Re: [RCSE] 18 minute tasks...
I say yah dude! I was one of the turkey winners and pulled one out of my 'landing sequence' at 50 feet to do a little better than the rest of the group. It made my weekend. I really like the seeded MOM as it is never boring in the last few rounds. Although it was 18 Min. I did about a 10 and won the round and that really felt good as the total group at the Pumpkin Fly was above average in capability. Depending on air for the round it could have been a 5 min winner or an 18 min winner. It was fun and a challange. I did not finish well, but will tell you that that the OVSS has the most fun fomat for TD that I have flown in. Thanks for the fun: Jack Iafret Keeper of the Nostalgia Rules From: Steve Siebenaler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [RCSE] 18 minute tasks... Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2003 17:34:03 -0400 Just so happens that I was CD at the CSS Pumpkin Fly last Sunday, October 12th. We fly seeded man-on-man and I called an 18 minute round for the last round of our contest, which was our TURKEY SHOOT round. Conditions were breezy, but sunny, so pilots had to find multiple thermals and many went way down wind to hook their first thermal. It was no cakewalk like some would surmise. Not every pilot got there time, and some landed a minute early after specking out, as they were trying to find the next thermal and all they found upwind was big sink. We even had a round where two pilots were duking it out at 50' with several minutes to go in the round. Of course, those pilots who skillfully completed the soaring task made it a landing contest to win a turkey. That was definitely a test of soaring skills. If conditions were really easy, it would have been silly to call such a long task. But when conditions are challenging, long task times really test one's soaring skills. Steve Siebenaler h http://www.cincinnatisoaring.org ttp://www.cincinnatisoaring.org Cincinnati, Ohio USA _ See when your friends are online with MSN Messenger 6.0. Download it now FREE! http://msnmessenger-download.com RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE] LSF Tasks
Are the LSF tasks the same now as they were back in the 70s? If so, with the exception of the competition requirements, would it not be easier today to accomplish those tasks? When you compare the performance of todys stuff verses what was flying then, I would think it may be a little easier today(providing the tasks have remained the same). Walter --- GG Get 25MB of email storage with Lycos Mail Plus! Sign up today -- http://www.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE] Eraser tip
At our F3J contest today My friend Michael and I tangled in a midair resulting in his sailplane having some damage to the tip of his Eraser. So he needs a right tip Does anyone have one?? Jeff
[RCSE] RE: De emphasized landings at Midsouth???
Jon, I have been to the same contests. In my mind, they are landing contests, pure and simple. It's a given that some guys are going to make their times just about every time. They are participating in a landing contest because that's all that separates them. Why, then, have 100 point landings. Say these guys have a not so hot day...it happens. Say that one of them misses a time 59 seconds, but makes a 100 point landing. Another makes his time but drags a tip and the resulting ground loop makes for a 24 point landing. Who won the round? The guy that missed his time. Why? Because he drug the other tip and the resulting ground loop luckily brought his nose in the right direction. Give me a 10 point landing for a tie breaker, not longer task times. In the above instance, the guy that made the time made a 2 point landing, and the guy that didn't made a 10 point landing. Who won the round? The guy that made the best decisions in the air. Why? Because the other guy's landing luck wasn't allowed negate that. Flame away - I don't care. There's a lot of skill getting into the landing zone consistently, that's a given. In the game of landing these things, there's too much luck at 2 points per inch. Yes, the good pilot group will always win. It's never the same guy winning by 5 points...the smiling face gets passed around alot. I would like to eliminate as much of the luck as possible. That's my better idea... Jack Womack --- Jon Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To this I have to say... Yes, a pure soaring task IS what we want! Gordy said a Thermal Duration competition. It is anything but that. It is a landing contest and nothing more. Why not make the landing count only if the time is perfect, and then with a max of 10 points? Look, the landings only count unless you make all your times anyway. Read on. Stepping politely off the soapbox, now, and returning to my normally placid demeanor... Yeah... right. You talk as if every contest is decided only on landings. Please... The point you are missing is that unless you make all your times within a few seconds, you don't qualify for the 2nd contest. (i.e. the landings). As a person who has helped plan, design, and