stunthanger.com
General control line discussion => Open Forum => Topic started by: steven yampolsky on August 02, 2010, 08:47:58 PM
-
I'll start the difficult topic: US team didn't do as well as in the years past. Is it just a transitional "change of the guard" situation? Is it something that WC judges emphasized this time that wasn't there before? Could competitors from other countries offer an opinion of what they saw? I thought FAI recently made rule changes that made FAI's scoring closer to AMA's. Shouldn't that have made the playing field more even for US team members? I could have sworn, in the past WC, the US team usually bunched up near the top. Are there lessons to be learned?
-
I'm just going to wait for one of the team members to get home and tell us exactly what went on there. David usually gives a full account.
-
Steve, I think you need look no further than team management. You can't have lackadaisical discipline in F2B. We had roll call at dawn, followed by calisthenics, all-day rigorous stunt drill, a strict curfew, and NO alcohol. Lopez and I cracked the whip, and we brought home champions.
-
Steve,
Why is it that you imply the US should always in the World Championships?
Aren't they other nations on this here planet (Earth) that can produce a winning stunt team?
Actually, the concept of a "stunt team" is a stretch, since they compete as individuals and just add up the results.
Perhaps if the flyers in the USA were to have more than one F2B contest (the team trials) every two years, you might have grounds to expect more success.
I looks to me like the American flyers (who can't really be called "national team" because they build, practice and compete as individuals) did pretty good.
-
Could competitors from other countries offer an opinion of what they saw?
Yes, we know how to beat us ;D
-
I agree with Paul...
The USA should decide if they want to compete on/in the World arena....
Fly F-2-B.....with reliable laptops and computer programs, tabulation is as easy as AMA stunt....
-
Steve, I think you need look no further than team management. You can't have lackadaisical discipline in F2B. We had roll call at dawn, followed by calisthenics, all-day rigorous stunt drill, a strict curfew, and NO alcohol. Lopez and I cracked the whip, and we brought home champions.
Howard, I didn't see any smiley faces associated with your post so I must assume you were serious. If so, your full of ...
Bill
-
If anybody took time to read the Stiletto Chronicals by our own Les McDonald will know why we got beat. We have told them how to fly the pattern to empress the judges and also how to build planes that are impressive also. These are my words, not Les'. And when you have the best in the world telling you how to improve, you know the rest. Anyway, I think the time difference, location and facilities have a lot to do with it.
-
Howard, I didn't see any smiley faces associated with your post so I must assume you were serious. If so, your full of ...
Bill
Oh, Bill, Howard is the new Bob Newhart. He has mastered the deadpan delivery, even on the internet.
Brett
-
I agree with Paul...
The USA should decide if they want to compete on/in the World arena....
Fly F-2-B.....with reliable laptops and computer programs, tabulation is as easy as AMA stunt....
I wondered how long it would take for the "helpful suggestions" to start pouring in.
So, Mr. Peabody, you believe that somehow people weren't trying to win and/or were not trying to maximize their performance? Please, with your vast knowledge of international competition, give us some of your sage insights on how us poor parochial types might do better.
Brett
-
Brett, my apologies for putting you on the spot here but you are closer to this than most of us. What is your take on this WC from US side?
-
Wow......... there are SO MANY factors that go into competing at the World Level, that I can't give any opinion. I am sad that the guys didn't really finish higher (I am an American and know all the guys) but I can see that it isn't as easy as flying at the local meet. To win is everyone's goal, of course, or why go to the trouble of trying to make the team and going abroad to fly?
The *pattern* is the same so individual styles must play a role. Just like it is here at our NATS and across the USA.. It isn't wrong, it is just CLPA.
Next time!
Bill
-
Howard, I didn't see any smiley faces associated with your post so I must assume you were serious. If so, your full of ...
Bill
Did Mark Twain use smiley faces?
-
I agree with Paul...
The USA should decide if they want to compete on/in the World arena....
Fly F-2-B.....with reliable laptops and computer programs, tabulation is as easy as AMA stunt....
And we have the computer programs.
Flying F2B is pretty much identical to flying AMA. You can leave in the extra lap after the hourglass and not be penalized. You just have to have your engine quit after you do all the tricks and in time to land before seven minutes expires. You could even have the computer program for every contest spit out an AMA score and an FAI score. Then the contestants could gauge how they are doing at F2B without any extra flying.
One could argue that AMA airplanes carry a few extra ounces of paint, but that may not hurt, and our best homemade airplanes are as good as the professionally built models that well-heeled Europeans fly. I don't think that flying or equipment differ enough to matter. Looking at the reports I've seen so far, weather variations at Gyula seem to have been the big factor.
One could make the case that our team trials should more accurately reproduce conditions we expect to find at the World Champs. To simulate Landres, for example, we could hold the team trials somewhere in downtown Chicago surrounded by tall buildings. We could require all entrants to fly airplanes that disassemble to fit into small boxes. We could simulate the conditions of the upcoming WC at the Bulgarian resort by getting a bevy of topless Euro-units to distract the contestants.
-
Brett, my apologies for putting you on the spot here but you are closer to this than most of us. What is your take on this WC from US side?
Not that much closer as far as this particular WC goes. I have *some* inside information but I will let the participants comment. That's where it starts, but I don't think the answer will be a lot different from before.
It's not like anyone is not trying.
Brett
-
If the US team has won or placed high alot, then the odds would keep increasing towards a less favorable outcome. In two years the cycle should reverse, unless this year wasn't the bottom. Somebody call Vegas, I'm sure they can figure the odds.
Steve
-
It's not like anyone is not trying.
No doubt. Still wondering though...
-
Downtown Chicago eh, At least I know of at least one free place 2 stay LL~
-
It is amazing how fast some are to judge. The USA teams have dominated many years, and have lost in others. We cannot expect to dominate every time. I have said it before. We were represented by a very good team.
Two years ago, we were sitting on top, and David rightfully was temporarily on the pedestal. David’s airplane was touted as one of the best designs ever.
Two years ago the team members all gave an account of their World Championships experience in Stunt News. I am looking forward to our current team members' reports.
“The USA should decide if they want to compete on/in the World arena....Fly F-2-B”
“Perhaps if the flyers in the USA were to have more than one F2B contest (the team trials) every two years, you might have grounds to expect more success.”
How absurd are these statements? As Howard said, there is almost no difference in the patterns anymore, except that if you want to pay $2000 or $3000 to have someone build your airplane it is OK. Yes, our “home built” airplanes are very good, well developed, and very competitive. They are as good as any stunters in the world.
We have been and will be very successful.
“Actually, the concept of a "stunt team" is a stretch, since they compete as individuals and just add up the results.”
Actually, with the exception of sports like Soccer, Baseball, Softball, all Olympic sports are individual sports. But the individuals in Figure Skating, Diving, Swimming, Gymnastics, etc., all represent their countries as a team.
In our case our F2B team members spend some days practicing together and helping each other, then rooting for each other. The account of the help to Ryan is a great example. This support of fellow team members has happened before, and will happen again.
