Author Topic: New rule proposal for electric - see rules section (Read 11178 times)

Dennis Toth · « **on:** October 06, 2011, 08:59:18 AM »

Guys,
There is a proposal for a new rule for electrics that is up in the rules section of this forum. Brett Buck is making the proposal, it is safety oriented and would require an arming switch other than the timer push button between the battery and ESC and that the model be restrained until the pilot has the control handle and is ready to fly whenever the battery is plugged in for official flights. I made some suggestion that some of the requirements apply to IC powered ships also.

Since Brett does not fly electric (to my knowledge) I think the electric community should look at this carefully and provide input to him. The proposal seems to be reasonable but some questions about how it could affect practice flights and after a ship has landed have been discussed and need work so we don't cause insurance problems. Take a look and give your feed back.

Best, DennisT

WhittleN · « **Reply #1 on:** October 06, 2011, 09:57:22 AM »

Guys I agree with Brett and here is what I posted on the rules section.

"Brett
I have read your proposal and concur completely. I now have about 500 flights using electrics. I have contemplated using the” timer only” as an arming device but only for a few seconds. Common sense overtook me in that thought immediately. I think the word “restrained” would encompass a person or a mechanical device. The word assistant could be changed to "person or restraining device". Once the operator of the aircraft (AKA Pilot) has the safety thong on and the handle in his hand; I would deem that taking control of the airplane and the restrained would no longer be required.

Also a battery should not be connected to an IC engine unless it has a positive means of restrained. I have seen just connecting a battery to an IC motor caused it to start. Unrestrained this can cause equally bad result."

Norm Whittle

Bob Hudak · « **Reply #2 on:** October 07, 2011, 06:53:28 PM »

I can't find the rules section of this forum. Could somebody point me in the right direction?
Bob

WhittleN · « **Reply #3 on:** October 07, 2011, 07:08:02 PM »

Bob
It is a forum on this site (Stunthanger) Called Rules Discussion. I think you need to login to see that one.
Norm

Bob Hudak · « **Reply #4 on:** October 07, 2011, 07:29:03 PM »

Norm,
I'm Logged on but I only have 4 topics under "General control line discussion". Rules sections is missing. I'm going to ask for help on the Main Forum.

Bob

PerttiMe · « **Reply #5 on:** October 08, 2011, 03:19:53 AM »

I think people are not automatically allowed into the Rules section. For some reason, I am.

The good thing is I get to see what people are talking about.
The bad thing is I might be tempted to participate in heated "discussions" on controversial issues

Dennis Toth · « **Reply #6 on:** October 08, 2011, 08:15:06 AM »

Bob,
You may have to email Robert S and have him make sure you have access to the "Rules Discussion" section. To have access you are suppose sign in with you real name which I think you do so should not be a problem. To get to the Rules section it is the one just below the General Forum.

All,
I added some comments to Brett's wording this morning regarding how to handle the end of flight shut down/disarming when a ship is brought back to the pits by someone unfamiliar with electrics or the requirements. I suggested that the pilot or assistant be able to shut it down "as soon as possible" to cover someone just putting the ship down in the pits and walking away. This can happen at a contest when things start moving fast and you can't control who is going to help get you off the circle.

I suggest you guys make your feelings known on this.

Best, DennisT

Dennis Toth · « **Reply #7 on:** October 09, 2011, 11:51:55 AM »

Dave,
I agree and made some suggestions about disarming since at least at local contests and the average flier can't always have a dedicated pit person to help you get off the circle, they might not know how to shut it off and just put the ship down and pick up the next ship going up in the circle leaving the pilot to tend to the shut down of the system.

Guys,

I'm a little supprised that with over 200 people reading this thread seems like only a handful of people have commented good or bad on the proposed rule. If we don't join the discussion we will have people making the rules for electric that don't fly electric (which is what is happening) and we get the problem with the disarming at the end of the flight penalty of a "0" score if the assistant doesn't disarm the system before the pilot releases the handle/safety thong.

If you don't want to be lead around by non electric fliers, then more people reading the "full rule proposal" in Brett's first post, not just the first part about the arming switch and get in on the discussion.

Best, DennisT

Crist Rigotti · « **Reply #8 on:** October 09, 2011, 05:03:16 PM »

Quote from: Dennis Toth on October 09, 2011, 11:51:55 AM

Dave,
I agree and made some suggestions about disarming since at least at local contests and the average flier can't always have a dedicated pit person to help you get off the circle, they might not know how to shut it off and just put the ship down and pick up the next ship going up in the circle leaving the pilot to tend to the shut down of the system.

Guys,

I'm a little supprised that with over 200 people reading this thread seems like only a handful of people have commented good or bad on the proposed rule. If we don't join the discussion we will have people making the rules for electric that don't fly electric (which is what is happening) and we get the problem with the disarming at the end of the flight penalty of a "0" score if the assistant doesn't disarm the system before the pilot releases the handle/safety thong.