implement the MidSouth a few times before, I think I can speak with a bit of experience. The landing task has one major objective... to differentiate among the top pilots who can make all their times.With no differentiation, and good weather, the top 20 pilots will all be within 20 points out of 5000. Let's say you get your way and there are no landing points of any kind. What's left? Two things. Making your times (thermal soaring), and precision in landing times (not landing location). At a large contest, there will be at least 5 pilots who make all their times within 20 seconds. Do you want their trophies decided 1st through 10th, solely on the basis of how accurately they can put the plane on the ground relative to the clock. (remember no landing scores). So you see, even with no landing scores, it still comes down to how precisely (when) the pilot can put his plane down. For the rest of the pilots (who did not make their times), the landings simply do not matter. Some people just want to introduce longer flight times. If the weather is good, it's a very long and boring day. If the weather is bad, the guy who hooks up the first and only thermal on launch will burry everyone else. Shorter lines introduce the same luck factor. There may just not be enough time to hook up a thermal. The one guy who stumbles into lift right off the launch line will burry everyone. That's not a test of skill, either. So where is the end of the road? Either tasks must be more challenging (F3B), or we have to put landings back in. F3B is too man and equipment intensive (given our history in the US) to run a contest. The Europeans are used to showing up with 2 or 3 of their own winches for each team. Americans are not. We also do not have the labor force necessary to pull it off. That leaves us right where we are now. Not too long soaring tasks (so the pilots can fly lots of rounds) and some landing task that can quickly and easily be measured. Requires the least labor force to put on the contest, and the least amount of equipment. Reasonable amount of fun. Do you have a better idea? Regards, Jon __ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
RE: [RCSE] LSF non-competition program ideas (long) (part 3 of 3)
I think Don has given this idea a lot of thought. It has so many valid points, mainly the infusion of non-contest fliers that are now flying, but non-fliers as witnesses so as to encourage them to be fliers and LSF participates. I would encourage the new (2004) board to give these 3 pages of Don's a lot of thought for the future of the LSF. Just a note to those older guys who have already done it, this would take nothing away from you. I congratulate each a everyone of you for your achievements in the LSF program, and encourage you to continue your activities in LSF. Jerry Miller, Level III and counting SOSS-Medford, OR -Original Message- From: Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 9:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [RCSE] LSF non-competition program ideas (long) (part 3 of 3) (continued from part 2) Of course, while we're coming up with alternatives to the experience requirements, we could also do some adjusting to the one-time tasks. For example, we could tie them to the wingspan of the model. The existing thermal tasks for Level V are framed typically around the capabilities of an open-class model from the era in which the program was started. That would be about a 10 ft. span model, but with overall capabilities for launching, ranging and penetrating that are probably somewhat less than today's typical open class ship. One option might be to use a modern 2-meter model for the baseline standard, and therefore to set the thermal duration tasks of Level A to 7.5 minutes for each meter of wingspan, 15 minutes per meter of span for Level B, 30 minutes per meter for Level C and 1 hour per meter of wingspan for Level D. Under this system, if you wanted to get a Level D thermal duration flight with a 1.5 meter HLG, you would have to fly for 90 minutes. If you wanted to use your 3-meter open class moldie, you would need to fly for 3 hours. If you went for it with your 5.5-meter scale ship, better plan to have a cast-iron bladder surgically installed first. A similar approach could apply to the one-time distance tasks. If we use a 2-meter model as the baseline for the current distance tasks, that means that for Level B you would need a 1 kilometer flight, 2 kilometers for Level C and 10 Kilometers for Level D. However, with a 1.5 meter HLG you would only need 0.75, 1.5 and 7.5 kilometers, while that 3-meter moldie would require 1.5, 3 and 15 kilometers respectively. Note, I'm only referring to the requirements for this new branch of the badge program. If other folks want to apply this to the existing program of badges to make it more interesting and more in step with today's technology, that's their business. Wingspan seems to be less of an issue for slope models, so perhaps those tasks should remain the same. I'm open to suggestion on that one. Also, I'd like to hear feedback from folks in tune