Very few of us have ever tried to compete at this level. The self sacrifice required is unimaginable. Just ask Les. Bill was thrown into the mix at the eleventh hour, and I am sure that he will never regret the experience. We have all flown in local contests with variable temperatures, humidity, turbulence, winds and judges. Yet we seem to forget that our team also experiences these variables, and all of these people are probably better at handling the changes than most of us.
At this level of competition one or two maneuvers affected by the variables is the difference.
I congratulate the USA team members and am very proud of them and their exhibition of good sportsmanship.
-
Amazing how Monday morning quarterbacking is common to every sport. S?P
Phil
-
I would definitely not do any arm chair quarterbacking or phoney analysis.
I do think from some comments made by team members that Brett is right that the weather played a big part in the process.
Certainly there are some excellent stunt fliers in Europe, and the Chinese always make a great effort.
I will repeat one brief comment made by David in answer to an enquirery I made on the other Forum.
He said that he flew his fourth flight in severe wind and rain and under the circumstances found that his airplane handled the conditions very well.
He also said that a lot of the top finishing guys flew earlier in the day in much better conditions.
Mind you that's not intended to take anything away from the winners. As in any competition luck of the draw is always a factor.
Ya Win's Some and ya lose's some.
I'm sure David and others will give a good description of the trials and tribulations.
Most importantly, remember that all these guys are Champions and we couldn't hope to be represented by a better bunch, both in terms of skill and also as Ambassadors of the USA.
-
My take on this. These guys are competing at the highest level of competition and everything has to be in line. All the planets so to speak.Time of day, Humidity,temp and wind. Not only does it take great skill but its a little luck too. Could draw a bad time to fly as the wind blows. You just don't know. I am sure everyone was giving it their best. 1st place or last they were there. Top of the heap. Cant slight anyone for that.
-
No doubt. Still wondering though...
I have to ask WHY, I don't fly any where near that level, neither do you, why are you still wondering, nothing better to do ?
Walter ???
-
I would definitely not do any arm chair quarterbacking or phoney analysis.
I do think from some comments made by team members that Brett is right that the weather played a big part in the process.
I don't think I said anything about that, but yes, I think that was a factor. But there were some pretty amazing things going on at the contest - I was incredulous. Ever hear of a mid-air at a stunt contest? Now you have!
Brett
-
To simulate Landres, for example, we could hold the team trials somewhere in downtown Chicago surrounded by tall buildings.
We could require all entrants to fly airplanes that disassemble to fit into small boxes.
We could simulate the conditions of the upcoming WC at the Bulgarian resort by getting a bevy of topless Euro-units to distract the contestants.
LL~
I very strongly feel we should do the last one. Yes thats it-the last one is what I,(sorry) what WE need.
-
The best of us are getting old. The young. They don't listen. n1
-
I don't think I said anything about that, but yes, I think that was a factor. But there were some pretty amazing things going on at the contest - I was incredulous. Ever hear of a mid-air at a stunt contest? Now you have!
I remember at 2004 WC, Australian combat Junior had his lines cut during a match. His combat model made a nice divot right behind where the judges stood on the L-pad. I have some pictures lying around that I took. Was there something similar at this WC?
-
I remember at 2004 WC, Australian combat Junior had his lines cut during a match. His combat model made a nice divot right behind where the judges stood on the L-pad. I have some pictures lying around that I took. Was there something similar at this WC?
I was there for the flyaway in 2004, saw it almost all the way from release to impact -right in the ditch between the circle and the hill all the spectators were standing on 1/2 hour before. I was walking back from the farmhouse on the road, framed it perfectly.
But no, this was not a flyaway. I'll let the witnesses tell the story.
Brett
-
I'll start the difficult topic: US team didn't do as well as in the years past. Is it just a transitional "change of the guard" situation? Is it something that WC judges emphasized this time that wasn't there before? Could competitors from other countries offer an opinion of what they saw? I thought FAI recently made rule changes that made FAI's scoring closer to AMA's. Shouldn't that have made the playing field more even for US team members? I could have sworn, in the past WC, the US team usually bunched up near the top. Are there lessons to be learned?
To this and several other comments that have been made on this thread, I will respond.
Our team came in fourth. Compared to the USA record during the past 20 years, that is not so bad. Also, given that we had three Americans in the top 15 is not a bad showing in any manner whatsoever. In fact, if those three placings could have been used for the calculation for team placing, guess where the USA would have finished -- First. So, David's score could not be used. Given the level of performance that has risen around the world, the fourth place finish of the USA team is not something to be ashamed of as some seem to be suggesting by needing to figure out what is wrong with our team or the process by which we pick our team. Back in the 70's and 80's, the US fliers were better. I saw it first hand by attending several World Championships during that period and since. But the rest of the world has improved. They have the equipment. They have the training, coaching and experience. The Chinese first attended the World Championships in 1982. They were well coached and well prepared then and they only got better. Other teams have improved as evidenced by the French, the Japanese, the team from the Ukraine, the Czechs and other individuals have shown more than casual competence when competing at that level. That the USA team is and has almost always been in contention, even this year, is an impressive record that is not matched by any other team in international model airplane competition since the World Championships took on the basic format used today starting in 1960.
And there should not be any hint that the performance of Ryan Young, the new reigning Junior Champion, was anything less that spectacular.
To those that suggest that we need to run more F2B contests here in the States, I will respond that there are no reasons to do so or not to do so. In fact, for those who want to eliminate the BOM rule, the F2B rules should be quite attractive. However, it would be interesting to hear the justification for holding F2B contests here for whatever reasons could be put fourth that would somehow make our teams more competitive or better prepared. The patterns are essentially identical. The differences in the patterns is practically nil and hardly make any difference on how the maneuvers are judged. There are a few slight variations:
a. The specification of the vertical or near vertical legs of the square maneuvers are different (and I will not comment on how some FAI judges score these maneuvers).
b. The FAI landing is different in that a full lap is required from the start of descent at 1.5 meters to touch down. The AMA pattern does not require such a thing.
c. Only 1 1/2 laps are required prior to the overhead eights instead of the 2 1/2 laps required by the AMA rules.
d. The FAI time limit is 7 minutes from the signal to start compared to the AMA limit of 8 minutes.
e. There are some minor differences in the times allotted to enter the circle and for the time to signal to start, but these are not anything beyond the capability of anyone who has some knowledge of the rules, knows how to carry his model to the circle, and knows how to get ready to start his engine/motor.
So, what is it in the FAI rules that make them so different that causes hardships for our team members because we do not hold F2B contests here in the States? I have yet to hear an explanation for that.
Yes, the scoring system is different. Our AMA scoring is based (except for the landing) on a 10 to 40 point range with full point increments. The FAI scoring has a K factor for each maneuver and uses 0 to 10 point scoring in 0.1 point increments. I do not know if it has ever been done, but it would be interesting to have two sets of judges at a contest, or even during a judging clinic where one set of judges uses AMA scoring and the other uses FAI scoring. I would be willing to wager that the better flights will still get scored as being better with both systems. The variances in the abilities/skills of individual judges will have more effect on pilot placings than will the effect of different scoring systems.
