some time.>>>> First lets look at the American Fast combat experience. They have> had>> shutoffs mandated for 10 years. Over that period Jeffery Rein (a> keen>> supporter and provider of shutoffs) has recorded the performance in>> flyaway situations. Line tension based shutoffs are 90% effective>> whilst centrifugal swing weight ones are only 25% effective. This>> must be considered with respect to the type of model they are used>> on, which is quite different to a F2d model.>>>> Fast models are quite heavy and have a real pull on the lines,> doing>> 120MPH on 60 foot lines. Typically 14 or 16 lbs, say 6 to 7Kg line>> tension. Speaking to people who have flown them they pull all the>> time and never lose line tension, don't float about and don't go>> light in tight manouvers. It is not uncommon for pilots to suffer>> from sore shoulders after a days flying. A belcrank based line>> tension shutoff in fast will arm at 7lbs or 3.1Kg, and shut off if>> the tension reduces to below 4lb/1.8Kg. To shut off against a full>> set of lines takes 1lb/0.45kg minimum, and they use 4lb to make>> sure. The arming mechanism means that it will keep the fuel line>> open until the line tension rises above that level after take off,>> its a one time latch set by the pitcrew before starting the engine.>> Also worth bearing in mind is the nature of fast combat, 1 model> and>> a kill rule (you win if you take off the whole streamer) means the>> bouts are typically under 1 minute long. They still have some> trouble>> with shutoffs tripping before the model is fully up to speed.>>>> Interested in the comparison with F2d I measured the line pull of a>> F2d model using a spring balance whilst flying. This gave 2kg while>> flying level in calm conditions which is not enough to even arm a>> fast shutoff or reliably keep it open. In a wind it is under 1kg>> upwind and 3-4 downwind. When manouvering the tension varies a lot,>> and it is perfectly feasible to fly upwind with under 0.5kg> tension.>> It is usual that a model will go light on the lines at times in a>> bout. This is the crux of the matter, as you need to have a line>> tension shutoff operate against a minimum of 450grams line tension>> which is approximately the drag of a full set of lines cut of at> the>> handle.>>>> What this means in reality is that a F2d model will stop due to a>> line tension shutoff operating at certain points in a bout,>> especially on a windy day. I conclude that use of a line tension>> shutoff will result in models stopping during a bout.>>>> Further issues result with the need to have the mechanic run with> an>> engine running model, without tripping the shutoff arming device. I>> believe that these are fixable up to a point but will make F2d more>> complicated and make the overworked pitmans life even harder.>>>> Having considered the proposed rule to disqualify a non operating>> shuoff in a flyawy situation, and the liklehood of a flyaway versus>> the shutoff tripping when flying costing me downtime my conclusion> is>> that I would show a shutoff that operates at the pre bout check,> and>> then make very sure that it would never work when flying, as the>> arming device would never work. I reach this conclusion as it is> much>> more likely that I will loose due to ground time due to the shutoff>> going off when flying a bout, than due to a fly away. I will not be>> the only flyer to reach this conclusion as it is fairly obvious,> and>> so the rule implementing shutoffs will not make any difference to> the>> danger of a long range flyaway injuring someone. I am not happy> about>> this conclusion but you need to know about it and discuss it. If> you>> factor this in with a success rate of shutoffs that will be well>> below the 90% experienced in FAST then you see that there will be a>> lot of hassle for little improvement in safety.>>>> My gut feel is that for a line tension shutoff to be reasonably>> flyable in a bout there is a less than 50% chance that it will work>> pulling a full set of lines. The forces that you have to play with>> are really too small to work reliably in a combat situation. It can>> work but not consistently, and no one will want to fly the event>> under that basis. This is bourne out by my flying tests so far> which>> have not been very impressive. If you get a system up and flying> and>> armed (about 50% of the time) then the model stops when> manouevering>> upwind. This is with a marginal 400g cutoff operating point. I do> not>> have a solution that is useable in a bout yet, and i am now not>> confident that it can be done due to the forces involved.>>>> To put all this difficult technology in perspective we should>> consider last years 2006 world championships in Spain. There were 3>> flyaways, all of which landed well within the proposed 2 second>> shutoff operation period, 2 within the 20m circle and one some 5-> 10m>> outside. From this you can see that no shutof in spain would have> had>> to operate. Why then do we need them? My non operational shutoff>> mentioned above aould not have got anyone disqualified but would> have>> passed the proposed rules for checking before hand. The situation> in>> spain was due to the officials in applying the rules properly and>> fully, and there was still room for further improvement. Good line>> checks and inspections also helped. All the flyers know this, if> you>> apply the rules properly and outlaw dangereous flying you don't get>> many flyaways. The way to safety is to make the rules enforce safe>> flying. A simple "one or both pilots gets disqualified in the event>> of a flyaway" rule will help a lot, the jury and judges must>> diqualify one of the pilots at least. That will make pilots try to>> avoid flyaways which is what we want. Also a yellow card - red card>> warning system for dangerous flying through the competition would>> also work.>>>> Due to me having a Electronics degree, and my conclusion that line>> tension shutoffs won't work properly, I believe that a radio> control>> shutoff is the way forward, with a failsafe mode. This would shut> off>> on range from the keep alive transmitter at the centre circle, and>> would also allow shutoff of all models at the press of a button. I> am>> going to try to prototype this next and if it works i will try to>> demonstrate it, ideally at the Euro champs. The problem with this>> will be cost, and the complexity it brings.>> ********************end of input to UK delegate************>>>>>>> Please visit MACA's Web Site:>> www.maca.hobby-site.org>> To unsubscribe from this email list, send a blank email message to:>> combat-l-unsubscribe@egroups.com> Yahoo! Groups Links>>>>