If you don't want to be lead around by non electric fliers, then more people reading the "full rule proposal" in Brett's first post, not just the first part about the arming switch and get in on the discussion.

Best, DennisT

Perhaps this is seen by some forum members as a "double post". Why comment in both places?

Dennis Toth · « **Reply #9 on:** October 09, 2011, 08:10:41 PM »

Crist,
This was not meant to have people post here but up in the rules area. I felt that since this rule concerned us electric fliers and sometimes people don't bother with the Rules section, they should know and go check this out and make their thoughts know.

Best, DennisT

Dwayne · « **Reply #10 on:** October 09, 2011, 09:46:48 PM »

The Kim Doherty programmer timer uses a sensor that requires a magnet to arm it, as far as profiles go you could have the contestants not install the battery until they are on the circle with model in the helpers hands.

john e. holliday · « **Reply #11 on:** October 10, 2011, 09:28:20 AM »

If some think of this as a double post I am in trouble as I have asked the question in the carrier section if there are problem with accidental start ups in the event.

Tim Stagg · « **Reply #12 on:** October 10, 2011, 02:13:49 PM »

Guys,

I dont have an issue with safety concerns about electrics accidentally starting, and I think that an assistant should be required for any engine start up, IC or electric. What I do have a beef with is the specific use of an arming switch verses something simpler and lighter. I have been flying electric's exclusively for the last 3 years, and none of my planes have a specific arming switch. They do however have magnetic hatches and or surface batteries where I walk out to the flight line with my assistant, plug the battery in while my assistant is holding the plane, push the arming switch, and walk to the handle while the 30 second delayed start ticks away.

I feel my process is just as safe and much simpler and lighter.

OK for those of you out there that say, "what happens when the airplane crashes, you can not pull the arming switch" this is true, and I can tell you that in the three cases I have witnessed, you do not want to be near the thing when it hits the ground, and I am certainly not going to run over and handle a switch plug that has been shorted out the wires are glowing red hot.....sorry it can sit there and melt, I am not touching it. Secondly, once it shorts out, the system is petty much toast, speed control, motor, battery, and timer and it happens much faster than you can run over and burn your hand pulling a red hot switch.

I am all for safety, and use as much caution as possible, but lets not over regulate an issue by specifying system setup. We could however mandate a process for start up, how you satisfy the process is your choice.

Tim

Tim Wescott · « **Reply #13 on:** October 10, 2011, 03:01:10 PM »

Clearly you did not read the thread. It quickly evolved into requiring any positive disconnect -- and removing the batteries counts.

I suggest you read the thread, and contribute as you see fit, instead of sniping about it in absentia.

Tim Stagg · « **Reply #14 on:** October 10, 2011, 03:15:52 PM »

Your right, I did not read the rules forum before I posted here, and if I had, I would have seen that a break in the battery connection is acceptable.

I was not attacking anyone, just offering some real world experience on the subject.

I apologize for lack of forum etiquette. You might practice a little refrain yourself.

Tim Wescott · « **Reply #15 on:** October 10, 2011, 05:07:00 PM »

Quote from: Tim Stagg on October 10, 2011, 03:15:52 PM

I apologize for lack of forum etiquette. You might practice a little refrain yourself.

Sorry if I'm sounding a bit tart -- it's just that there's one thread in the rules section, which has immediately splattered into three threads elsewhere. People are sharpening their pitchforks and lighting their torches, and they haven't even read the proposal that they're ready to go riot against (or for).

I find that frustrating. Particularly because there's some pretty sensible discussion going on in the pertinent thread, and at any rate right now it's just one guy who doesn't even fly electric who's going to submit a proposal. I mean -- I could propose that you have to wear a pink hat in order to fly, but that doesn't mean that the contest board will pay any attention to it.

Dean Pappas · « **Reply #16 on:** October 10, 2011, 07:53:08 PM »

Ah! You've never been to Tommy Hampshire's "Silly Hat Contest". If you don't bring one, a propellor beenie willbe issued to you!

Now there's a guy who has the right attitude.

take care, Gentle Friends,
the grumpy moderator

Tim Stagg · « **Reply #17 on:** October 11, 2011, 07:21:09 AM »

Tim,

I agree with your frustration with a proposed rule change particularly by someone that does not fly electric's. That is what got my juices flowing.

I normally do not post on such topics just because it is so easy to let the fingers do the walking on a keyboard

Know that we are all doing this for fun and for the good of the sport.