Many factors can govern the outcome of any contest, and particularly at the World Championships level. Luck of the draw coupled with field conditions (including long grass and less than smooth and/or level surfaces), changing weather conditions all enter into the equation. Then, there is a problem that some judges do not really know the rules and record scores that show they do not know certain aspects of the rules. I have seen this first hand and it is very frustrating not being able to have such situations corrected given some of the political aspects that must be considered before filing any sort of protest.
And what some people fail to realize is the tremendous commitment by any team member to participate as a team member. The process is expensive. The AMA provides only a small fraction of the individual expenses to be on a team. Transportation is difficult. Getting models, equipment and fuel on site takes a major effort. Living conditions are not always to a standard that we would like be be accustomed. Local transportation requires a lot of sacrifices by each team member to accommodate the rest of the team. Practice sites, when they exist are sometimes marginal at best and time for practice is often limited and must be shared with the other team members. Yes, other teams cope as well, but nontheless, there are factors that require considerable effort and sacrifice in order to compete successfully at that level.
In short, I think our entire team did a terrific job this year and should get nothing short of our praise for their efforts.
-
To this and several other comments that have been made on this thread, I will respond.
Our team came in fourth. Compared to the USA record during the past 20 years, that is not so bad. Also, given that we had three Americans in the top 15 is not a bad showing in any manner whatsoever. In fact, if those three placings could have been used for the calculation for team placing, guess where the USA would have finished -- First. So, David's score could not be used. Given the level of performance that has risen around the world, the fourth place finish of the USA team is not something to be ashamed of as some seem to be suggesting by needing to figure out what is wrong with our team or the process by which we pick our team. Back in the 70's and 80's, the US fliers were better. I saw it first hand by attending several World Championships during that period and since. But the rest of the world has improved. They have the equipment. They have the training, coaching and experience. The Chinese first attended the World Championships in 1982. They were well coached and well prepared then and they only got better. Other teams have improved as evidenced by the French, the Japanese, the team from the Ukraine, the Czechs and other individuals have shown more than casual competence when competing at that level. That the USA team is and has almost always been in contention, even this year, is an impressive record that is not matched by any other team in international model airplane competition since the World Championships took on the basic format used today starting in 1960.
And there should not be any hint that the performance of Ryan Young, the new reigning Junior Champion, was anything less that spectacular.
To those that suggest that we need to run more F2B contests here in the States, I will respond that there are no reasons to do so or not to do so. In fact, for those who want to eliminate the BOM rule, the F2B rules should be quite attractive. However, it would be interesting to hear the justification for holding F2B contests here for whatever reasons could be put fourth that would somehow make our teams more competitive or better prepared. The patterns are essentially identical. The differences in the patterns is practically nil and hardly make any difference on how the maneuvers are judged. There are a few slight variations:
a. The specification of the vertical or near vertical legs of the square maneuvers are different (and I will not comment on how some FAI judges score these maneuvers).
b. The FAI landing is different in that a full lap is required from the start of descent at 1.5 meters to touch down. The AMA pattern does not require such a thing.
c. Only 1 1/2 laps are required prior to the overhead eights instead of the 2 1/2 laps required by the AMA rules.
d. The FAI time limit is 7 minutes from the signal to start compared to the AMA limit of 8 minutes.
e. There are some minor differences in the times allotted to enter the circle and for the time to signal to start, but these are not anything beyond the capability of anyone who has some knowledge of the rules, knows how to carry his model to the circle, and knows how to get ready to start his engine/motor.
So, what is it in the FAI rules that make them so different that causes hardships for our team members because we do not hold F2B contests here in the States? I have yet to hear an explanation for that.
Yes, the scoring system is different. Our AMA scoring is based (except for the landing) on a 10 to 40 point range with full point increments. The FAI scoring has a K factor for each maneuver and uses 0 to 10 point scoring in 0.1 point increments. I do not know if it has ever been done, but it would be interesting to have two sets of judges at a contest, or even during a judging clinic where one set of judges uses AMA scoring and the other uses FAI scoring. I would be willing to wager that the better flights will still get scored as being better with both systems. The variances in the abilities/skills of individual judges will have more effect on pilot placings than will the effect of different scoring systems.
Many factors can govern the outcome of any contest, and particularly at the World Championships level. Luck of the draw coupled with field conditions (including long grass and less than smooth and/or level surfaces), changing weather conditions all enter into the equation. Then, there is a problem that some judges do not really know the rules and record scores that show they do not know certain aspects of the rules. I have seen this first hand and it is very frustrating not being able to have such situations corrected given some of the political aspects that must be considered before filing any sort of protest.
And what some people fail to realize is the tremendous commitment by any team member to participate as a team member. The process is expensive. The AMA provides only a small fraction of the individual expenses to be on a team. Transportation is difficult. Getting models, equipment and fuel on site takes a major effort. Living conditions are not always to a standard that we would like be be accustomed. Local transportation requires a lot of sacrifices by each team member to accommodate the rest of the team. Practice sites, when they exist are sometimes marginal at best and time for practice is often limited and must be shared with the other team members. Yes, other teams cope as well, but nontheless, there are factors that require considerable effort and sacrifice in order to compete successfully at that level.
In short, I think our entire team did a terrific job this year and should get nothing short of our praise for their efforts.
Well said
-
I remember at 2004 WC, Australian combat Junior had his lines cut during a match. His combat model made a nice divot right behind where the judges stood on the L-pad. I have some pictures lying around that I took. Was there something similar at this WC?
No.
Fly-aways in F2D are very infrequent now since the mandated shut-offs were added a couple of years ago. I witnessed one cut-off F2D model (Canadian flyer) and the engine was off within 50' of the flight circle. I heard that there was one shut-off failure and the model went OOS and apparently never found. But there was no F2D interference wih the F2B circles other than the fact that they were nearby and I am SURE that the sound of the F2D engines annoyed the trick flyers. :)
Now: as to failures by the organizers.....they were rampant and I am sure you will hear more later.
Bill
-
No doubt. Still wondering though...
The words I would like to use to describe the way I feel about you would certainly get me banned from this forum! To imply that any one of our team would not give 110% at all times during this competition (the hardest one on the planet) is insulting at best!
Lets just do a recap though. We brought home a Junior World Champion, a 3rd place a 5th place a 13th place and a 31st. Oh yes this is terrible!! It must have been the Hungarian air that had me confused I thought we did pretty well.This all coming from someone to my knowledge has never been on an US team or even in the top 5 of our own Nationals is a joke! And just to clarify I am calling you a joke!
Thank you Brett, Keith, Sparky. and Tom N. for you're support!
Derek Barry
-
The words I would like to use to describe the way I feel about you would certainly get me banned from this forum! To imply that any one of our team would not give 110% at all times during this competition (the hardest one on the planet) is insulting at best!
This is what I was worried about! I made no such implications and you implying that I did is insulting and I will probably get banned from this forum as well!