      _________________________________________________________________
      Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!
      http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Iskandar Taib
      ... This is where I think the analysis breaks down. Sure, a full set of .018 lines on a Nelson .36 powered model might produce 1 lb. of force on the lines, but
      Message 2 of 28 , Nov 12, 2007
        Gordon Price <gordon.price1@...> wrote:

        > This is the crux of the matter, as you need to
        > have a line
        > tension shutoff operate against a minimum of
        > 450grams line tension
        > which is approximately the drag of a full set of
        > lines cut of at the
        > handle.

        This is where I think the analysis breaks down. Sure,
        a full set of .018 lines on a Nelson .36 powered model
        might produce 1 lb. of force on the lines, but I doubt
        a F2D dragging 52 feet of .015 wire will generate
        anything near that. So you can afford to make a
        shutoff that stays open with, say, 200g of force on
        the lines. This is what Jeff did with his F2D version
        of his shutoff, I believe. It's got a smaller spring
        on it. If you designed your shutoff to shut off at 450
        grams, that's perhaps why it didn't work so well.

        Iskandar
      • Phil C
        One thing I can see from all this discussion is that there are a lot of problems with the current rules and adding shutoffs is going to require a complete
        Message 3 of 28 , Nov 12, 2007
          One thing I can see from all this discussion is that there are a lot of
          problems with the current rules and adding shutoffs is going to require
          a complete rewrite. I can't see any way to drop an engine shutoff
          requirement into the current rules and not create more problems than we
          solve. We haven't even got a good idea or list of all the areas
          affected, no consensus on how or when to test, and what appropriate
          penalties might be for various infractions.

          There also seems to be a lot of dissatisfaction with pilots who use the
          quirks in the rules to win, rather than outflying an opponent-
          purposeful line tangles, deliberate midairs, trying to cut the other guy
          loose, forcing(positioning your body) to help the other guy step out of
          the pilot's circle, oversize intakes and exhausts, tuning mufflers, and
          the list goes on.

          The bottom line: is F2D a competition amongst pilots to see who can get
          more cuts to win a match, is it a demolition derby, or is it a team
          sport where the pilot and two pit crew navigate a complicated set of
          rules to score points and try and get the opponent to lose points. The
          big question is what set of rules will encourage the most number of flyers?
        • bmears9413@aol.com
          My testing results proved to be much different than I expected. My shutoff took 7lbs. to trip. That seems like an awful lot when your just pulling on the line.
          Message 4 of 28 , Nov 12, 2007
            My testing results proved to be much different than I expected. My shutoff took 7lbs. to trip. That seems like an awful lot when your just pulling on the line. AND, thats ONLY on the up line! I'm not pulling both lines at te same time with my scale. On my first flight I was quite surprised to see it trip. I was also quite surprised to see it stay open when maneuvering up wind. I think these F2D's?pull much harder than were thinking they do. When I was up wind, my lines were sagging and dragging to the point the plane was hard to control. only whe I would "leap" into the plane on?a hard turn would the engine sag, and that was only for a second. Also was quite surprising. BTW, I was doing consecutive outsides up wind so my shutoff line, the up line, would have had the least tension.
            We have more pressures here to deal with than we think, use them to our advantage.

            Bob Mears



            -----Original Message-----
            From: Iskandar Taib <ntaib@...>
            To: combat-l@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 10:15 am
            Subject: Re: [combat-l] My input to the last CIAM via the UK delegate






            Gordon Price <gordon.price1@...> wrote:

            > This is the crux of the matter, as you need to
            > have a line
            > tension shutoff operate against a minimum of
            > 450grams line tension
            > which is approximately the drag of a full set of
            > lines cut of at the
            > handle.

