News:


  • March 29, 2024, 05:07:00 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: F2B World Championships  (Read 31235 times)

Offline BillLee

  • AMA Member
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1292
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #100 on: July 22, 2018, 12:20:14 PM »
Robby do you, or Bill know when the next rules cycle comes around to submit proposals?

Dave

Rule proposals for F2 are considered/voted upon at the Plenary April meeting in Lausanne only in the years of a F2 World Championships. All rules proposals have to be submitted to the FAI by November 15 of the previous year, which means submitted somewhat earlier to AMA (Colleen Pierce)  to allow her to prepare and send to the FAI.

Regards,

Bill Lee
Bill Lee
AMA 20018

Online Peter Germann

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 400
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #101 on: July 23, 2018, 04:07:22 AM »
I'll leave it up to Peter Germann to explain that since he was at the meetings in Lausanne where the 5 or 6 folks who can afford to get there  ripped out what the entire F2 Technical Committee voted for.

By e-mail and prior to the 2018 CIAM Plenary Meeting the members of the FAI  F2 Subcommittee voted 13 for and 6 against on the original swiss proposal which suggested the addition of BOM bonus points to the flight score.

Later, at time of the Technical Meeting from April 27 2018 in Lausanne, it was found that:

•   the lack of BOM bonus points for pilots flying non BOM compatible airplanes is discriminating for a substantially large percentage of the participants at FAI F2B contests.

•   the lack of BOM bonus points for flyers competing with all kinds of models provided by or borrowed from others may have a demotivating effect on newcomers.

The delegates present (6) have therefore modified the proposal accordingly by removing the wording allowing the addition of bonus points to flight scores. The related voting was 6 for and 0 against. The revised version of the Concours d’Elégance F2B proposal was then submitted to the Plenary Meeting from April 28. The Delegates representing 37 countries have unanimously accepted the modified proposal. It will be set in force by January 1st. 2019.

For details, please check the minutes of the 2018 CIAM Plenary Meeting on pages 43 - 58:

www.fai.org/sites/default/files/documents/ciam_2018_plenary_minutes_final.pdf

rgds, Peter Germann
Peter Germann

Offline Dave_Trible

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 6135
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #102 on: July 23, 2018, 06:29:15 AM »
Thank you Peter.  I haven’t gotten all the way through it yet but I will later today.  I will put forth through the proper channels a proposal (bi-annually if need be) to REQUIRE BOM with or without appearance judging for JUST the World competition, not affecting any other lesser events.  I may see if the PAMPA EC cares to enjoin.  At this level these competitors should be able and willing to construct their own airplanes.  We do this at our own Nationals with the Open class only and it works well.

Dave
AMA 20934
FAA Certificate FA3ATY4T94

Offline Robert Zambelli

  • 23 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2914
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #103 on: July 23, 2018, 06:41:43 AM »
What aircraft/engine combination was used by the first place entrant?

Offline Dave_Trible

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 6135
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #104 on: July 23, 2018, 07:04:03 AM »
What aircraft/engine combination was used by the first place entrant?
Yatsenko Shark/electric
AMA 20934
FAA Certificate FA3ATY4T94

Offline BillLee

  • AMA Member
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1292
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #105 on: July 23, 2018, 10:55:12 AM »
By e-mail and prior to the 2018 CIAM Plenary Meeting the members of the FAI  F2 Subcommittee voted 13 for and 6 against on the original swiss proposal which suggested the addition of BOM bonus points to the flight score.

Later, at time of the Technical Meeting from April 27 2018 in Lausanne, it was found that:

•   the lack of BOM bonus points for pilots flying non BOM compatible airplanes is discriminating for a substantially large percentage of the participants at FAI F2B contests.

•   the lack of BOM bonus points for flyers competing with all kinds of models provided by or borrowed from others may have a demotivating effect on newcomers.

The delegates present (6) have therefore modified the proposal accordingly by removing the wording allowing the addition of bonus points to flight scores. The related voting was 6 for and 0 against. The revised version of the Concours d’Elégance F2B proposal was then submitted to the Plenary Meeting from April 28. The Delegates representing 37 countries have unanimously accepted the modified proposal. It will be set in force by January 1st. 2019.