Please, check the initial post. It made NO implications on pilot's skills or commitment. As a matter of fact, I would like to applaud Mr. Trostle for very polite and insightful analysis made in his earlier post. This is the kind of polite, respectful conversation I am looking for.
this all coming from someone to my knowledge has never been on an US team or even in the top 5 of our own Nationals is a joke! And just to clarify I am calling you a joke!
I wonder what will happen if I say that Atlanta Falcons didn't do as well in '09 as they did in '08? Will you start burning my effigy?
HB~>
-
This is what I was worried about! I made no such implications and you implying that I did is insulting and I will probably get banned from this forum as well!
Please, check the initial post. It made NO implications on pilot's skills or commitment. As a matter of fact, I would like to applaud Mr. Trostle for very polite and insightful analysis made in his earlier post. This is the kind of polite, respectful conversation I am looking for.
I wonder what will happen if I say that Atlanta Falcons didn't do as well in '09 as they did in '08? Will you start burning my effigy?
HB~>
I was not referring to you're original post for a reason. I was referring to the comment you made that you were "wondering" if we were trying! Maybe I missunderstood you but it seemed insulting.
I light of you're original Question, I have seen in many WC;and the people we think of as the best not place as high as you would imagine. I have seen Billy, Paul, Bob all come in lower spots than the top 3 so why question this team. As far as Bill Rich's placing we (the team) are all confused by this. I saw many people that looked like they should be in the top 15 not there. It is up to the judges even if we don't agree in the end. To me, Igor seemed to fly the best shapes and bottoms of everyone but he ended up 6th. That is just the way it is.
-
This is what I was worried about! I made no such implications and you implying that I did is insulting and I will probably get banned from this forum as well!
Please, check the initial post. It made NO implications on pilot's skills or commitment. As a matter of fact, I would like to applaud Mr. Trostle for very polite and insightful analysis made in his earlier post. This is the kind of polite, respectful conversation I am looking for.
I wonder what will happen if I say that Atlanta Falcons didn't do as well in '09 as they did in '08? Will you start burning my effigy?
HB~>
Steve,
In your original post, you stated "US team didn't do as well as in the years past."
That was a very critical statement and falls completely short of the facts. Actually, our team did very well. Compared to our history, the team this year did better than it has in some other years, and admittedly, not as well as we have sometimes seen and seemingly always expect. I think I understand what your were trying to say, but if I was on the team or had anything to do with their effort, I would have been offended by your choice of words. That is why I wrote my response above.
And I am still waiting for the reasons to fly more F2B contests in the States so that somehow our teamswill be helped.
Keith
-
I was not referring to you're original post for a reason. I was referring to the comment you made that you were "wondering" if we were trying! Maybe I missunderstood you but it seemed insulting.
I am still wondering about the factors that contributed to the final standings, not team's effort. The insights are trickling in one drop at at time. I want to know more as to what happened there.
The title did include a question "is it too early?". Perhaps it is and this thread should get locked down.
I meant no disrespect to anyone but have to wonder(I wonder a lot) how a single word could be taken so far out of context and cause a very insulting post. I can't help but think that my geographic proximity to NY or some other "implied" associations have something to do with it.
-
I am still wondering about the factors that contributed to the final standings, not team's effort. The insights are trickling in one drop at at time. I want to know more as to what happened there.
The title did include a question "is it too early?". Perhaps it is and this thread should get locked down.
I meant no disrespect to anyone but have to wonder(I wonder a lot) how a single word could be taken so far out of context and cause a very insulting post. I can't help but think that my geographic proximity to NY or some other "implied" associations have something to do with it.
I did not think it was that far out of context, but if you say you meant nothing to be disrespectful I will accept that and offer my apology.
There are many things that contributed to the standings. Weather was one but not in the way you think. For the majority of the contest the weather was very nice. This made for MANY good flights. One windy rainy day on the 3rd day of qualifying; and the first half of the first day of finals was very bad. Wind was blowing through over and around tents and the tabulation booth. This caused low scores in the early part of the day and those lucky enough to get a late draw in the second round did have an advantage. Orestes was one of the last to fly on that day (day one of finals) and if you compare his first round to his second round flight you will see the dramatic change in score. The last day of finals was great weather and that is why there are a lot of big scores. You're draw on day one of finals played a big part on where you would finish. As I said there were many things that contributed to the final position, some worth mentoning and others better left alone.
-
Steve,
In your original post, you stated "US team didn't do as well as in the years past."
That was a very critical statement and falls completely short of the facts. Actually, our team did very well. Compared to our history, the team this year did better than it has in some other years, and admittedly, not as well as we have sometimes seen and seemingly always expect. I think I understand what your were trying to say, but if I was on the team or had anything to do with their effort, I would have been offended by your choice of words. That is why I wrote my response above.
Thank you Keith for your remarks. I think you and I have the same view. "US team didn't do as well as in the years past." and your comments "admittedly, not as well as we have sometimes seen" are echoing the same intent. The difference is that you are much, much closer to the team and have a better insight where I am not. I'd like to know more about this WC so I could understand the nuances better!
I don't want to take anything away from the achievement of this team. Past US teams move the bar VERY HIGH which is a matter of pride and every WC those of us on the sidelines root for our guys to keep the bar high. Some degree of "Monday night quarterbacking" usually ensues when things don't go as hoped. Still, it's no disrespect is implied.
As to your comment about reasons for having more contests, I also don't see why having more F2B contests can help. A few years ago, Dave Cook showed me a program used to keep scores at the NATS. I seem to remember it had a feature where one could show AMA and F2B scores for the same flights side by side. It scaled down per-maneuver scores to match F2B scale and applied factors. Analysis showed virtually no difference in placing regardless of the scoring system used.
-
Steve, I think the answer is obvious. None of the US team were using ST60's. :)
-
Well, everything else is going downhill for America:
The economy is in the dumps with little/no hope of recovery
Obamacare Canadian/Cuban style health care system replacing our own
Lack of jobs - 9.5% unemployment (actually more like 17 or 18%)
Iran about to get the Nuke and threatening to "abolish" Israel
Israel about to attack Iran to stop their nuclear program
Obama bowing and scrapeing to the leaders of all foreign nations
Drug cartels taking over Arizona and soon your locality
Obama refuses to close Mexican border and sues Arizona
A national debt so large that we, our kids and grand kids can never pay it off
And that is only the beginning...................................................................
SO WHY BE SURPRISED THAT WE ARE SLIPPING DOWN THE LIST OF WINNERS AT THE F2B COMPETITIONS? mw~ S?P H^^
-
Hi Derek,
First, congratulations to our entire USA team for an outstanding job. As others have pointed out, you all worked very hard and made great sacrifices to represent us. I am very proud of the high placing of our team and it's members. My guess is that 99.999% of the modelers in our country feel the same as the many people making the positive posts on this thread.
Please don't let someone who's original post was both rude and in very poor taste get to you. I have no idea who this person is but if he said this face to face to any of us, he would be quickly shown the way to the parking lot. It is a shame that there are a few people like him that hurt our hobby/sport. Fortunately the majority of people in CL are like you who by their positive actions makes our hobby better.