Tim

WhittleN · « **Reply #18 on:** October 11, 2011, 08:30:39 AM »

Tim
It may appear like Brett Buck is an outsider (as far as Electrics are concerned) but he is a leader member of PAMPA - so I don't think he could be perceived as someone just meddling in electric stunt rules. PAMPA members need to step in when we see potentials for problems – I have seen some modelers thinking they have things under control only to cause potentially grave situations. At my RC Flying field I have seen a couple of modelers showing up with bandaged hands and arms – a result of not realizing their electric airplane was armed and starting on the workbench. Luckily, I have not witnessed this in the C/L environment but the potential is certainly there.
Let’s get behind making electric a safe way to enjoy the hobby. We will work the phraseology of the rules out.
Regards
Norm Whittle

Tim Stagg · « **Reply #19 on:** October 11, 2011, 10:10:57 AM »

Norm,

I am with you 100%.

Thanks

Will Hubin · « **Reply #20 on:** October 12, 2011, 07:57:26 AM »

Probably most people, including our rules people, don’t realize that the timer’s job (giving throttle instructions to an ESC) is not a simple thing, electrically speaking. Note that the only connection between the timer and the ESC is through the three wires: ground, signal, and (if the ESC provides a BEC) +5 volts.

The only kind of a throttle instruction that an ESC will accept on the signal wire is one in which the signal voltage is at ground level for 90% or more of the time and, when it is not at ground level, it must be at a logic level of around 5 volts for between 0.001 second (throttle off) and 0.002 (maximum throttle). All the ESCs we use require a “throttle off” signal (pulse) before they will “initialize” and accept positive throttle requests; otherwise the motor simply doesn’t even start to run.

Some of the very first attempts at timers used discrete components (such as the 555 integrated circuit) but I believe all current timers use a microcontroller that is programmed to generate these pulse outputs. The possibility of a damaged microcontroller producing valid throttle signals is almost zero. With around 1400 or more of my timers now in circulation, I know of none that has done this. In addition, I know of none that has failed during a flight—but, if they have, would certainly just stop the motor with an invalid signal voltage.

It is possible to damage a timer’s microcontroller. For example, as has happened, if one connects the three-wires incorrectly (off center), it is possible to switch the ground and the 5-volt wires and this kills any microcontroller (except one specifically protected against this). Another possibility is static electricity. But such a damaged microcontroller is totally incapable of putting out a pulsed output; instead, in my experience, it will put out a steady voltage, usually zero.

The power requirements of a timer’s microcontroller are so small that heating is not a consideration; if it does get hot, it has been killed and will certainly not generate pulses on its output pin.

I have recently inspected three FM-9 timers that couldn’t be programmed and that wouldn’t initialize or run an ESC; they were found to be running the internal flight program correctly except that the output driver on the signal pin had been damaged so that the voltages were too low (well below logic levels). It is unclear how this occurs and to what extent the ESC is responsible. In any case, I now leave the signal pin in an “input” state for a second after the timer is first connected (and then change it to an output and provide the “throttle off” signal) and also change it to an “input” state some fifteen seconds after the motor is stopped, as an extra precautionary measure.

In sum, then, I believe that the possibility of any of my timers (or probably any others) re-starting the motor at the end of a normal flight is very close to zero. Even if the battery is disconnected and then re-connected, the timer will only put out a “throttle off” signal, at most. (I know of at least one instance in which an intermittent battery connection caused the timer to reset in flight and this stopped the motor prematurely, with no other ill effects.) If the plane “lands” somehow before the flight time is up, it is important to be able to use the timer to stop any continued motor run, to protect the ESC and the motor and bystanders, as has been noted for timers now in use, even though a battery disconnect will also do that.

Will

Crist Rigotti · « **Reply #21 on:** October 12, 2011, 08:38:55 AM »

Thank you Will for the detailed information. It sure is welcomed.

Igor Burger · « **Reply #22 on:** October 13, 2011, 03:03:24 AM »

I can only confirm what Will says, I developed and sold many timers (~150), includind those active and also FF timers for slope gliders etc. Malfunction can happen, but it NEVER started motor earlier or something like that. Running BLDC motor is relatively complicated task and malfunction of ESC or timer leads to STOP. I did over 2000 electric flights and nothing like that happened to me and also my friends around.

BUT we have one component which does mistakes often and it is the human running around. So we have errors of type reverse motor run, improperly set delays etc. I even saw early start leading to crash of the model ... and it was on OFFICIAL FLIGHT ON WC!!! and WITH HELPER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ... and it happened after someone told to pilot that it is necessary to “release” model, not just start on the timer. But nothing like arming plug will solve those problems, it could be solved only by safe handling, becuase armed E model is armed weapon. So the solution is minimizing of armed time and SAFE HANDLING. And it is not related to E models, the same goes on with IC as well ... never point model to danger side, do not allow people in disc of prop etc. And I add also do not allow other person manipulate with it. (will you give armed weapon to manipulate to someone else???)

