Another obvious scheme cooked up by people who want to get rid of combat.

• 10-20-70 fuel.
  wrist straps.
  4 mm venturis.
  8 mm mufflers.
  flyaway shutoffs.
  6 mm mufflers.

I'm surprised the event has survived all of this.
Both a flyway shutoff and an on-demand shutoff at the same time might be the straw that breaks the camel.

So you put in 2.4 gz radio for the "on demand" and a second system for flyaway.
That's a lot of gizzmoism in a plane where you can wreck eight in routine contest.

Just hitting the ground sounds a lot more economical.  We could have a gentlemen's agreement to never "demand" a landing, with the possible exception of the biannual WC.

 Just land the plane . Hitting a net will break more parts than a net .Leave the grass about 4" high .Skip it off the grass sometimes you don't even break the prop .

So you put in 2.4 gz radio for the "on demand" and a second system for flyaway.
That's a lot of gizzmoism in a plane where you can wreck eight in routine contest.

Just hitting the ground sounds a lot more economical.  We could have a gentlemen's agreement to never "demand" a landing, with the possible exception of the biannual WC.

At the NATS this past year I'm guessing about 1/3 of the matches would have fallen under this rule.  Pancaking in 3-4 planes will cost at least 3 props, $12-16.  That is the cost of the receiver/servo/battery on one plane.

Tall grass would be good.  Just require the contest management to leave the whole field, except the pitting area and the pilot circle at least 4 in. tall.

I will fially ask, why a land on demand rule?   If it is plane that is unsafe, coming apart, yes smash it into the ground. 

I will fially ask, why a land on demand rule?   If it is plane that is unsafe, coming apart, yes smash it into the ground. 

John, I'll try and give a little background for you.

As you know, the FAI rules are primarily written by and for the Europeans. We are fortunate that we have at least one or two really GOOD Americans on the F2D subcommittee.

In Europe, the population density is much higher than here in the States (well, at least once you get out of the rabbit warrens of the northeast), and they are very sensitive about noise. Where most of the world doesn't have a problem, they do in Europe, and that is the driving force behind a lot of the noise rules we are dealing with at this time. The "shut-off on demand" for F2D and mufflers in F2C are the two current examples.

For F2D, the idea is to cut down on the noise footprint of a contest. As you know, many F2D matches end up with one or two models with nearly full bladders when the time expires. Shutting them down when a match is obviously over is perceived to lower the total noise output at a contest site. Making a match a bit shorter is supposed to make a contest run quicker and hence, lessen the total noise output. (Yes, LOTS of arguments about THAT!)

So, in 2010, the rule was passed to require "shut-off on demand"  with an effective date of 1/1/13, the idea being that an additional two  years would allow technology to develop to satisfy the rule.

My own opinion is that there are a jillion Murphy's Law examples and "unintended consequences" waiting in this rule set. My opinion is ALSO that there are far better ways to cut down on the noise output at a contest, e.g., some ideas that Phil Cartier has put forth in the past year or so. (Phil, let's make sure we get a proposal written in 2013 for your ideas!)

Bottom line: the "shut-off on demand" is strictly a noise issue, as opposed to "fly-away shut-offs" which address a definite safety issue.