Considering the insult, I admire the great amount of restraint you showed in your posts. We all know what you (we) would like to say/do about it! ;)
Again, thanks for making us proud, well done. y1
Regards, H^^
-
Well, everything else is going downhill for America:
(clip)
SO WHY BE SURPRISED THAT WE ARE SLIPPING DOWN THE LIST OF WINNERS AT THE F2B COMPETITIONS? mw~ S?P H^^
What is it that you do not understand? Our team did very well. It performed better than have a number our USA teams in the past. And the World Junior Champion is an American. Your post is insulting and should be withdrawn.
Our team deserves all of the credits it deserves, not the cheap shots that a few seem to dlight in writing. If there is a way to do better, please show us.
Keith
-
Our team deserves all of the credits it deserves, not the cheap shots that a few seem to dlight in writing. If there is a way to do better, please show us.
Labor Day Weekend, 2011, to give a specific time and place. We won't be using keyboards, then.
Brett
-
What is it that you do not understand? Our team did very well. It performed better than have a number our USA teams in the past. And the World Junior Champion is an American. Your post is insulting and should be withdrawn.
Our team deserves all of the credits it deserves, not the cheap shots that a few seem to dlight in writing. If there is a way to do better, please show us.
Keith, that response was unnecessary. Right, Dennis?
-
We won't be using keyboards, then.
Sticking with the internal combustion engine?
-
But seriously, folks,
We had a great team. I know. I was there last September trying to be among them. That was the toughest stunt contest I've flown in. Guys that did well at the Nats came back to fly even better two months later. Then they went even further, built new equipment that could be transported by hostile airlines, practiced their butts off, and spent thousands of dollars of their own money to represent the US stunt community. I'm proud of them, and I know Steve is, too.
-
The US team did VERY well, I believe....only David had experience in the Open class.....for three brand new Open fliers to do as well as they did is remarkable.
And I am sure that quite a few lessons were learned......
I hope that some fun was had, too!
-
The US team did VERY well, I believe....only David had experience in the Open class.....for three brand new Open fliers to do as well as they did is remarkable.
And I am sure that quite a few lessons were learned......
I hope that some fun was had, too!
Uhhhh Peabody... I think Orestes would disagree with your statement, He has been there representing the US before this year... matter of fact he finished 7th at the 2008 World Championships.
Regards
Randy
-
From what I have heard from my friends I think if there were different judges the results could have been quite different.
This all about precision flying and I feel the other end "judging" is not up to par.
Seems at least one of the judges, which I will not say from where, did not do a good job. It messed up my buddy socore and the amercians too, so I have heard.
I hope one day we´ll have an electronic system to analyse and grade our flights.
Martin
-
I don't think I said anything about that, but yes, I think that was a factor. But there were some pretty amazing things going on at the contest - I was incredulous. Ever hear of a mid-air at a stunt contest? Now you have!
Brett
My apologies Brett. I really thought you said something about the weather being a factor...Maybe on the other forum. Honestly I can't find any such comment by you now...must be ESP! Again sorry.
Maybe I just got that impression from what David said....Who knows.
Randy C.
-
Yup....I forgot about Orestes...sorry....
It is still a relatively inexperienced team compared to other Nations.
Have fun!
-
I have tried to read everything that is written in this post and have not been able to stay with it. The results of the event but for Ryan's are, we are disappointed that our open guys are not on the top this time. Being disappointed means we wished for a better result however that does not mean that our team of fliers did not do well. They did their best. We are all very proud of them.
Many comments here should not have been taken to be mean in spirit. They surely are not. We don't have mean people here on Stunthanger, do we? Well look lets let it go and continue to play our game.
It would be much better to have an Astrodome to fly the WC in. Still even if we eliminated the elements people would question the results. Someone once said only the winner of the event has no complaints.
-
Howard, I was going to ask so and so (TD) to show me his hat. I imagine it's one of the cockscombs hung with scrotal sacks. I find every one of those lids a hoot. The incoherent babbling has, of course, a long European tradition. I know Da Da art when I stumble up on it. Long been a fan. Always very funny. Glenn Beck the master actor, writer and humorist updating Da Da, bringing Da Da into the 21st. ce. Brilliant satirist. To quote Alfred Jarry's Perre UBU, "merde." Must say, I never thought to mix Da Da in with model airplanes. My shortsightedness. Thanks to our Glenn protege for pushing my aesthetic. Brett has turned me on to some fall down laughing funny examples of All American Da Da. Never would have figured out how to access those websites without Mr. B's hints. Those folks can sure work the genre. Very creative people. The incoherence, non-logic, phrase by phrase meaningless assertions as good as any in Jarry or Bauhaus theater. Where do they come up with that "merde." Often I'm struck dumb. Then I laugh and laugh.
Seems to me it's tough to compete in anything on the International level. The new members of the team, or less experienced team members, deserve special praise. Interesting to note that many of our home designed birds are still competitive at the FAI Internats. Open bay balsa birds powered by IC. Just the way George liked them.
Note for our non-theater buffs: it took me .24 seconds to Google the term Da Da and .47 seconds to Google Alfred Jarry. At one time in my career I wrote in the style of Alfred Jarry. Howard actually bought my book of plays written in that genre. It has added confusion, fun and interest to our conversations.
Cockscomb: .27 seconds to Google.
Scrotal: .40 seconds and so forth.
-
(Howard, I was going to ask so and so (TD) to show me his hat. I imagine it's one of the cockscombs hung with scrotal sacks. I find every one of those lids a hoot. The incoherent babbling has, of course, a long European tradition. I know Da Da art when I stumble up on it. Long been a fan. Always very funny. Glenn Beck the master actor, writer and humorist updating Da Da, bringing Da Da into the 21st. ce. Brilliant satirist. To quote Alfred Jarry's Perre UBU, "merde." Must say, I never thought to mix Da Da in with model airplanes. My shortsightedness. Thanks to our Glenn protege for pushing my aesthetic. Brett has turned me on to some fall down laughing funny examples of All American Da Da. Never would have figured out how to access those websites without Mr. B's hints. Those folks can sure work the genre. Very creative people. The incoherence, non-logic, phrase by phrase meaningless assertions as good as any in Jarry or Bauhaus theater. Where do they come up with that "merde." Often I'm struck dumb. Then I laugh and laugh.)
Will you laugh when you no longer have a country to fly your beloved model airplanes in? Just wondering. ???
[/quote]
-
To me, Igor seemed to fly the best shapes and bottoms of everyone but he ended up 6th. That is just the way it is.
Thanx for that Derek. :-)
I flew second final flight only few minutes after you so I thing you know why ::)
That second round pretty mixed results and it was main determining factor, because some pilots got ~30 points less thna others if I compare relatively fair other rounds.
I had anemometer whole day on and I can say that whole first round of final flights was fair, when wind was from ~6m/s to ~8m/s, while strongest wind I measured during flight of Orestes. But I did not get less that 6.6 (Vejmola). And I was happy, baceuse it was wind for me :-) ... I had maximum 7.4m/s
The second round was with wind up to 7m/s for first half round, when Derek flew, and also myself, slowly going down aproximately during David's flight if I remember well and calm during flights of Vejmola, Orestes, Richie, Ximping etc.