            This is where I think the analysis breaks down. Sure,
            a full set of .018 lines on a Nelson .36 powered model
            might produce 1 lb. of force on the lines, but I doubt
            a F2D dragging 52 feet of .015 wire will generate
            anything near that. So you can afford to make a
            shutoff that stays open with, say, 200g of force on
            the lines. This is what Jeff did with his F2D version
            of his shutoff, I believe. It's got a smaller spring
            on it. If you designed your shutoff to shut off at 450
            grams, that's perhaps why it didn't work so well.

            Iskandar




            ________________________________________________________________________
            Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • bmears9413@aol.com
            I think if we eliminated all or the rules we wouldnt have anymore flyers, maybe fewer whiners. Bob Mears ... From: Phil C To:
            Message 5 of 28 , Nov 12, 2007
              I think if we eliminated all or the rules we wouldnt have anymore flyers, maybe fewer whiners.

              Bob Mears


              -----Original Message-----
              From: Phil C <philcartier@...>
              To: combat-l@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 10:27 am
              Subject: [combat-l] Re: The MORAL aspect of shutoffs






              One thing I can see from all this discussion is that there are a lot of
              problems with the current rules and adding shutoffs is going to require
              a complete rewrite. I can't see any way to drop an engine shutoff
              requirement into the current rules and not create more problems than we
              solve. We haven't even got a good idea or list of all the areas
              affected, no consensus on how or when to test, and what appropriate
              penalties might be for various infractions.

              There also seems to be a lot of dissatisfaction with pilots who use the
              quirks in the rules to win, rather than outflying an opponent-
              purposeful line tangles, deliberate midairs, trying to cut the other guy
              loose, forcing(positioning your body) to help the other guy step out of
              the pilot's circle, oversize intakes and exhausts, tuning mufflers, and
              the list goes on.

              The bottom line: is F2D a competition amongst pilots to see who can get
              more cuts to win a match, is it a demolition derby, or is it a team
              sport where the pilot and two pit crew navigate a complicated set of
              rules to score points and try and get the opponent to lose points. The
              big question is what set of rules will encourage the most number of flyers?




              ________________________________________________________________________
              Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • Iskandar Taib
              ... Just out of curiosity.. how does one make one s own airplane fly away, marginal line or no marginal line? Just trying to figure out how they did it. I keep
              Message 6 of 28 , Nov 12, 2007
                Bryce Gibson <flyf2d@...> wrote:

                > The large number of fly aways in 02 was I believe a
                > result of the deliberate use of marginal line so
                > that a fly away was possible as a tactical
                > option.Bryce GibsonDictator for LifeNOCLASS MAC

                Just out of curiosity.. how does one make one's own
                airplane fly away, marginal line or no marginal line?
                Just trying to figure out how they did it. I keep
                hearing they did it, but not how it was done.

                Iskandar
              • Iskandar Taib
                ... Hmmm.. Why didn t I think of that? Carrot instead of stick... Iskandar
                Message 7 of 28 , Nov 12, 2007
                  Bob Mears <bmears9413@...> wrote:

                  > So...looks like, in the event of a flyaway, and a
                  > shutoff works, the
                  > cut loose airplane should be scored an extra 100
                  > points!

                  Hmmm.. Why didn't I think of that? Carrot instead of
                  stick...

                  Iskandar
                • bmears9413@aol.com
                  Me too Iskander. I did take my plane up wind and did hard outsides untill it stalled and flew into the circle. I was confident enough already that the shutoff
                  Message 8 of 28 , Nov 12, 2007
                    Me too Iskander. I did take my plane up wind and did hard outsides untill it stalled and flew into the circle. I was confident enough already that the shutoff would work before I even tried that one. but, I aint just lettin go of my handle! Now I'll build you a shutoff and you can test it that way if you like ;)

                    Bob Mears


                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: Iskandar Taib <ntaib@...>
                    To: combat-l@yahoogroups.com
                    Sent: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 10:36 am
                    Subject: RE: [combat-l] The MORAL aspect of shutoffs






                    Bryce Gibson <flyf2d@...> wrote:

                    > The large number of fly aways in 02 was I believe a
                    > result of the deliberate use of marginal line so
                    > that a fly away was possible as a tactical
                    > option.Bryce GibsonDictator for LifeNOCLASS MAC

                    Just out of curiosity.. how does one make one's own
                    airplane fly away, marginal line or no marginal line?
                    Just trying to figure out how they did it. I keep
                    hearing they did it, but not how it was done.

