I have just received the complete list of all soaring rules change
proposals for the next cycle. There was only one proposal, the RES
proposal of Bob Johnson as outlined in Bill & Bunny Kuhlman's message. A
summary of the rule change proposal will be published in the March issue of
Model Aviation that AMA members will be receiving in January. A
preliminary vote on the proposal by the Soaring Contest Board is due
February 28th. If the proposal passes the preliminary vote, then the
proposal will be open to modification or counter proposals. If the
proposal is approved in a final vote, the rule will become official in 2002.
Lets don't have a repeat of the fiasco last time where the RES proposal was
defeated by a few vocal opponents who did not even allow the proposal to
reach the second stage where the offending parts could modified. The
period for rules change proposal submission has passed and the only thing
to be discussed is Proposal No. S002-1 and possible cross proposals. A
discussion of anything else about RES is just spam.
Proposal No. S002-1 is well thought out and I intend to vote for it's
approval in the preliminary vote. It is not perfect and there are a couple
of minor changes that I would like to see but I could live with the rule as
it now stands. For the record, most of the sailplanes I fly would qualify
for the new RES class with nothing more than minor modifications so I am
very familiar with that type model. I intend to fly my new RES class
design at Phoenix in February. That is if I don't pull the usual before a
major contest trick and damage it just before the contest. :-)
Chuck Anderson
AMA District V Soaring Contest Board member.
>The current, albeit tentative, "rules" for RES events, as written by
>Bob Johnson, are still listed on one of the RC Soaring Digest web
>pages - <http://www.halcyon.com/bsquared/RES.html>, as mentioned
>previously. There are two Parts which are related to the question of
>the Thermal Zagi - Part (a) and Part (b):
>
>"a. Control of the aircraft will be limited to three functions:
>rudder, elevator, and spoilers.
>
>"b. Except in the case of tailless aircraft which have a portion of
>the trailing edge of the wing serve as the elevator, the trailing
>edge of the wing must remain fixed at all times. In the excepted
>case, where split elevators are used, they may be driven by separate
>servos but both left and right halves must at all times deflect in
>the same direction and by the same amount."
>
>Notice in Part (a) that the functions are Rudder, Elevator, and
>Spoilers. There is no direct aileron function. In the RES class, roll
>is generated by the effective angle of attack differential caused by
>rudder induced yaw. This is the case whether the aircraft has a tail
>or not. Tailless aircraft with rudder and elevator controls, like the
>MB Raven, Windfreak, and Windlord, can be entered in RES events.
>
>In Part (b), where tailless aircraft with split elevators are
>covered, both elevator halves must move in unison even if driven by
>separate servos. No differential movement is allowed. This means that
>although the elevator halves on a tailless entry could be at the wing
>tips, and hence look like ailerons, roll control must still be under
>the influence of the rudder alone. Tailless aircraft with elevons,
>like the Blackbird 2M and Thermal Zagi, are therefore specifically
>excluded from RES events under these rules.
>
>When these second generation rules were proposed, there was a
>suggestion to simply count servos, as mentioned by another respondent
>to your query. After some discussion, it was decided that the roll
>control offered by elevons is contrary to the intention of the class.
>The aileron function is not allowed on tailed aircraft of the RES
>class, and that exclusion is extended to tailless aircraft by
>disallowing elevator differential.
>
>To reiterate, in the case you point out, the Thermal Zagi as
>described would NOT qualify as an RES entry under the current rules
>because it has an aileron function through use of a mixer.
>
>BUT, if that same Thermal Zagi were modified to have a vertical fin
>with a rudder, and the mixer replaced with a Y-harness (still one
>servo per elevator, but no differential), it would then be a valid
>entry in the class.
>
>I hope this is clear.
>
>A note on V-tails: V-tails are not prohibited in the RES rules, and
>so a mixer can be used to obtain the required coordinated functions.
>However, it should be noted that with a standard V-tail, right rudder
>imparts a roll to the left. Perhaps the rules need to address roll
>control through use of an _inverted_ V-tail? We'll leave that to you
>enthusiasts of tails.
>
>Bob's rules proposal also did not say anything about dihedral,
>polyhedral, etc., but did state that spoilers had to be on the top of
>the wing only and at least two inches from the trailing edge, and
>could not operate differentially.
>
>Bob's rules are simple yet comprehensive. It sounds like when local
>clubs add to or subtract from the rules as currently proposed, it
>tends to mess things up more than fix them.
>
>Respectfully submitted,
>B^2 B2Streamlines
>Bill & Bunny Kuhlman 'specialty books for aircraft modelers'
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.halcyon.com/bsquared/
>P.O Box 975 P.O. Box 976
>Olalla WA 98359-0975 Olalla WA 98359-0976
>RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe"
and "unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News. Send "subscribe" and
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