Third round was calm, so it means some flyers got 2 high scores (counting high + high), while others only one (counting low+high).
I do not know if there is a way how to eliminate such influence. May be in case of such change of weather (but how to define it?) we can cancel the round and use some scores from previouse 4 rounds?
-
My apologies Brett. I really thought you said something about the weather being a factor...Maybe on the other forum. Honestly I can't find any such comment by you now...must be ESP! Again sorry.
Maybe I just got that impression from what David said....Who knows.
No need for apologies, there's a lot of stuff swirling right now. And yes, clearly weather was an issue. But of course there is always the luck of the draw, too.
Once again, while I have heard a whole lot about it, I think those actually there should be the primary reporters.
Brett
-
Thanx for that Derek. :-)
I flew second final flight only few minutes after you so I thing you know why ::)
.........................
I do not know if there is a way how to eliminate such influence. May be in case of such change of weather (but how to define it?) we can cancel the round and use some scores from previouse 4 rounds?
The usual way to remove this kind of influence is to normalize the scores, so each flyer is ranked by percent of the high score for the round. That helps eliminate the bias of adding a low score from one round to a high score from another. Unfortunately, nothing can really help when the wind blows up in the middle of a round and the judges don't throw it out. The allowable wind for PA is really kind of ridiculous for any kind of a fair contest. Really, a flight should be cancelled and reflown if the wind gusts over 7 m/s. That is about 1/3 of the normal flight speed, and more than enough to seriously affect a flight.
-
After Warren Tiahrt didn't call off flying on the windy day at the 2003 Nats and did call it off on one round at the 2004 Nats and got criticized for both, I told him to pick a wind criterion, and I'd build a machine to sound an alarm when the wind met it. He picked 7 m/sec. (I think), sustained for one minute. I built an Anemowimpometer and toted it to the Nats. Turns out that's a pretty strong wind. Even stout breezes fall below 7 m/sec. at least once a minute. I made the same offer to Paul Walker, but he declined it, so I left the claptrap at home. I encourage the new Nats ED to publish a wind specification for cancelling a round and to have a means of measuring it.
I now see the wisdom of dividing our Nats qualifications into eight groups (four each for Open and Advanced). Given 40 guys in Open, for example, only ten are competing against each other. Ten guys can all put in a flight within an hour and a half or so, minimizing the weather difference among them. The WC could do the same, perhaps using six groups of fliers, yet maintaining the same number of judges and circles they use now. They could use a seeding algorithm akin to Paul's Nats method.
-
Well, I was there and saw pretty much the whole thing. The good, the bad and the ugly.
First, the standard of flying was quite good throughout with a number of very good electric ships which got my attention, including, of course, Igor's. As I recall there were four electrics in the finals. The overwhelming number of buy and fly Yatsenko airplanes was a definite factor. Didn't count them but they were everywhere and all flew to a predictably high standard. Orestes was the highest placing of those flying these ships and I would agree that he deserved the honor. I also felt that the Yatsenko brother in the finals flew essentially just as well but had the misfortune of flying first in the final (and deciding) third round.
The finals, by the way, were flown with two rounds on Friday and one round on Saturday. As noted by others, the Friday flying was impacted by widely varying conditions. The difference was exacerbated because of the scheduling that included a one and a half hour lunch break for the judges which pretty much separated the bad morning and early second round air from the nearly stunt heaven air later in the latter flights of the second round. Rub of the green as they say in golf. Unfortunately, mulligans weren't part of the package.
Our guys flew very well although there were some weak spots in some of their patterns that never did get totally ironed out. Orestes was very solid throughout and, as I stated, truly earned his third place finish. David did get hammered in the windy round but flew solidly throughout with the exception of his second qualifying round where I thought he backed off a little too much in hopes of avoiding big errors (needing to get a good flight on the board) and as a result had some wishy washy bottoms and a significant lack of "sparkle" that usually helps set his patterns apart. The result was a "safe" score that got him into contention but still pretty far in trail of the highest scores of the top competitors. His last flight was much solider throughout but wasn't enough to bring him back up to the top three level.
Derek and Bill responded well to our critique sessions and Derek's finish pretty well told the story of a good flyer getting whacked by Mother Nature (He pancaked in during the square eight on his flight in the bad air) and not being able to dig himself out of the hole which resulted. The less then perfect grass surface also bit him and cost him at least two props--forcing him to go in search of a replacement. I was very proud of his last round flight in which he was finally able to put all the "stuff" behind him and earned a very credible 1060+ score. Even more impressive was the last round of qualifying flight in which he had pre-determined he needed to get a 1020+ to overcome the hole he found himself in from the previous rounds. He pulled something like a 1021 which did exactly what he said it would do.
Bill Rich's situation bothered us all. He started out the week with a few rough spots but had them pretty thoroughly smoothed out by the time officials rolled around yet he never seemed to get the judges' attention. The fact that he had no international history combined with the fact that the depth of talent was so great among the vast majority of the fliers probably joined forces to do him in. His official flights were solid and scores well in excess of those he received would not have surprised me a bit. Having said that, I've always felt that I'm never surprised by stunt scores--often informed--but never surprised. There are only certain things the flier has control over and none of them has anything to do with the judges' determinations. That's just the way it goes.
I can't say enough positive things about the performance of young Ryan Young. His week got off to a rotten start when none of his equipment made it to Hungary when he did. Finally his backup airplane (a Brett Buck Infinity with a Trivial Pursuit wing in it) arrived but the engines and tanks were in another case which hadn't shown up. The team worked together to shoe horn David's backup PA .75 and its eight oz capacity tank into the front end of the big yellow bird. Fortunately, the engine performed pretty much as programmed and after some intensive retrimming the new ship was flying well and the pilot performing even better. From the very first flight he was the only member of the US Team who didn't have some shape problems. I don't know if it's because kids have studied geometry more recently than their "elder" team members but all of his rounds were round and all of the cornered maneuvers had equal sides and precise 90 or 120 degree angles. This, plus the fact that he drove so deep into bottom corners that I flinched every time he did so, made his flight truly standout.
The only thing we tried to caution him on was that he was demanding the absolute maximum out of the airplane under ideal conditions and we feared that under stress or bad air he risked performance problems. That did in fact turn out to be the case in the bad air day as he stalled the ship repeatedly in the bottom corners and this didn't do him any good with the judges.
Nonetheless, although he started out well behind his primary competition (the Italian and French Juniors) the judge gradually and almost predictable scored him better with each successive round. After two round of finals he had a substantial lead over the two other Juniors although a good flight by either coupled with a stinker of his own could have done him in.
The most impressive thing I saw all week was his last finals flight when he got off richer than ideal and I feared that he wouldn't finesse the flight the way that would be necessary to eliminate errors that would cost lots of points. Well, the kid is nothing if not a fast learner, not only did he display such finesse but he also took the airplane to pretty much the limits of what could be asked and never went beyond that edge of the envelope. Although the French flier put up a big number on his last flight, Ryan finessed his flight to a virtual wash with that of the Frenchman and his bigger numbers from the first day took the blue ribbon.