                    Iskandar




                    ________________________________________________________________________
                    Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Gordon Price
                    Iskander, see Jeffreys post on the other thread: I quote: Here, let me see if I can add some more confusion and discontent. My shutoff starts to trip at about
                    Message 9 of 28 , Nov 12, 2007
                      Iskander,

                      see Jeffreys post on the other thread:

                      I quote:
                      "Here, let me see if I can add some more confusion and discontent. My
                      shutoff starts to trip at about four pounds. It will shut off
                      instantly in most cases. When I was flying at the team trials in 25
                      MPH winds, my lines were cut at the handle due to a tangle. The plane
                      took off overhead and strait up wind. With the added drag on the
                      lines caused by the high winds, it took my shutoff about 2 seconds to
                      start shutting down. So 4 pounds is about right for worse case
                      scenario. If you just want it to shut down if it is cut at the lead-
                      outs, 1/4 pound of tension is plenty. I wanted mine to work in all
                      cases, hence the 4 pound tension.
                      Now here is the part that everyone will find unacceptable. To keep
                      the proper tension at all times, I use more lead-out rake and a
                      longer inboard wing. I am sure the drop in performance for using
                      these techniques is unacceptable to most. "

                      Most modern F2d models pull about 2kg flying level - thats 4.4lbs. Not
                      enough to play wiht.

                      Gordon


                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: combat-l@yahoogroups.com [mailto:combat-l@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf
                      Of Iskandar Taib
                      Sent: 12 November 2007 16:16
                      To: combat-l@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: Re: [combat-l] My input to the last CIAM via the UK delegate


                      Gordon Price <gordon.price1@...> wrote:

                      > This is the crux of the matter, as you need to
                      > have a line
                      > tension shutoff operate against a minimum of
                      > 450grams line tension
                      > which is approximately the drag of a full set of
                      > lines cut of at the
                      > handle.

                      This is where I think the analysis breaks down. Sure,
                      a full set of .018 lines on a Nelson .36 powered model
                      might produce 1 lb. of force on the lines, but I doubt
                      a F2D dragging 52 feet of .015 wire will generate
                      anything near that. So you can afford to make a
                      shutoff that stays open with, say, 200g of force on
                      the lines. This is what Jeff did with his F2D version
                      of his shutoff, I believe. It's got a smaller spring
                      on it. If you designed your shutoff to shut off at 450
                      grams, that's perhaps why it didn't work so well.

                      Iskandar





                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Bryce Gibson
                      Fly it up wind in a tangle turning tight, it will start banging on the lines. When it goes loose get your arm as tight as possible so it really bangs on the
                      Message 10 of 28 , Nov 12, 2007
                        Fly it up wind in a tangle turning tight, it will start banging on the lines.
                        When it goes loose get your arm as tight as possible so it really bangs on the lines when it comes tight. A good pull against the lines so that if the lines don't break this time it bounces again. Maybe have full deflection on so one line goes first.
                        I think the static arm is the key.
                        I have always had insufficent power so I am used to models going light on the lines. When they do I try to have my elbow bent to act as a gradual stop. One fly away in contests in 27 years.Bryce GibsonDictator for LifeNOCLASS MAC


                        To: combat-l@yahoogroups.comFrom: ntaib@...: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 08:36:46 -0800Subject: RE: [combat-l] The MORAL aspect of shutoffs




                        Bryce Gibson <flyf2d@...> wrote:> The large number of fly aways in 02 was I believe a> result of the deliberate use of marginal line so> that a fly away was possible as a tactical> option.Bryce GibsonDictator for LifeNOCLASS MACJust out of curiosity.. how does one make one's ownairplane fly away, marginal line or no marginal line?Just trying to figure out how they did it. I keephearing they did it, but not how it was done. Iskandar






                        _________________________________________________________________
                        Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!
                        http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • Gordon Price
                        measure the pull with a spring balance while flying. Very exciting to do - askme how i know! The line tension varies greatly between model designs and setup.
                        Message 11 of 28 , Nov 12, 2007
                          measure the pull with a spring balance while flying. Very exciting to do -
                          askme how i know! The line tension varies greatly between model designs and
                          setup.

                          Then you say trip do you mean it arms at 7lbs, or it shuts off at 7lbs?



                          Gordon

                          -----Original Message-----
                          From: combat-l@yahoogroups.com [mailto:combat-l@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf
                          Of bmears9413@...
                          Sent: 12 November 2007 16:29
                          To: combat-l@yahoogroups.com
                          Subject: Re: [combat-l] My input to the last CIAM via the UK delegate


                          My testing results proved to be much different than I expected. My shutoff
                          took 7lbs. to trip. That seems like an awful lot when your just pulling on
                          the line. AND, thats ONLY on the up line! I'm not pulling both lines at te
                          same time with my scale. On my first flight I was quite surprised to see it
                          trip. I was also quite surprised to see it stay open when maneuvering up
                          wind. I think these F2D's?pull much harder than were thinking they do. When
                          I was up wind, my lines were sagging and dragging to the point the plane was
                          hard to control. only whe I would "leap" into the plane on?a hard turn would
                          the engine sag, and that was only for a second. Also was quite surprising.
                          BTW, I was doing consecutive outsides up wind so my shutoff line, the up
                          line, would have had the least tension.
                          We have more pressures here to deal with than we think, use them to our
                          advantage.