with the typical slope-soaring contest scene regarding what sort of documented non-contest slope soaring experience would equate to the slope-soaring contest experience and skill level shown by the contest requirements in the existing LSF badge program. Remember when you're thinking about those that we're not trying to kill the new program with excessive requirements, but rather make it just tough enough that accomplishing it demonstrates at least an equivalent level of experience and accomplishment, and commands the same respect, as earning the equivalent number badge in the current contest-oriented LSF badge program. Ideally, if we've set all this up right, there should be a significant number of individuals who want to complete BOTH programs. Who will be the first to have both a Level V and a Level D badge, or even two of each? As far as submissions and record keeping, I recommend we stay within the framework of the existing voucher system as much as possible, to make it easier to fit into the existing LSF program infrastructure. Additional documentation for the experience portions of the requirements would simply involve legible photocopies of the appropriate pages from the aspirant's logbook, with the applicable flights highlighted, plus a tally of the flights involved showing that they add up to the required number of flights and number of hours. The idea is to keep it as simple as possible so we don't create problems for Jim Deck. Of course if the participation in this new program is so great that Jim can't handle it all, the LSF might need to get him an assistant. As I mentioned at the beginning, this would be no different than if participation in the existing program had suddenly increased, and in any case would show that the LSF had become more successful. This is a GOOD thing, folks! The other aspect of the existing LSF program that we've touched on briefly, but needs more elaboration, is the mentoring aspect. Supposedly a holder of an existing LSF badge has contributed to the history of R/C soaring and to the soaring community
[RCSE] WANTED-- Viking Models Contestant Fuse
Does anyone out there have a Viking Models Contestant fuse they want to sell. Or can whoever now owns the molds made me one. Thanks EDG Pittsburgh
Re: [RCSE] LSF non-competition program ideas
Don has presented some good ideas and I wish him well, however I see two obstacles to implementing them. First, who is going to do all the work. The current LSF officials have more than enough work to do administering what they already have. That means another officer (secretary for non competitive events?) Don't pile any more work on our already overworked secretary. And don't expect non-contest fliers to do the work. It has been my experience that most of the people who don't like contests also don't do much of anything else but fly. I know a few but there aren't many. Also remember that LSF officials work without pay, often at considerable expense out of their own pockets. The other problem I see is how is do we pay the extra expenses. Would all the participants be willing to pay say $5 or $10 each time they submit a voucher to advance a level? LSF was set up over 30 years ago when things cost much less. I am amazed that the LSF can continue to operate without such a charge. I served 2 years as the District V representative on the Soaring Advisory Committee to set up Soaring as an official AMA event followed by 3 years as a district VP and a year as Treasurer for the old NSS. I was always amazed at the amount of resistance many fliers had at paying $10 annual NSS dues which included Sailplane, the only publication devoted to soaring. We have the same problem today. Some people who spend thousands of dollars on mouldies and computer transmitters object to spending a few dollars for RCSD. Maybe they don't like RCSD or see a need for it but I don't buy cost as a reason for not subscribing. It is just an excuse. Do you think the non-competition fliers will be willing to pay for the new programs or administer it? I doubt it. Chuck Anderson LSF IV 583, AMA 371, NSS 72-361 RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE] Ruby Nosecone
Does anyone know where I can find a new nosecone for a Ruby? Thanks, -Jeffrey Jeffrey Goodman JGRC 727-781-5722 www.jgrc.biz RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
Re: [RCSE] LSF Tasks