I do not see reason to have such statement in rules, but IF .. then I would say it should be something like the armed model must be all the time attended either by helper on the place or by pilot via lines or so. It is more than enought to prevent results of human mistakes and also potential harware malfunction, dead pilot after heart attack in middle of lines and also satisfy those who afraid of their life (yes here are also other pilots and spectators and we should not make them feel danger)

But I think defining arming plug without knowledge what it really means (it makes complication of long battery leads and thus probably additional capacitors, complication of charging resistors and especially as I see from inputs on this forum it leads to idea to disconnect it during run, what can make risk of another danger situation) is not good idea. Arming plug is good think, but it is not device for use of "anybody uninformed" and I would not recommend it “automatically”, it needs some skill to do it properly.

But I think defining arming plug withou knowledge what it really means (it makes complication of long battery leads and thus probably additional capacitors, compliation of charging resistors and espacially I see it leads to idea to disconnect it during run what can make risk of another danger situation) is not good idea. Armin plug especially combined woth charging connector is good think, but it is not device for use of "anybody uninformed".

Derek Barry · « **Reply #23 on:** October 13, 2011, 09:41:36 AM »

Quote from: Dave Adamisin on October 13, 2011, 07:12:43 AM

Exactly Igor. Education

Then you must have liked this quote from Igor

"becuase armed E model is armed weapon"

Derek Barry · « **Reply #24 on:** October 13, 2011, 11:43:43 AM »

Quote from: Dave Adamisin on October 13, 2011, 10:46:35 AM

He also wrote:
"I can only confirm what Will says, I developed and sold many timers (~150), includind those active and also FF timers for slope gliders etc. Malfunction can happen, but it NEVER started motor earlier or something like that. Running BLDC motor is relatively complicated task and malfunction of ESC or timer leads to STOP. I did over 2000 electric flights and nothing like that happened to me and also my friends around."

I like what i quoted better.

Tim Wescott · « **Reply #25 on:** October 13, 2011, 12:14:34 PM »

Quote from: Igor Burger on October 13, 2011, 03:03:24 AM

I do not see reason to have such statement in rules

This is the statement I'm coming to like. We tell folks all about how to avoid stupid injuries and risk to others with IC motors, without putting them in the rules. So why do we need to single out electric? If there are specific safety rules that pertain to IC, then paralleling them with ones for electric makes sense -- but that's the extent of it.

Igor Burger · « **Reply #26 on:** October 14, 2011, 02:01:57 AM »

Yes Derek, it is ... for 100% ... just like IC engine running CF prop at high rpm, especially running so that judges are in disk area, especially on grass ... I saw several broken CF props on grass in hungary and their flying blades aroud ... and do we have rule about that? ... electric has specific issues and IC has another, we just must be carefull, that is all, simple device defined in rules will not make it better, because problem is not in the harware, problem is in humans, they make mistakes.

Derek Barry · « **Reply #27 on:** October 14, 2011, 05:47:51 AM »

Quote from: Igor Burger on October 14, 2011, 02:01:57 AM

Yes Derek, it is ... for 100% ... just like IC engine running CF prop at high rpm, especially running so that judges are in disk area, especially on grass ... I saw several broken CF props on grass in hungary and their flying blades aroud ... and do we have rule about that? ... electric has specific issues and IC has another, we just must be carefull, that is all, simple device defined in rules will not make it better, because problem is not in the harware, problem is in humans, they make mistakes.

I agree with you 100% the problem is human error. There is a reason that I do not start my plane bare handed. I like my fingers! We all have to practice safety.

John Hammonds · « **Reply #28 on:** October 14, 2011, 09:50:01 AM »

I had decided I was just going to pull up a chair, grab a 6 pack and watch this thread develop, finally something which gets people wound up almost as much as BOM.

It's a lonely life over in England flying Electric control line. Rumours abound about so & so's new electric project but in the 3 years since I re joined the fold (18 months actually competing) I have never flown against another electric model in open competition.

I don't think the proposed rule will improve safety simply because I think (With the possible exception of lone flyers who are unable to "Disarm or restrain the model" prior to retrieval) everything suggested is already practised. I never connect the battery leads until I am about to signal my starting procedure, likewise I always disconnect the battery before leaving the circle. (Why do it any other way)? I don't think it's the intention of the rule which has got peoples attention it's the implied penalty for none adherence.

I do use a helper at competitions but more for effect than anything else. Any helper who is not familiar with ECL can do the most unexpected things without warning so I try to keep instructions as simple as possible but the misinformed bystander, helper or whatever will always find some new way (Usually without warning) to throw a wrench into the works. I show them where the timer shut-down button is and ask them to restrain the model until I get to the handle put on the safety strap and give them a signal to release. They are also prepared to restrain the model again prior to take off should I ask for any reason. The model then sits there until the delay has timed out and the motor starts. I could show them how to disconnect battery leads etc but I think that's better left for me as the leads are usually fairly close to the prop and to me it's akin to asking an unfamiliar person to adjust the needle on an IC engine.