                          Bob Mears

                          -----Original Message-----
                          From: Iskandar Taib <ntaib@...>
                          To: combat-l@yahoogroups.com
                          Sent: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 10:15 am
                          Subject: Re: [combat-l] My input to the last CIAM via the UK delegate

                          Gordon Price <gordon.price1@...> wrote:

                          > This is the crux of the matter, as you need to
                          > have a line
                          > tension shutoff operate against a minimum of
                          > 450grams line tension
                          > which is approximately the drag of a full set of
                          > lines cut of at the
                          > handle.

                          This is where I think the analysis breaks down. Sure,
                          a full set of .018 lines on a Nelson .36 powered model
                          might produce 1 lb. of force on the lines, but I doubt
                          a F2D dragging 52 feet of .015 wire will generate
                          anything near that. So you can afford to make a
                          shutoff that stays open with, say, 200g of force on
                          the lines. This is what Jeff did with his F2D version
                          of his shutoff, I believe. It's got a smaller spring
                          on it. If you designed your shutoff to shut off at 450
                          grams, that's perhaps why it didn't work so well.

                          Iskandar

                          __________________________________________________________
                          Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! -
                          http://mail.aol.com

                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • bmears9413@aol.com
                          it arms at 7lbs. I havent measured where it shuts off besides 0 Bob Mears ... From: Gordon Price To: combat-l@yahoogroups.com
                          Message 12 of 28 , Nov 12, 2007
                            it arms at 7lbs. I havent measured where it shuts off besides "0"

                            Bob Mears


                            -----Original Message-----
                            From: Gordon Price <gordon.price1@...>
                            To: combat-l@yahoogroups.com
                            Sent: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 12:24 pm
                            Subject: RE: [combat-l] My input to the last CIAM via the UK delegate






                            measure the pull with a spring balance while flying. Very exciting to do -
                            askme how i know! The line tension varies greatly between model designs and
                            setup.

                            Then you say trip do you mean it arms at 7lbs, or it shuts off at 7lbs?

                            Gordon

                            -----Original Message-----
                            From: combat-l@yahoogroups.com [mailto:combat-l@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf
                            Of bmears9413@...
                            Sent: 12 November 2007 16:29
                            To: combat-l@yahoogroups.com
                            Subject: Re: [combat-l] My input to the last CIAM via the UK delegate

                            My testing results proved to be much different than I expected. My shutoff
                            took 7lbs. to trip. That seems like an awful lot when your just pulling on
                            the line. AND, thats ONLY on the up line! I'm not pulling both lines at te
                            same time with my scale. On my first flight I was quite surprised to see it
                            trip. I was also quite surprised to see it stay open when maneuvering up
                            wind. I think these F2D's?pull much harder than were thinking they do. When
                            I was up wind, my lines were sagging and dragging to the point the plane was
                            hard to control. only whe I would "leap" into the plane on?a hard turn would
                            the engine sag, and that was only for a second. Also was quite surprising.
                            BTW, I was doing consecutive outsides up wind so my shutoff line, the up
                            line, would have had the least tension.
                            We have more pressures here to deal with than we think, use them to our
                            advantage.

                            Bob Mears

                            -----Original Message-----
                            From: Iskandar Taib <ntaib@...>
                            To: combat-l@yahoogroups.com
                            Sent: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 10:15 am
                            Subject: Re: [combat-l] My input to the last CIAM via the UK delegate

                            Gordon Price <gordon.price1@...> wrote:

                            > This is the crux of the matter, as you need to
                            > have a line
                            > tension shutoff operate against a minimum of
                            > 450grams line tension
                            > which is approximately the drag of a full set of
                            > lines cut of at the
                            > handle.

                            This is where I think the analysis breaks down. Sure,
                            a full set of .018 lines on a Nelson .36 powered model
                            might produce 1 lb. of force on the lines, but I doubt
                            a F2D dragging 52 feet of .015 wire will generate
                            anything near that. So you can afford to make a
                            shutoff that stays open with, say, 200g of force on
                            the lines. This is what Jeff did with his F2D version
                            of his shutoff, I believe. It's got a smaller spring
                            on it. If you designed your shutoff to shut off at 450
                            grams, that's perhaps why it didn't work so well.

                            Iskandar

                            __________________________________________________________
                            Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! -
                            http://mail.aol.com

                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                            ________________________________________________________________________
                            Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com


                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • Iskandar Taib
                            ... Ah, OK. Yeah, a stiff arm rather than openly jerking on the line(s), which can be construed as sawing, particularly in a tangle. If that works on the brown
                            Message 13 of 28 , Nov 12, 2007
                              Bryce Gibson <flyf2d@...> wrote:

                              > Fly it up wind in a tangle turning tight, it will
                              > start banging on the lines.
                              > When it goes loose get your arm as tight as
                              > possible so it really bangs on the lines when it
                              > comes tight. A good pull against the lines so that
                              > if the lines don't break this time it bounces again.
                              > Maybe have full deflection on so one line goes
                              > first.
                              > I think the static arm is the key.