For details, please check the minutes of the 2018 CIAM Plenary Meeting on pages 43 - 58:

www.fai.org/sites/default/files/documents/ciam_2018_plenary_minutes_final.pdf

rgds, Peter Germann
Thank you, Peter, for that summary. It serves to illustrate the FACT that a few people who can afford to get to Lausanne for the Technical Committee meeting held there can thwart the will of the entire F2 Technical Committee. This sort of thing is exactly why the world believes the FAI rules are a joke and a mess.

Regards,

Bill Lee
Bill Lee
AMA 20018

Offline Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 13717
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #106 on: July 23, 2018, 12:39:58 PM »
Thank you, Peter, for that summary. It serves to illustrate the FACT that a few people who can afford to get to Lausanne for the Technical Committee meeting held there can thwart the will of the entire F2 Technical Committee. This sort of thing is exactly why the world believes the FAI rules are a joke and a mess.

   I might have put it differently, but it is certainly beyond frustrating to the point that I more-or-less gave up on the effort, and there aren't a whole lot of things that I have just given up on, almost to a fault. I was also involved in Sxx (spacemodeling in FAI-speak) where it was even more blatant; basically, design the event rules around specific manufacturers and individual competitors, all Eastern Block, to effectively lock out anyone else. That was at least weaky justified by the fact that the majority of the Sxx participants were in fact from the Eastern Block even before the manipulation started. At this point you show up at a WC or world cup Sxx event, and for most of the performance events, you have never tested or even seen the engines you have to use before you get to the site, because they are illegal or not imported to the USA.

   I was also dismayed at one of the F2B rules group taking personal shots at Peter and invoking the USA as the culprit. One wonders how much of that goes on in the mysterious smoke-filled room in Lausanne, out of sight and with no pushback.

   Brett
« Last Edit: July 23, 2018, 04:19:22 PM by Brett Buck »

Offline Ken Culbertson

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 6037
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #107 on: July 23, 2018, 03:45:55 PM »

•   the lack of BOM bonus points for pilots flying non BOM compatible airplanes is discriminating for a substantially large percentage of the participants at FAI F2B contests.

•   the lack of BOM bonus points for flyers competing with all kinds of models provided by or borrowed from others may have a demotivating effect on newcomers.


Two points rephrased

.   the lack of BOM bonus points for pilots flying non BOM compatible airplanes is discriminating for a substantially large percentage of the builders of the contest ready planes.

.   the lack of BOM bonus points for flyers competing with all kinds of models provided by or borrowed from other is a good way to justify the 1st point.

In other words - follow the money.

Ken
AMA 15382
If it is not broke you are not trying hard enough.
USAF 1968-1974 TAC

Offline Dave_Trible

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 6135
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #108 on: July 23, 2018, 04:07:24 PM »
I honestly think it’s not really that sinister.  There isn’t enough money floating around in the whole sport combined to make that a serious proposition.  I DO think it may be good intentions run amuck.  Give everyone a good toy (without much effort) and more will play.  I think we know that has limited utility.  Be that as it may those at the very top of the game should take the training wheels off and play full bore.

Dave
AMA 20934
FAA Certificate FA3ATY4T94

Offline Ken Culbertson

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 6037
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #109 on: July 23, 2018, 05:02:47 PM »
I honestly think it’s not really that sinister.  There isn’t enough money floating around in the whole sport combined to make that a serious proposition.  I DO think it may be good intentions run amuck.  Give everyone a good toy (without much effort) and more will play.  I think we know that has limited utility.  Be that as it may those at the very top of the game should take the training wheels off and play full bore.

Dave
I am on board with that!  Somehow flying something that someone else built is not anywhere as satisfying as flying your own - warts and all.  I don't even like to build something someone else designed - but I will.