Incidents have included (In no particular order). Helpers becoming bored waiting for the motor to start so deciding to give it a helping hand by pushing the model forwards, once in such a way that it stopped rolling pointing into the circle. Also I have a quite a slow initial spool up and again I have had my model pushed in some misguided thought that it needed some help to start it's take off run. But the most worrying was when someone thought it was a good idea to flick the propeller during the initial delay because it obviously needed it.

As far as the IC fraternity goes I've seen diesels start unexpectedly after a flight when someone decides to flick the prop. There is also one flyer (Well respected, represented his country, been flying control line models for around 50 years) who has a starting procedure where everything is done from infront of the model. RPM checking, needle adjustment, glow driver removal, everything done by reaching around the prop, makes my toes curl just watching it. I'm confident if he ever does have a mishap the PA65 probably will not stop and assuming he does not fall across the model to stop it moving off someone (As well than him) will get seriously hurt.

I probably have far to much faith in Will's timer and CC's ESC's but I think there is more chance of me tripping over a stooge line and inadvertently launching the model or a helper thinking up a new and potentially catastrophic way of interpreting instructions than there is of either of these components malfunctioning in such a way that the motor gets the correct signal to go full throttle while the model is unattended. Does this make me a bad person?? An experienced helper is worth their weight in gold but (At least in "Merry England") just grabbing the nearest competitor and asking them to give me a hand is not fair on anyone.

So, I applaud any guidelines or even rules if that's what you want them to be called which improve safety but do have a concern that people who do not appreciate the risks may be placed directly in the line of fire at the same time.

TTFN
John.

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #29 on:** October 14, 2011, 11:36:24 PM »

Quote from: John Hammonds on October 14, 2011, 09:50:01 AM

I had decided I was just going to pull up a chair, grab a 6 pack and watch this thread develop, finally something which gets people wound up almost as much as BOM.

TTFN
John.

..and you my friend are a much wiser man than I. Sadly I wandered in. The only thing missing from that thread is a hidden gunman on the grassy knoll...

Douglas Ames · « **Reply #30 on:** October 15, 2011, 06:31:11 AM »

Quote from: WhittleN on October 11, 2011, 08:30:39 AM

Tim
It may appear like Brett Buck is an outsider (as far as Electrics are concerned) but he is a leader member of PAMPA - so I don't think he could be perceived as someone just meddling in electric stunt rules. PAMPA members need to step in when we see potentials for problems – I have seen some modelers thinking they have things under control only to cause potentially grave situations. At my RC Flying field I have seen a couple of modelers showing up with bandaged hands and arms – a result of not realizing their electric airplane was armed and starting on the workbench. Luckily, I have not witnessed this in the C/L environment but the potential is certainly there.
Let’s get behind making electric a safe way to enjoy the hobby. We will work the phraseology of the rules out.
Regards
Norm Whittle

This subject applies to ~ALL~ Electric powered Control Line Models. Stunt, Carrier, Speed, Racing, Scale and yes, even us lowly pee-on Sport Flyers. I perceived Brett's original post as being all about SAFETY, nothing more.
MANY of us will be converting to electron power in the future.
I just spent my 2c. Let's all move on and see what develops with the rules proposal.

John Hammonds · « **Reply #31 on:** October 15, 2011, 06:36:47 AM »

Here we go, 2nd post, (I just can't help myself).

I just read peabody's post in the rules section (I do have access, but being from across the pond don't really feel justified in getting involved in "That" thread directly).

I am willing to bet that the incident mentioned involved a brushed motor which basically just requires power to run. (2 power leads, no phases to regulate). That's not to diminish the comments he made but I think we have moved on somewhat and the distinction between what was used 10 years ago and what we use today needs to be recognised..

TTFN
John.

Dennis Toth · « **Reply #32 on:** October 16, 2011, 08:46:16 AM »

Guys,
I think we all want to fly safely, the idea of the arm plug/switch/procedure once the battery is connected in the pits or going out to the circle is not the question only the disarming were you can't always get someone that knows your ship/setup to disarm once the ship is returned to the pits is the area that needs work. Some wording that allows the pilot to put down the handle then walk to the ship and disarm will work.

I personally have used a heavy duty toggle switch (40 amp rated) in the positive battery lead to arm my ships for over 2 yrs with no problem. In my profile it is easy to see, in my Stuka I put it inside the cowl (the Stuka cowl is open in the back and sticks below the fuse so has open access) which makes it a little more difficult for those unfamiliar with the ship to flip it to off. The switch weights about 1/2 oz which is fine for me, but for some a 1/2 oz is a lot of extra weight and they do a lot of work to get that weight out of the ship.

What we need is for some timer or ESC manufacture to develop a light weight positive arm devise separate from the start switch and offer it as part of their system.