I've got to run now. I'll try to get back later on and talk a bit about the other fliers, the site, the weather, the contest administration and some thoughts on the judging.
The bottom line on the American team is that they all worked hard and performed well. In the judges' eyes they appear not to quite have come up with the big numbers necessary to prevail at the level we all would have liked. As an assistant manager tasked with "shepherding" their efforts, I can assure you that they left nothing in their tanks by the end of the week. You couldn't ask for more than they gave.
Ted Fancher
Edited to remove repeated paragraphs.
-
Thanks Ted.
Looking forward to more words from you and all the team members.
-
Thank you Ted!!! This is what I was hoping for! A thorough analysis! Man I wish I was there!
-
Thanks, Ted. We were fortunate this time to have an ATM who could help with the coaching.
-
Just a quick late night correction to my original post. David's flight which I felt was too "backed off" was his second official flight, not qualifying. He had good logic in trying to avoid big errors but I felt it needed a bit more aggression to really score well. As I stated, it worked to provide a better base line but was insufficient to bring him the total number that was necessary to threaten to win.
Monday morning quarterbacking at its best, huh!
Ted
-
Thank Ted, for leting us in on the rest of the story. It is great to have someone there and knows what is going on. The photo of you there with young Ryan is a keeper is a keeper. Also seen a photo of Shareen. Glad you are all home safe and sound. Thanks again, H^^
-
Steve, I think the answer is obvious. None of the US team were using ST60's. :)
Yeah, but I bet a lot of our guys are rummaging around in the attic trying to find them.
FWIW, World Champ Richie told me to personally let engine guru Tom Lay know that his work was more than satisfactory. From the sidelines all I can say is that it handled the bad and the good conditions pretty much as well as anything out there. Unlike most all I've seen in the US, he ran with an expansion chamber muffler and the apparent control of the run seemed much superior to that obtained using "chip" mufflers. Ran like a clock all week and Richard was in the lead throughout every round. Can't do much better than that.
Plus he's a gentleman, has a great father who had a smile plastered on his face all week, and was humbly accepting of the plaudits sent his way. A deserving Champion! It was a pleasure to watch his success...even if I had hoped for a bit different outcome.
Ted Fancher
-
Richard was in the lead throughout every round
But not that first windy final round ;D ... ST60, even that his, is not good weapon to the wind.
-
But not that first windy final round ;D ... ST60, even that his, is not good weapon to the wind.
You could be right, Igor. I didn't write down all the scores. What I did know was that every time I went back to the hotel Richie was in the lead. Including Saturday afternoon! I certainly never saw him give up much more than anyone else in bad air. Like it or not (and I'm a big fan of more "modern" powertrains), his equipment was up to the challenges Mother Nature served up.
Ted
-
I know ... just because I was first >:D
But really. I know that model very well and also that power train and also its ability, and I know that wind is its problem. He is good flyer and he does good pattern also in bad conditions, but if model falls from lines, then it is really difficult also for good flyer. I tried (unsuccesfully) to convince him to pipe in past to prevent that problem.
However Richie has already two electric sets and I think we will see him next year flying electric.
-
I know ... just because I was first >:D
But really. I know that model very well and also that power train and also its ability, and I know that wind is its problem. He is good flyer and he does good pattern also in bad conditions, but if model falls from lines, then it is really difficult also for good flyer. I tried (unsuccesfully) to convince him to pipe in past to prevent that problem.
However Richie has already two electric sets and I think we will see him next year flying electric.
Hmmm.
Whatever, Igor. I just have a problem pointing fingers at the guy who was "first" the only time it counted...after all the flights were over. Sounds too much like sour grapes. The way I understand the event, the flier who winds up on top pretty much convinced the judges his/her stuff worked pretty well.
Ted
-
Hmmm.
The way I understand the event, the flier who winds up on top pretty much convinced the judges his/her stuff worked pretty well.
Ted
This was the statement I was waiting to hear. No surprise, that it has come from one of our more senior, and experienced members.
-
I know Ted, I was just speaking about that one single round with wind, just because you wrote he won "all". I really know that final results are counted from all flights. ;D
I just wanted to point out, that the ST60 in hands of good flyer (now we can say the best after his succes) is limiting factor to some extent. But do not worry, he is already on good way to solve it ;D
-
I know Ted, I was just speaking about that one single round with wind, just because you wrote he won "all". I really know that final results are counted from all flights. ;D
I just wanted to point out, that the ST60 in hands of good flyer (now we can say the best after his succes) is limiting factor to some extent. But do not worry, he is already on good way to solve it ;D
Six years ago, the top was dominated by 4 strokes. Everyone seemed to be convinced that piped engines, 4-2-4 engines are pretty much inferior. Not a day went by on the forums with one member or another posting about "the switch". In the end, piped engines are still in the game(08 WC champion), so are 4-2-4 kinds(10 WC champion). This is why I have such a hard time believing electric taking over the stunt competition.
-
Steve...
My belief is that FAI and AMA rules are tilted to favor electrics....there is no mention of excluding the variable speed switches and the like that electrics are employing....yet IC engines prohibit them....
I believe that Ted Fancher has done a TON of work with 4 strokes and has eliminated them from his Nats and Worlds challenging planes...
-
I've lots of opportunity to watch Mike Palko fly his electric birds. The power system that he uses in the Bob Hunt designed Mustang has proven itself to be extremely reliable and adjustable. Mike buys components that he judges to be of the highest quality. The astuteness of his choices are evident. The systems always work well. The consistency of his power package, same from day to day, no matter the weather, and the ability to adjust rpm and power, are, I think, a great advantage when compared to IC. Pipes, venturis, fuel, plugs, head gasket, props and other factors can be changed in IC engines to tune in performance for a given plane. To an extent IC can be matched to the weather. Our best competitors have accumulated the archane knowledge and have the skill to adjust an IC. Mike Palko's adjustment process is infinitely simpler. RPM is set with a twist of a knob. Run time, also, no problem. The motors start and run the same, flight after flight. The more complicated possibilities for electric power, tuning via a microchip so that the motors deliver more power in different parts of the pattern-- far as I know, Mike doesn't bother with that. It's the simpler elements that make electric a desirable power option. (I hate electric.)
-
Six years ago, the top was dominated by 4 strokes. Everyone seemed to be convinced that piped engines, 4-2-4 engines are pretty much inferior. Not a day went by on the forums with one member or another posting about "the switch".
Says a lot about the system where people decide, with pretty much no evidence or basis, to declare the next big thing a "revolution".
Brett
-
Six years ago, the top was dominated by 4 strokes. Everyone seemed to be convinced that piped engines, 4-2-4 engines are pretty much inferior. Not a day went by on the forums with one member or another posting about "the switch". In the end, piped engines are still in the game(08 WC champion), so are 4-2-4 kinds(10 WC champion). This is why I have such a hard time believing electric taking over the stunt competition.