Ken
AMA 15382
If it is not broke you are not trying hard enough.
USAF 1968-1974 TAC

Offline Dave_Trible

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 6135
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #110 on: July 23, 2018, 05:52:31 PM »
Of course, I don't remember this being such a hot topic issue when a US pilot won with said equipment.
Robby it has been accepted that one was sufficiently home built so as to be allowed to fly here at the Nats.  Five of the Chinese with them  seems to say something else.  Then Igor mentioned a high percentage of 'bought' airplanes in the competition.  The trend seems to going that direction which may be fine for most but the it seems to me the World Champs should reach a little higher.  I said before I can understand wishing to just buy the dream as long as it is allowed but should it be?

Dave
AMA 20934
FAA Certificate FA3ATY4T94

Offline Dave_Trible

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 6135
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #111 on: July 23, 2018, 06:03:01 PM »
Yes I know what you meant. 
AMA 20934
FAA Certificate FA3ATY4T94

Offline Dave_Trible

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 6135
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #112 on: July 23, 2018, 06:26:02 PM »
Yes and it seems from what is being said that any effort to make a change may be a waste of time.  It surely will be true that others will disagree.  All that can be done is to campaign the issue and beat this old dog till it changes or bites me!  Before long we will go to the Worlds and you will just rent your Shark from the management like a pair of roller skates at the rink.  What is to prevent that?

Dave
AMA 20934
FAA Certificate FA3ATY4T94

Offline Dave_Trible

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 6135
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #113 on: July 23, 2018, 06:44:01 PM »
Yes you are correct.  We'd hope going through the rules process will yield the desired result of the majority.  It appears that has already failed from what Bill and Peter have said-the voice of the technical committee was ignored.  An attempt to at least reward BOM with a points system was asked for by those charged with such duties and some lone actors chose to ignore them.  What I am saying is that was not acceptable.  The overall group desire was for the change but that didn't happen.  All you can do is hit them in the face with it again and again.  You are (i think) suggesting some sort of poll to determine what the whole of sport wants.  Great! But not sure how you do that.  We don't do that here either.  It's like pulling teeth to get very much feedback on anything, except for a few very interested, + or - on the issue. 

Dave
AMA 20934
FAA Certificate FA3ATY4T94

Offline Bob Hunt

  • 23 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2691
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #114 on: July 23, 2018, 06:44:59 PM »
Okay, here's a wild, way outside the box, radical idea: Who says that we have to accept the FAI as the governing body for model aviation? We could just start our own organization, make our own rules and pick our own Champion. Wait, we already have that, it's AMA, PAMPA, and the Nats... We could just declare our winner the World Stunt Champion.  H^^ S?P ;)

Bob Hunt
1978 F2B World Champion (not that it means anything these days...) 

Offline Dave_Trible

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 6135
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #115 on: July 23, 2018, 06:51:22 PM »
Okay, here's a wild, way outside the box, radical idea: Who says that we have to accept the FAI as the governing body for model aviation? We could just start our own organization, make our own rules and pick our own Champion. Wait, we already have that, it's AMA, PAMPA, and the Nats... We could just declare our winner the World Stunt Champion.  H^^ S?P ;)

Bob Hunt
1978 F2B World Champion (not that it means anything these days...)
HERE HERE and....
AMA 20934
FAA Certificate FA3ATY4T94

Offline Dave_Trible

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 6135
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #116 on: July 23, 2018, 06:51:45 PM »
You could certainly do that!  However, the FAI World Championships is the one with the history that we all care so much about.  So, that's the one that matters to me!
HERE HERE!
AMA 20934
FAA Certificate FA3ATY4T94

Offline Ted Fancher

  • 23 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2323
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #117 on: July 23, 2018, 07:00:28 PM »
Of course, I don't remember this being such a hot topic issue when a US pilot won with said equipment.

Touche, Robby!

Alas, the argument is still a valid one.  To put it simply, aero-modeling is a way different thing from buying an expensive balsa drone mit wires! (How about that!  French and German in one post! Don't know how to put the accent in touche though :'( )

Ted

Offline Trostle

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3338
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #118 on: July 24, 2018, 12:48:35 AM »
Regarding the comments about the apparent mix-up on the finals results.  In an effort to get the results posted quickly, the ED essentially asked for a manual tabulation of the scores from the finals rounds.  The person performing that tabulation did not understand that the ranking of the 15 finalists is based on the two best of the three finalists rounds and included scores from some of the qualifying rounds.  Those totals distorted the rankings.  Finally, when the rankings were calculated using the correct procedures, using the computer programs that were developed for this championships, the correct rankings were established.