                              Ah, OK. Yeah, a stiff arm rather than openly jerking
                              on the line(s), which can be construed as sawing,
                              particularly in a tangle. If that works on the brown
                              Ukrainian wire it'd work even better on the American
                              stainless. Perhaps we should have a "jerk test" in
                              addition to the pull test? Test one line, use a pulley
                              and a dropping weight. On the other hand, they've all
                              quit using these lines and tactics, right?

                              Iskandar
                            • Bryce Gibson
                              Yeah if you really want to make sure, get some angular separation from your opponents lines. I have had demonstrated to me on a ropes course how to cut a 15mm
                              Message 14 of 28 , Nov 12, 2007
                                Yeah if you really want to make sure, get some angular separation from your opponents lines.
                                I have had demonstrated to me on a ropes course how to cut a 15mm braid in one pass with a 3mm brail line. Anything over about 10 degrees from parallel and it's like a knife edge.
                                If by the brown wire you mean that 7 strand I haven't seen that for a long time,It sure was crap.The 97 team trial my pilot had bought some wire from a noted US Supplier, it was brown 7 strand and crumbled when you looked at it.
                                I don't know if that was the bad stuff in 02.
                                Bryce GibsonDictator for LifeNOCLASS MAC


                                To: combat-l@yahoogroups.comFrom: ntaib@...: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:45:44 -0800Subject: RE: [combat-l] The MORAL aspect of shutoffs




                                Bryce Gibson <flyf2d@...> wrote:> Fly it up wind in a tangle turning tight, it will> start banging on the lines.> When it goes loose get your arm as tight as> possible so it really bangs on the lines when it> comes tight. A good pull against the lines so that> if the lines don't break this time it bounces again.> Maybe have full deflection on so one line goes> first.> I think the static arm is the key.Ah, OK. Yeah, a stiff arm rather than openly jerkingon the line(s), which can be construed as sawing,particularly in a tangle. If that works on the brownUkrainian wire it'd work even better on the Americanstainless. Perhaps we should have a "jerk test" inaddition to the pull test? Test one line, use a pulleyand a dropping weight. On the other hand, they've allquit using these lines and tactics, right? Iskandar






                                _________________________________________________________________
                                News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Get it now!
                                http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx

                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • Iskandar Taib
                                ... No, it s 4 strand from Yuvenko. Haven t had any break, it seems pretty strong, but I do notice there s rust coming off on my fingers when I roll it up. The
                                Message 15 of 28 , Nov 13, 2007
                                  Bryce Gibson <flyf2d@...> wrote:

                                  > Yeah if you really want to make sure, get some
                                  > angular separation from your opponents lines.
                                  > I have had demonstrated to me on a ropes course how
                                  > to cut a 15mm braid in one pass with a 3mm brail
                                  > line. Anything over about 10 degrees from parallel
                                  > and it's like a knife edge.
                                  > If by the brown wire you mean that 7 strand I
                                  > haven't seen that for a long time,It sure was
                                  > crap.The 97 team trial my pilot had bought some wire
                                  > from a noted US Supplier, it was brown 7 strand and
                                  > crumbled when you looked at it.
                                  > I don't know if that was the bad stuff in 02.

                                  No, it's 4 strand from Yuvenko. Haven't had any break,
                                  it seems pretty strong, but I do notice there's rust
                                  coming off on my fingers when I roll it up. The
                                  Indonesians bought some stainless when some of the
                                  Euro wire (not sure about provenance) rusted and broke
                                  at the terminations. Rather humid here. Might try
                                  using this stuff called "Stuph" - the RC Warship
                                  Combat people use it to waterproof their radio
                                  equipment, which gets submerged on a regular basis.

                                  The brown stuff from the US was stainless steel.
                                  Probably from Sevenstrand Corp., Bob Bearden sold some
                                  back in the early 80s, still have a set or two of it.
                                  Don't think it was much different from the "bright"
                                  line. I think someone else was selling this to the
                                  Stunt fliers.

                                  I have a bunch of galvanized carbon steel 7 strand,
                                  don't know how it matches up to stainless or Euro
                                  wire, but haven't had any break so far (nor does it
                                  rust). I have (and use) the .018 for Fast Combat, it
                                  cost about half the price of stainless.