Walter, having just completed my Level 5 last Sat. at age 60, I will tell you that my first choice glider for 8 hrs of slope was a 100 Big Birdy (gas bag). The glider that I actually finished the slope task was my wife's 2M Spirit. I did my 2 hr. thermal with a large composite poly ship that I designed and built. I intended to use it for XC as well , but I wrecked it launching from the grass and expected it to ROG. It caught a wing tip and did a tight 300 deg. roll. (ugly wreck). The R and R SBXC is the one that I finished the goal and return with, but I have done a 10K using a scratch built 150 poly gas bag. (it depends on the day). As far as TD competition, it is tough to have THE BEST glider, because every one seems to have one. Level 5 didn't seem easier to me with the equipment that I flew. What gliders would you choose for each task of L5? Mike Remus Fort Wayne IN On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 16:36:45 -0700 gldr guy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Are the LSF tasks the same now as they were back in the 70s? If so, with the exception of the competition requirements, would it not be easier today to accomplish those tasks? When you compare the performance of todys stuff verses what was flying then, I would think it may be a little easier today(providing the tasks have remained the same). Walter --- GG Get 25MB of email storage with Lycos Mail Plus! Sign up today -- http://www.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. Mike Remus V.P. LOFT Glider Club Fort Wayne IN LSF 5 The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand! Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER! Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today! RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE] LSF Voting eligibility
I'd venture to say if count was taken, there are more level 3 LSF members than any other level, followed by 4, 2, 1 and 5. It would seem that leaving out the votes from the largest group isn't in the best interest of the membership. gv -Original Message- From: Steve Meyer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2003 1:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [RCSE] LSF Voting eligibility People who have not been able to vote on-line because of a failed search, I have now included an explanation of membership. http://www.silentflight.org/vote/membership.html RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off. RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
Re: [RCSE] cool your angst- buy a doo dad
John, if you were to fly with my club, the Greater Detroit Soaring and Hiking Society, you would fly all year long with us and even fly at our annual Snow Fly, now into it's 4th decade without interuption, and not have to worry about what to do during the long winter months. Regards, Dave Corven. RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
[RCSE] NorCal 60 Foamie MoM Tomorrow
Howdy Foamie Fanatics, The San Francisco Bay Area 60 Foamie MoM race IS ON for tomorrow, Sunday the 19th of October at SHELL RIDGE. Today's wind (Sat. the 18th) saw speeds of 13 - 23 mph from SSW between 1 and 5 pm. Meet at the top at noon, racing to start at 1 pm. Late signups (until Sunday 10 AM or so), go here: http://soarheads.com/cgi-bin/soarheads/mom_signup.cgi Directions to Shell Ridge: - From San Francisco / Marin / East Bay, get to the East Bay and head East on Hwy 24. Take 24 East to North 680 and take the first exit, Ygnacio Valley Rd. Turn right at the signal heading East on Ygnacio Valley Rd. - From points North or South of Walnut Creek, take 680 North or South as appropriate, exit as appropriate and find your way to Ygnacio Valley Rd. heading East. - Once you're heading East on Ygnacio Valley Rd., approximately 1 mile ahead, turn right on Homestead Ave. Proceed a short distance and turn left onto Marshall Dr. Proceed to the dead end, park, and walk to the top. There is a sign which says Shell Ridge Open Space. For a map with parking spot starred: Go to: http://maps.yahoo.com Enter: 575 Marshall Dr Walnut Creek, CA If you get lost or want to confirm or beg out, call my cell: 510-377-4514 P.S. If you hate walking to the top of Shell Ridge, call me in the morning... -- James .-_--. James R. Osborn * [EMAIL PROTECTED]| \/ \ | Up and Running LLC |-. \ _ /\\_/ | Computer and Information Technology Support | '-.\ / \\/| (510) 377-4514 Office * (510) 232-2575 Fax| ' \_/ | `' RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
Re: [RCSE] LSF non-competition program ideas
Chuck, Your statement below is pretty bogus if you ask me. As whole through the years I have seen many more non-competitive flyers helping out than just a few. Most contests I go to, the brunt of the work force are pilots that are not flying in the contest. This is especially true of the Midwest Slope Challenge, and has been true at both of the SW Classics I have been to. To say non-competition pilots only want to fly is like saying Hey let's kickem while they're down. In most organizations the 80/20 rule applies. That is 80% set on their asses and do nothing except maybe bitch a lot if everything is not perfect and the other 20% do all the work. This rule applies pretty much across the board, not just with non-competitive pilots. Why is everybody so afraid of LSF changing and/or expanding? See Ya, Pat McCleave Wichita KS And don't expect non-contest fliers to do the work. It has been my experience that most of the people who don't like contests also don't do much of anything else but fly. I know a few but there aren't many. RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send subscribe and unsubscribe requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that subscribe and unsubscribe messages must be sent in text only format with MIME turned off.