The ED soon realized the error, worked quickly to correct the problem and was very apologetic for the matter.

Keith

Offline Trostle

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3338
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #119 on: July 24, 2018, 12:53:07 AM »
Regarding the question about the types of power plants used for the F2B Championships, I do not have an accurate accounting, but I believe that there were no more than about 4 IC engines in the top 15, the rest being electric.  This ratio seems about the same for the total of 84 entrants

Keith

Offline Bob Hunt

  • 23 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2691
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #120 on: July 24, 2018, 05:11:03 AM »
You could certainly do that!  However, the FAI World Championships is the one with the history that we all care so much about.  So, that's the one that matters to me!

Gee Rob, I would expect you of all people to get the sarcasm in my post. Did you actually think I was serious about splitting from FAI?

Dear old dad   

Offline Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 13717
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #121 on: July 24, 2018, 09:37:33 AM »
Okay, here's a wild, way outside the box, radical idea: Who says that we have to accept the FAI as the governing body for model aviation? We could just start our own organization, make our own rules and pick our own Champion.

   I don't know why you are making fun of it - that describes the founding of the FAI to a tee. A bunch of French aviation buffs decided to proclaim themselves the arbiters despite having never contributed anything of consequence to aviation, aside from being really really enthusiastic about it. The first successful and practical airplane in France was built in a bike shop in Dayton and was already 4 years old.

      Naturally, being French, they figured that only *they* could do it properly, and that it would only be official if *they* did it. People, for some reason (most likely that is was too trivial to care about one way or the other, while everyone else was *inventing the aviation industry and commercial aviation*) went along, here we are 100 years later.

    Don't get me wrong, the AMA is hardly any different, and hardly any different from the host organization, the NAA. Perhaps it is slightly more legitimate, having formed as a buffer/lobbying group for aviation with the government. There is no doubt that the formation was of and by *people actually involved in aviation* and model aviation, as opposed to the FAI, where their primary relationship  to aviation was thinking it was neat-o and figuring (with classic French arrogance and their abject cultural fear of not being perceived as the smartest people in any room*1), they should become the faceless bureaucrats that deem things official or not.

    All of these organizations are fundamentally *trivial* in nature, and the fact that we happen to care about a *trivial* function like administering model airplane contest rules and deeming them "official" or not doesn't really change anything.

    We compete to gain the respect and admiration of others, that can happen with or without sanction FAI, AMA, Northern California Control-Line Coalition, or the 3 other guys you fly with in a cow pasture. I can call next weekends flying session a "world championship", if Dave and Paul and Orestes and Bubba Hunt show up, who's to say otherwise, and why would we care if someone else sent a strongly-worded letter about it not being "official"?

    We are going to have a World Series in October, does anyone think the winner is going to care if it is not sanctioned by the rest of the "world"?

    These threads, for the most part, are hallmark examples of how easy it is to *lose perspective*. Yes, if we are going to go to a WC or any other contest, we should try our best to win (and I am sure everyone who has ever done it had done *exactly that*). Yes, we should get the rules and standards correct, and try to argue our points and get agreement *with other stunt fliers* about what the "right" standards should be. We should follow the processes available to get things the way we want, to the maximum extent possible. But having the sanction of self-appointed apparatchiks is entirely secondary and irrelevant, and if said apparatchiks are standing in the way, no matter where they come from (FAI, AMA, WAM, El Cerrito Flying Dons, whatever), they should be bypassed, ignored, or supplanted. 

   Winning against the best competitors is what makes it worth doing, not an FAI seal of approval.

    Brett

Offline Fredvon4

  • 23 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2099
  • Central Texas
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #122 on: July 24, 2018, 10:46:57 AM »
What he said!