                                  Iskandar
                                • Dalibor Toman
                                  On Monday, November 12, 2007 5:28 PM , ... v = 40m/s, r = 16m m =
                                  Message 16 of 28 , Nov 13, 2007
                                    On Monday, November 12, 2007 5:28 PM ,
                                    bmears9413@... <bmears9413@...> wrote:

                                    > My testing results proved to be much different than I expected. My
                                    > shutoff took 7lbs. to trip. That seems like an awful lot when your
                                    > just pulling on the line. AND, thats ONLY on the up line! I'm not
                                    > pulling both lines at te same time with my scale. On my first flight
                                    > I was quite surprised to see it trip. I was also quite surprised to
                                    > see it stay open when maneuvering up wind. I think these F2D's?pull
                                    > much harder than were thinking they do.

                                    v = 40m/s,
                                    r = 16m
                                    m = <0.4Kg (plane + engine, no fuel)
                                    F=m . v2 / r = m . 100 = 40 [N] ~ 4Kgs (~8lbs)

                                    So you have about 4Kg of tension for both lines (when flying level, no
                                    wind) . The tension lower flying on the top of the sphere (minus the
                                    model weight).
                                    If your shut-off really requires 7lbs (~3.5Kg) of tension on one line
                                    it cannot work (the equation above gives you about 2Kg (~ 4lbs) on
                                    each line of tension...


                                    Regards
                                    Dalibor Toman
                                  • bmears9413@aol.com
                                    Thats why I dont screw with formulas. I build it first, then test it, then make a few assessments on for inquiring minds. I dont care how it looks on paper. It
                                    Message 17 of 28 , Nov 13, 2007
                                      Thats why I dont screw with formulas. I build it first, then test it, then make a few assessments on for inquiring minds. I dont care how it looks on paper. It works in the air.

                                      Bob Mears


                                      -----Original Message-----
                                      From: Dalibor Toman <dtoman@...>
                                      To: combat-l@yahoogroups.com
                                      Sent: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 11:01 am
                                      Subject: Re: [combat-l] My input to the last CIAM via the UK delegate






                                      On Monday, November 12, 2007 5:28 PM ,
                                      bmears9413@... <bmears9413@...> wrote:

                                      > My testing results proved to be much different than I expected. My
                                      > shutoff took 7lbs. to trip. That seems like an awful lot when your
                                      > just pulling on the line. AND, thats ONLY on the up line! I'm not
                                      > pulling both lines at te same time with my scale. On my first flight
                                      > I was quite surprised to see it trip. I was also quite surprised to
                                      > see it stay open when maneuvering up wind. I think these F2D's?pull
                                      > much harder than were thinking they do.

                                      v = 40m/s,
                                      r = 16m
                                      m = <0.4Kg (plane + engine, no fuel)
                                      F=m . v2 / r = m . 100 = 40 [N] ~ 4Kgs (~8lbs)

                                      So you have about 4Kg of tension for both lines (when flying level, no
                                      wind) . The tension lower flying on the top of the sphere (minus the
                                      model weight).
                                      If your shut-off really requires 7lbs (~3.5Kg) of tension on one line
                                      it cannot work (the equation above gives you about 2Kg (~ 4lbs) on
                                      each line of tension...

                                      Regards
                                      Dalibor Toman





                                      ________________________________________________________________________
                                      Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com


                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    • Bryce Gibson
                                      If, and thats a big if we could get someone to build an elctronic shut off. I think doing shut down on Loss of signal would be the best. (like the RC failsafes
                                      Message 18 of 28 , Nov 13, 2007
                                        If, and thats a big if we could get someone to build an elctronic shut off. I think doing shut down on Loss of signal would be the best. (like the RC failsafes that go to low throttle on loss of signal).
                                        I thought I had it cracked with the idea of sending an RF pulse from the handle down the lines every 50 M/sec or so, If the fail safe doesn't "hear" any signal after 300 M/sec it shuts off.
                                        Only slight flaw in the logic is as Gordon pointed out; it's not really possible to send signal down the lines this way.Damn facts getting in the way.
                                        If we went to a centre marshall dead man switch. Yes reaction time becomes a factor but the whole point of the shut off rulle is not to protect the people 50' away ( although it's nice if it does) but people who are not part of our acitivity within a 5 Mile radius. If the centre marshall takes 1.5 sec to realise then thats acceptable.
                                        Nothing is ever completely safe, Risk management is the name of the gameBryce GibsonDictator for LifeNOCLASS MAC


                                        To: combat-l@yahoogroups.comFrom: ntaib@...: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 04:18:05 -0800Subject: Re: [combat-l] Fly aways for beginners