Best, DennisT

Peter Nevai · « **Reply #33 on:** October 19, 2011, 09:35:51 AM »

Here is my take.

For electrical / electrical designs you have two modes of failure.

It wont turn on or it wont turn off. Unlike a IC engine which typically needs 3 things to activate it (Fuel, Power to the Glo Plug and rotation of the prop) the electric needs only one (Power to the motor)

Seeing how so many people attach electronics (which are static sensitive by the way) unsheilded or unprotected to the sides of profile models is courting trouble. Shorts in electronics are a common a open circuits and either can cause the MOSFET to activate and send battery juice to the motor. Microprocessor controlled circuits that operate typically at +-5vdc are sensitve to all sorts of noise. There are a host of issues that can effect the reliable operation of electronics from poor or vibration weakened solder joints to the degrading of the electrolytic capacitors due to a number of factors.

Any failure mode in a IC engine design prevents the engine from running. In electric a failure mode can actually cause the motor to start running.

My 2 cents.

Dennis Toth · « **Reply #34 on:** October 19, 2011, 09:29:33 PM »

Peter,
I don't think there is any one arguing that these things can't happen and that's why most fliers will either not plug in the battery until on the flight line or have an arming switch/plug and have someone hold the ship until the pilot is ready and able to control it from the handle. The issue is once the motor shuts down the risk that it will restart in the time it takes the pilot to put down the handle and walk to the airplane (10 sec for us slow guys) and disarm is very remote and there have not been any casts of current day system doing this. Assessing a "0" score for not disarming by the assistant who helps get you off the circle and who may or may not know your ship (i.e. where the arm plug or switch) or is not comfortable with touching someones electronics is an unfair penalty against electrics. Giving reasonable time for the pilot to do this is fair and if it is not done the first time a warning is issued the second time you get the "0" score could work.

Best, DennisT

Derek Barry · « **Reply #35 on:** October 20, 2011, 10:40:11 AM »

You could just have the guy helping you take the handle and you go disarm your own plane; or is that way to simple? There are already IC guys who prefer to get their own plane instead of having someone else grab it.

Derek

John Rist · « **Reply #36 on:** October 20, 2011, 12:10:19 PM »

By the way pre-built arming plugs are starting to show up in the market place.

http://www.sharprc.com

Dennis Toth · « **Reply #37 on:** October 20, 2011, 04:25:58 PM »

Derek,
Yes, if things are going smoothly that works, so does having a pit person who knows your ship that stays with you for the whole flight and for the most part that is the way you would do it, no question. However, you know how things can get at King Orange for example, they want to move through the flight order very quickly to beat the wind and you get who you get that picks the ship up and puts it in the pits and sometimes they just put it down and grab the next ship going up and don't wait for you to get there. That's the whole point, you can't always control that part no matter what your intentions or the rules. Hence the suggestion that the pilot be given reasonable time to put down the handle and walk to the ship and disarm.

Best, DennisT

Derek Barry · « **Reply #38 on:** October 21, 2011, 04:40:32 AM »

Quote from: Dennis Toth on October 20, 2011, 04:25:58 PM

Derek,
Yes, if things are going smoothly that works, so does having a pit person who knows your ship that stays with you for the whole flight and for the most part that is the way you would do it, no question. However, you know how things can get at King Orange for example, they want to move through the flight order very quickly to beat the wind and you get who you get that picks the ship up and puts it in the pits and sometimes they just put it down and grab the next ship going up and don't wait for you to get there. That's the whole point, you can't always control that part no matter what your intentions or the rules. Hence the suggestion that the pilot be given reasonable time to put down the handle and walk to the ship and disarm.

Best, DennisT

Makes sense. Yes I am very aware of how things can get at contests when the rush is on. (not Howard) I don't think it is quite as big of a deal as some people are making it but you do have some valid points. I could go along with something like the pilot being allotted a small amount of time to safe his plane, however, I am not sure how that will look once written. I guess that is Brett's problem.

Derek

Alan Resinger · « **Reply #39 on:** October 21, 2011, 07:38:04 AM »

As electrics become more popular I believe that we'll find that just about all the competitive flyers will know to pull the arming switch when they go retrieve anothers plane. I know that when they just started showing up at contests in the NW it took me just a couple of contests to look for the arming switch or plug when I went to retrieve an electric after a flight. I like the rules proposal idea that Brett has put forth.
Alan Resinger

Mike Haverly · « **Reply #40 on:** October 21, 2011, 01:30:52 PM »

The simple solution is to instruct the person retrieving the model. I'm sure that mine is one of the models that Alan has retrieved. A simple shout to the person to "pull the plug!" doesn't hurt either. I think a rule would be a good idea, including the zero score. Preparation is everything, that's just part of it, IMO.