I guess I completely MISSED that, I saw no complete dominance by 4 strokes at any time much less 6 years ago???
Randy
-
I guess I completely MISSED that, I saw no complete dominance by 4 strokes at any time much less 6 years ago???
Randy
Dont Feel bad, I MISSED that too!
-
Dont Feel bad, I MISSED that too!
I think the confusion hinges on the definition of "everyone" in Steve's post! He is correct in that there was a lot of noise about the 4-stroke revolution, and a few very aggressive promoters (with whatever motives they may have had) trying to turn 4-strokes in to the second coming*. Proving the point that most advice on the internet is worth exactly what you pay for it. I got 2-3 letters a week asking if I had "gone 4-stroke yet" for a while (about the same rate I am getting "have you gone electric yet?" now! - assuming of course I ever had access to read my email in the last 6 months!!).
The only bandwagon I am jumping on is the "what gives me the best chance to win stunt contests" bandwagon. Any of these systems can be made to work if it suits your approach but some answers are better than others, and everybody has to decide for themselves. The more successful decide based on objective results, the less successful chase perceived (or concocted) trends.
Brett
-
I think now it is pretty irrelevant what power train you use. There are so many good power systems available now that it is all about preference. Winning really all comes down to skill. Everyone is talking about how a ST60 won the World Championships. That is all B.S. Richie and his great flying ability won, nothing else. Obviously it does not hurt to have a powerful and RELIABLE engine but that will only take you so far. Richie had 2000 flights on the plane he won with (I know because I asked him) and that is the reason he flew so well. He was solid from his first to his last flight, that is what makes a World Champion.
ST60, PA 40,51,65,75, RoJett, Saito, electric, Fox 35, all of these in the hands of a talented pilot could possibly win.
-
I think now it is pretty irrelevant what power train you use. There are so many good power systems available now that it is all about preference. Winning really all comes down to skill. Everyone is talking about how a ST60 won the World Championships. That is all B.S. Richie and his great flying ability won, nothing else. Obviously it does not hurt to have a powerful and RELIABLE engine but that will only take you so far. Richie had 2000 flights on the plane he won with (I know because I asked him) and that is the reason he flew so well. He was solid from his first to his last flight, that is what makes a World Champion.
ST60, PA 40,51,65,75, RoJett, Saito, electric, Fox 35, all of these in the hands of a talented pilot could possibly win.
Bingo!
-
Fox .35?
-
#^ #^ #^ #^
I have to agree with Derek, I have over 1000 on my SV-11 an it seems to fly better the more I fly it. Or is it that I'm more comfortable with it. y1 y1 y1
Gene
-
Double Bingo!
-
Fox .35?
While that seems a little off the wall in the "modern" age I fully remember appropriately sized Fox .35 powered models handling bad conditions at national championships with more aplomb than the hot "motors of the era". Todd Lee's complete pattern in the high winds of Lincoln the year he won Senior comes to mind. IIRC, that was the same year that Les got blown out of the Clover three out of three Walker fly-off flights and Bob Gieseke won the whole thing also with a Fox.
We've learned a lot about airplane trim and design since the early days of stunt with nose heavy, small tailed, overflapped designs and I don't think it is out of the question for a properly sized, designed, built and trimmed stunt powered by a good Fox .35 to be competitive. It wouldn't be with 600 square inches and 65 foot lines but at 525 and 57-8 foot lines I think we'd be surprised how well it could do.
...or maybe not. I'm unlikely to be the first to try it.
Ted
-
We did very well as we always do and we fielded the best team possible. End of story.
I am particularly proud of our guys and was there for the trials last fall. To me the team trials is the hardest contest flown stateside. I have flown twice at the trials and it is a tough contest. However, it is much less nerve racking than the Nats. Until you have been there as a competitor....you just dont know how good our guys really are.
Surely you local competitors have been in a contest situation where weather or something as simple as an interuption to your "routine" or other annoyances played into how well you flew at a given contest in a large field of expert competitors such as Brodaks or VSC. Then factor in jet lag where you arrive six hours before the time you left US territory. No time to get acclimated etc. Until we place dead last, you will never hear me second guessing what could be done better...unless by some luck I manage my own way onto the team.
A few years back we heard the old saying repeated a lot "Well, the Euro pilots etc. arent quite up to snuff." Anyone who saw the US Worlds in person in 04 will tell you that is not true anymore if it ever was. Even the best pilot ever doesnt win every single time....that's why we keep competing as I see it. Besides I kind of like you folks! Stunt has been in my blood since birth pretty much.LL~
Loyal US F2b team follower here. We were at Lexingtons contest and calling other folks to see who had the Worlds final scores. We would have followed a blow by blow from an announcer on the radio like a baseball game if we could have.
-
...at 525 and 57-8 foot lines I think we'd be surprised how well it could do.
Ted
=====================================================================
Ted, anyone who saw your flight at a bygone VSC with that Veco Chief / Johnson .33 (.32?) would have to agree. That thing was on rails, and the flight was mighty impressive (right up 'til the glow plug quit, or whatever that problem was). An amazing and very impressive flight with a relatively small & unsophisticated model. We were all mighty impressed.
-
I guess I completely MISSED that, I saw no complete dominance by 4 strokes at any time much less 6 years ago???
Randy
1) At the 04 WC, top teams such as the French and Chinese were 100% 4-stroke.
2) Paul Walker, the dominant US flier at the time was flying 4-strokes too. That's what I mean by dominance.
EDIT: Never mind the post. Brett wrote a much better explanation of what I meant. Thanks Brett.
-
1) At the 04 WC, top teams such as the French and Chinese were 100% 4-stroke.
2) Paul Walker, the dominant US flier at the time was flying 4-strokes too. That's what I mean by dominance.
Hi Steven I guess the reason I am confused and do NOT remember that is because of this The "top 2004 world Chinese team that was all 4 stroke was beat by a 2 stroke 61
The Top French 2004 World team that was all 4 stroke was beat by a 61 2 stroke
matter of fact a 61 2 stoke won both jr and Sr World title that year as did the US Nat's Champ used a 2 stroke that year also which was typical all over, so excuse my thinking that they have never dominated.
However I do see what you are saying in referring to Bretts post, and the points you were trying to make
2004 WORLD GOLD Medal winner Bill Werwage PA61
2004 WORLD GOLD Medal winner Rob Gruber PA61
2004 NATs winner David Fitzgerald PA61
2004 Senior NATs winner Rob Gruber PA61
2004 Advanced NATs winner Orestes Hernandez PA61
2004 NATS Classic winner Bob Hunt Aero 36
Have fun
Regards
Randy
-
However I do see what you are saying in referring to Bretts post, and the points you were trying to make
2004 WORLD GOLD Medal winner Bill Werwage PA61
Yep, Out of top 10 places, 5 where flying 4-strokes that I know of. It felt like 4-strokes was "IT" and I was on the trailing edge of progress with my VF's. Glad it was just a phase.
Steve.
P.S. Randy, I'm enjoying PA75. It's am easy motor with LOTS of power.