Winning against the best competitors is what makes it worth doing, not an FAI seal of approval.
"A good scare teaches more than good advice"

Fred von Gortler IV

Offline Ruslan Kurenkov

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 151
  • UKR 995 / FAI 91828
    • controllineparts.com
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #123 on: July 24, 2018, 03:38:11 PM »
Hello
During the whole tournament, for 6 days, the organizers received full information about the schedule of the competitions and the results of the flights. On the first day there were official training flights for 10 minutes per pilot, for a team of 4 athletes - 40 minutes. After the official training flights that ended at 16:00 there were free flights on record. Next 4 days of tours, one performance per day on one of two laps. One asphalt, the other grassy. General estimates of all pilots and the general results of the tour were published 30 minutes after the last pilot's flight on the tour. Everything was absolutely clear and understandable. But when the final 3 round began, the situation with the publication of the results changed dramatically after the third round. Estimates were published only after 2 hours and only on the site. On the field where all the pilots were and waited for the results on paper and did not wait. Then these results were quickly removed from the site of the organizers.
The official closing of the Championship began.
At the time of closing, none of the 15 finalists of the athletes and the 3 finalists of the juniors had a common outcome. Each athlete knew only his own personal result.
None of the athletes could in principle in general file a protest since the closing ceremony of the Championship began without general results.
I stood beside the Italian National team and saw the expression of Marco Valera's face when he was invited to 2nd place. Before that, he was on the 1 st place.
None of the athletes with whom we communicated and did not understand what happened.
The athlete of our team found out that he is in 10th place only the day after the close.
Maybe we did not see something or heard something? Unfortunately, we do not know this.
If any of the athletes clarify for us the situation with the results?
I do not want to offend anyone!
But the fact is a fact.
Regards
RusLan Kurenkov

Offline Reptoid

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 437
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #124 on: July 25, 2018, 03:36:37 PM »
   "I don't know why you are making fun of it - that describes the founding of the FAI to a tee. A bunch of French aviation buffs decided to proclaim themselves the arbiters despite having never contributed anything of consequence to aviation, aside from being really really enthusiastic about it. The first successful and practical airplane in France was built in a bike shop in Dayton and was already 4 years old."

      "Naturally, being French, they figured that only *they* could do it properly, and that it would only be official if *they* did it. People, for some reason (most likely that is was too trivial to care about one way or the other, while everyone else was *inventing the aviation industry and commercial aviation*) went along, here we are 100 years later. " 
    Brett
It's not quite correct to blame it all on the "French"

    "The FAI was founded at a conference held in Paris 12–14 October 1905, which was organised following a resolution passed by the Olympic Congress held in Brussels on 10 June 1905 calling for the creation of an Association "to regulate the sport of flying, ... the various aviation meetings and advance the science and sport of Aeronautics."[4] The conference was attended by representatives from 8 countries: Belgium (Aero Club Royal de Belgique, founded 1901), France (Aéro-Club de France, 1898), Germany (Deutscher Aero Club e.V.), Great Britain (Royal Aero Club, 1901), Italy (Aero Club d'Italia, 1904), Spain (Real Aero Club de España, 1905), Switzerland (Aero-Club der Schweiz, 1900) and the United States (Aero Club of America, 1905).

Source:     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%C3%A9d%C3%A9ration_A%C3%A9ronautique_Internationale

This topic comes up every two years and is bantered about and then nothing is done to improve the US results.

I fly mostly Combat in competition these days and have, on and off, for almost 60 years. The US (AMA) combat events are VASTLY different than F2D which is the official World (FAI) combat event. If none of the US combat pilots flew FAI combat for two years we would probably do a lot worse than the F2B team this year, do to the extreme differences in the events.
In order to avoid that, and in the interest of improving performance at the Worlds and promoting combat in general, a number of individuals and groups have stepped up and hosted full F2D rules combat events including at the Nats (Either double or triple elimination) during the year so that pilots/pit crews can fly in competition under the same criteria/rules they will see at the team trials or the worlds. Results this year in Landres; Junior World Champion and USA Team Podium (3rd)
F2B is seemingly the only FAI event not flown at the Nationals or at all during the year in the US for that matter. I really don't understand why you wouldn't want to fly the event at all. You can use the same equipment you use for AMA and/or use an ARF, an ARC,  or a RTF airplane. You can still retain all the AMA rules events as they are.
If the combat community would have refused to fly F2D and insisted on having only AMA combat events with a  BOM rule it would have been completely dead years ago. Instead it has had a strong resurgence, and F2D spec aircraft are by far the most popular aircraft in use.
Regards,
       Don
       AMA # 3882

Offline Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 13717
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #125 on: July 25, 2018, 03:46:11 PM »
This topic comes up every two years and is bantered about and then nothing is done to improve the US results.