Mike

Dennis Toth · « **Reply #41 on:** October 21, 2011, 08:33:21 PM »

Alan & Mike,
There is no argument about having the person who retrieves the ship disarm it, if they will. There are those occasions were your regular pit crew person isn't there for your flight and you get whoever is around to get you off the circle. In other cases some people don't feel comfortable touching systems they are not familiar with. That is were the suggestion is to modify the language to allow the pilot to put down the handle and walk to the ship and disarm it if the helper didn't or won't or just put the ship down and walks away without a "0" flight score penalty. No problem with the arming and holding at the start just the disarming at the end part.

Best, DennisT

Crist Rigotti · « **Reply #42 on:** October 21, 2011, 09:21:24 PM »

It should be allowed that the helper holds the plane and the pilot is allowed to put down the handle and then disarm the plane. The key to this whole thing is that the plane is always restrained (held) when their is nobody at the handle.

Tim Wescott · « **Reply #43 on:** October 21, 2011, 09:53:37 PM »

Quote from: Crist Rigotti on October 21, 2011, 09:21:24 PM

It should be allowed that the helper holds the plane and the pilot is allowed to put down the handle and then disarm the plane. The key to this whole thing is that the plane is always restrained (held) when their is nobody at the handle.

If you read the actual thread pertaining to the proposed rule, that is, indeed allowed. Unless things have really spun off into left field since the last time I looked the only requirement was that the plane be "restrained". Brett didn't start out with that wording, but as soon as the problem was pointed out to him, he changed it.

Crist Rigotti · « **Reply #44 on:** October 21, 2011, 10:16:47 PM »

Quote from: Tim Wescott on October 21, 2011, 09:53:37 PM

If you read the actual thread pertaining to the proposed rule, that is, indeed allowed. Unless things have really spun off into left field since the last time I looked the only requirement was that the plane be "restrained". Brett didn't start out with that wording, but as soon as the problem was pointed out to him, he changed it.

My response was to Dennis's post. I have read the other thread.

Robert-Jan · « **Reply #45 on:** October 22, 2011, 03:55:44 PM »

Question,
Do the RC guys also have such a provision?

I totally Agree with Will.
I also make my own timers
http://www.lijnbesturing.nl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=63&Itemid=93&limit=1&limitstart=1
The motor will never start suddenly because of a failure.
It can happen because of an operating failure.
But it is very very very unlikely the motor will restart after a landing.

I fly electric for 3 years and have no sudden starting issues.
I don't use a stooge or a helper (mostly I fly alone).

Does anyone now of any safety issues?
If there are now issues lets not find solutions for problems that do not exist.
You don't were a helmet in your bed because the ceiling can come down.

BTW in the past once my IC engine started without a battery just by flipping over.

Greetings Robert-Jan

Frank Imbriaco · « **Reply #46 on:** October 22, 2011, 07:30:49 PM »

Quote from: Robert-Jan on October 22, 2011, 03:55:44 PM

Question,
Do the RC guys also have such a provision?

I totally Agree with Will.
I also make my own timers
http://www.lijnbesturing.nl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=63&Itemid=93&limit=1&limitstart=1
The motor will never start suddenly because of a failure.
It can happen because of an operating failure.
But it is very very very unlikely the motor will restart after a landing.

I fly electric for 3 years and have no sudden starting issues.
I don't use a stooge or a helper (mostly I fly alone).

Does anyone now of any safety issues?
If there are now issues lets not find solutions for problems that do not exist.
You don't were a helmet in your bed because the ceiling can come down.

BTW in the past once my IC engine started without a battery just by flipping over.

Greetings Robert-Jan
That question can best be addressed by Dean. I don't know of one. I can tell you this much.If a pilot shuts off his/her transmitter before the receiver battery, there is a chance that the electric motor can go WOT and then all hell breaks loose. A R/C flying buddy did just that with his brand new e-powered Integral(2 meter FAI Pattern bird), it accelerated, headed right for my van, buried itself under my Class 3 hitch and exhaust and disintegrated ! Pilot and set-up error for sure.
Having a Hubin timer, remaining at the handle of tethered flight, and having a pit helper disconnect my arming plug before I set the handle down gives me the comfort that same event won't happen with e-U/C.

Dennis Toth · « **Reply #47 on:** October 24, 2011, 12:57:34 PM »

Crist,
I agree that at the end of the flight the pilot should make every effort to have the helper stay with the ship until either he disarms it or the pilot disarms it. However, sometimes at local contests things get moving very fast and you can't always get someone who you know to help take the ship off the circle. In this case they sometimes just put the ship in the pits and walk away no matter what you yell to them (I have had this happen) and to penalize with a "0" score is the problem when the helper just walks away. The suggestion is to have the wording allow the pilot to put down the handle and walk to the ship and disarm if the helper has left.