                                        Bryce Gibson <flyf2d@...> wrote:> Yeah if you really want to make sure, get some> angular separation from your opponents lines. > I have had demonstrated to me on a ropes course how> to cut a 15mm braid in one pass with a 3mm brail> line. Anything over about 10 degrees from parallel> and it's like a knife edge.> If by the brown wire you mean that 7 strand I> haven't seen that for a long time,It sure was> crap.The 97 team trial my pilot had bought some wire> from a noted US Supplier, it was brown 7 strand and> crumbled when you looked at it. > I don't know if that was the bad stuff in 02.No, it's 4 strand from Yuvenko. Haven't had any break,it seems pretty strong, but I do notice there's rustcoming off on my fingers when I roll it up. TheIndonesians bought some stainless when some of theEuro wire (not sure about provenance) rusted and brokeat the terminations. Rather humid here. Might tryusing this stuff called "Stuph" - the RC WarshipCombat people use it to waterproof their radioequipment, which gets submerged on a regular basis. The brown stuff from the US was stainless steel.Probably from Sevenstrand Corp., Bob Bearden sold someback in the early 80s, still have a set or two of it.Don't think it was much different from the "bright"line. I think someone else was selling this to theStunt fliers. I have a bunch of galvanized carbon steel 7 strand,don't know how it matches up to stainless or Eurowire, but haven't had any break so far (nor does itrust). I have (and use) the .018 for Fast Combat, itcost about half the price of stainless. Iskandar






                                        _________________________________________________________________
                                        News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Get it now!
                                        http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx

                                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                      • Iskandar Taib
                                        ... One could build one NOW with existing RC equipment. If you wanted the FM failsafe mode, it would cost a little more, but if it s simply a judge-controlled
                                        Message 19 of 28 , Nov 13, 2007
                                          Bryce Gibson <flyf2d@...> wrote:

                                          > If, and thats a big if we could get someone to build
                                          > an elctronic shut off. I think doing shut down on
                                          > Loss of signal would be the best. (like the RC
                                          > failsafes that go to low throttle on loss of
                                          > signal).

                                          One could build one NOW with existing RC equipment. If
                                          you wanted the FM failsafe mode, it would cost a
                                          little more, but if it's simply a judge-controlled
                                          shutoff, you'd just need a radio transmitter, a
                                          receiver, a servo and a battery pack. We'd all have to
                                          agree as to the brand of transmitter and frequency,
                                          however.

                                          Failsafe is usually programmable, just program it to
                                          trip the shutoff.

                                          Iskandar
                                        • Gary James
                                          ... While I understand that most of us combat flyers do not participate in the dark side of aeromodeling i.e. R/C, the new 2.4 GHz spread spectrum systems do
                                          Message 20 of 28 , Nov 15, 2007
                                            --- In combat-l@yahoogroups.com, Iskandar Taib <ntaib@...> wrote:

                                            > We'd all have to
                                            > agree as to the brand of transmitter and frequency,
                                            > however.

                                            While I understand that most of us combat flyers do not participate in
                                            "the dark side" of aeromodeling i.e. R/C, the new 2.4 GHz spread
                                            spectrum systems do not require the selection of a particular RF shift
                                            or frequency since they work somewhat similar to a CDMA "cell phone"
                                            system.
                                          • Iskandar Taib
                                            ... There are probably quite a few on the list like me, who actually read RC articles in the magazines, on the sly. Turns out the current 2.4 GHz systems do
                                            Message 21 of 28 , Nov 15, 2007
                                              Gary James <gsjames@...> wrote:

                                              >In combat-l@yahoogroups.com, Iskandar Taib
                                              > <ntaib@...> wrote:
                                              >
                                              > > We'd all have to
                                              > > agree as to the brand of transmitter and
                                              > frequency,
                                              > > however.
                                              >
                                              > While I understand that most of us combat flyers do
                                              > not participate in
                                              > "the dark side" of aeromodeling i.e. R/C, the new
                                              > 2.4 GHz spread
                                              > spectrum systems do not require the selection of a
                                              > particular RF shift
                                              > or frequency since they work somewhat similar to a
                                              > CDMA "cell phone"
                                              > system.

                                              There are probably quite a few on the list like me,
                                              who actually read RC articles in the magazines, on the
                                              sly. Turns out the current 2.4 GHz systems do NOT use
                                              frequency shifting, they simply look for two
                                              unoccupied frequencies within the band and use them.
                                              This limits their use to maybe 50 planes at one time
                                              (unless you're at a ProBro mass-hover event, that's
                                              far more than you'd ever need at a particular field).
                                              There are reasons NOT to use this band - the signals
                                              depend strongly on antenna orientation, so you need to
                                              install TWO receiver units in your plane, with
                                              antennas at right angles, AND none of this stuff is
                                              currently cheap. I'd say our first efforts should
                                              center around GWS sets, since they're cheap and
                                              available, and also available in 27 MHz, which is a
                                              universally accepted RC band.

                                              I can imagine running a Combat meet near an RC field,
                                              we'd go over, remove one of the frequency pins, and
                                              stick it on a flagpole. The flag would be the
                                              frequency number we're using...

                                              Iskandar

                                              Iskandar
                                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.