Best, DennisT

Peter Nevai · « **Reply #48 on:** October 27, 2011, 01:36:47 PM »

Quote from: Robert-Jan on October 22, 2011, 03:55:44 PM

Question,
Do the RC guys also have such a provision?

I totally Agree with Will.
I also make my own timers
http://www.lijnbesturing.nl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=63&Itemid=93&limit=1&limitstart=1
The motor will never start suddenly because of a failure.
It can happen because of an operating failure.
But it is very very very unlikely the motor will restart after a landing.

I fly electric for 3 years and have no sudden starting issues.
I don't use a stooge or a helper (mostly I fly alone).

Does anyone now of any safety issues?
If there are now issues lets not find solutions for problems that do not exist.
You don't were a helmet in your bed because the ceiling can come down.

BTW in the past once my IC engine started without a battery just by flipping over.

Greetings Robert-Jan

RC fields (nice ones at least) usually have a fence that seperates the pilots from the runway. Once they get clearance to taxi to the runway they are seperated from the aircraft and the impact of failures and the like are reduced.

Electronics and low voltage electronics are subject to transients. transients can be generated by large number of events. It is almost impossible to address all of them in ideal conditions let alone in the wilds. There are just too many variables to consider. While control line applications eliminate the majority of electromagnetic induced transients, it is not unusual for low voltage electronic devices to glitch. Just the dew on the grass early in the morning can easily cause it, or a bit of conductive falling onto a sensitive section of unprotected printed circuit.

The bottom line is that so long as there is electric current available to run the motor, the system should be considered HOT and safe course is for the plane to be restrained. In lieu of that at the very least the electronics should be enclosed in a dust and water resistant enclosure, preferably sheilded from vibration as well. At the very least the pilot should never relinquish control of the model until it can be placed into a safe condition. A tough nugget if you fly alone and your model is still hot after landing. But those of us flying alone are facing far more safety issues than just a potential model runaway.

PJ Rowland · « **Reply #49 on:** October 28, 2011, 05:57:37 PM »

"I fly electric for 3 years and have no sudden starting issues"

Unfortunatly you cannot 100% Guarentee that it will not re-fire. It also only takes 1 Incident, at most major contests I see lots of kids - helpers, runners and what not - it only takes 1 accident to imbed a plane into a childs head and the sport will be changed forever.

Take a look at what happened to Bob hunts model at the Nats with the Dust Devil, freak events be Natural or not can occur when we least expect it - lifted the model up and slammed it down.

Things get moving so fast at local contests? I have never seen a contest run so fast that once the guy Lands - he doesnt have enough time to walk to the model and pull out the arming pin.

Even at the Nats there was sufficient time to allow the 15 seconds required to do this - anyone who tries to tell me they dont have 15 seconds is full of it.

Thats like saying " sorry officer I didnt have time to stop at that Red light "

Make time for safety.

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #50 on:** October 28, 2011, 10:17:12 PM »

Quote from: PJ Rowland on October 28, 2011, 05:57:37 PM

"I fly electric for 3 years and have no sudden starting issues"

Unfortunatly you cannot 100% Guarentee that it will not re-fire. It also only takes 1 Incident, at most major contests I see lots of kids - helpers, runners and what not - it only takes 1 accident to imbed a plane into a childs head and the sport will be changed forever.

Take a look at what happened to Bob hunts model at the Nats with the Dust Devil, freak events be Natural or not can occur when we least expect it - lifted the model up and slammed it down.

Things get moving so fast at local contests? I have never seen a contest run so fast that once the guy Lands - he doesnt have enough time to walk to the model and pull out the arming pin.

Even at the Nats there was sufficient time to allow the 15 seconds required to do this - anyone who tries to tell me they dont have 15 seconds is full of it.

Thats like saying " sorry officer I didnt have time to stop at that Red light "

Make time for safety.

IC guys: pay attention. The electric guys who have checked in on the issue have stated that they are ALREADY do what the rule proposes. Please do not presume to lecture me on what I am already doing, and will continue to do with or without a "rule".

As for the hysteria based presumptions that electrics are out to run amok, please get a grip...

PJ Rowland · « **Reply #51 on:** October 29, 2011, 05:58:46 AM »

" As for the hysteria based presumptions that electrics are out to run amok, please get a grip..."

Maybe that can be the new safety slogan " Get a Grip........ of your arming pin "

Dennis Adamisin · « **Reply #52 on:** October 29, 2011, 06:51:01 AM »

Larry Wong · « **Reply #53 on:** October 29, 2011, 03:51:46 PM »

John Cralley · « **Reply #54 on:** October 29, 2011, 04:14:29 PM »

My Drill Sergeant taught me that after you pull the pin and give it a toss you have 6 seconds!!! So much for hand launching!!

Author Topic: New rule proposal for electric - see rules section (Read 11178 times)

Dwayne