    "Nothing is done?" Really?

      Brett

Offline Reptoid

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 437
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #126 on: July 25, 2018, 04:41:40 PM »
    "Nothing is done?" Really?

      Brett
By "nothing is done" I was referring to specific changes aimed at improving the performance of our teams at International events like the topics discussed in this thread. I guess if I were looking for a silver bullet to improve the US performance in general I would say competitors need to fly under the exact rules of F2B more often. As for the "Tight Corner" debate, I think you said it best, both sets of rules as worded should reward the tightest corners with the highest scores; given that the rest of the maneuver is equal.
Regards,
       Don
       AMA # 3882

Offline Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 13717
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #127 on: July 25, 2018, 09:35:54 PM »
By "nothing is done" I was referring to specific changes aimed at improving the performance of our teams at International events like the topics discussed in this thread. I guess if I were looking for a silver bullet to improve the US performance in general I would say competitors need to fly under the exact rules of F2B more often. As for the "Tight Corner" debate, I think you said it best, both sets of rules as worded should reward the tightest corners with the highest scores; given that the rest of the maneuver is equal.

    Given that the rules *are effectively identical* in terms of the way the pattern is performed, it's hard to see how that alone would make any difference. This is fundamentally different from F2D, where the equipment and techniques are in some ways diametrically opposed to AMA. I seem to recall a lot of complaining among Fast fliers about not having a "kill" in FAI, and that it caused people a lot of trouble. And, not to point the fingers, AMA combat was not exactly in robust good health before FAI combat took off.

    What appears to be different, from a functional standpoint that is under the control of the pilots, is exactly what Paul pointed out, the cornering has been weighted more in the last few WC. I have to believe that this was partly a result of our own previous efforts to correct earlier perceived flaws in the emphasis. But not entirely - it has been clear to me for at least most of the teens, even from afar, that just like Paul put a permanent end to swoopy corners and vague definition that Aldrich would have approved of in National competition, Igor put an end to the "5 foot is everything and ignore the corners that are too soft to even detect" in FAI. Possibly by taking the original gripe about corners to its ultimate end, possibly by wanting to do it and show everyone how it should be done, etc. It takes the right person at the right place and time to do that.

    But I think there are other factors at play in the results from various WCs, not just this one, and those may not be something anyone can directly do anything about, and may also be otherwise very difficult to overcome.

   Again, I think this garment-rending over the results is a bit over the top. It's sensible to look at trying to do better, and that's the entire point of the event no matter where you are flying or what your end goal might be. But that doesn't mean we have to make massive changes to systems and processes we think are otherwise working,  in a few days, and not necessarily based on what non-participants (including me at this point) might perceive the problem to be.
 
   In the same vein, if the results do not come out the way you want, the only way to make them different it to fly better and *make* them give you your due. That's also a universal truth of stunt.

     Brett

p.s. This doesn't bear on the content, but if you look at the signatories and the dates, it is nearly certain that *no one involved with forming the FAI had seen a heavier-than-air craft actually fly*, the one exception, remotely possible, being the US representative. At the time of formation, the French considered themselves the leaders in aviation (and to the rudimentary understanding at the time, everyone else involved probably agreed), occasionally taking barely-controlled low-altitude hops and in no way grasping the necessary techniques for practical flying. That's *why* they took it upon themselves to form the FAI. It's right in the name, it would be called the IAF instead of FAI had the people who knew what they were doing formed it.

   BTW, irritation at the existence and actions of the FAI as a group *does not extend to our stunt flying colleagues in the rest of the world*, including the judges. I have been involved with the F2B working group since shortly after its formation, and based on the other respondents, one of the more active participants. International stunt fliers are generally agree on what should be done and how it should be done, including our friends from France. In fact, Serge Delebarde came up with what I consider the most sarcastic and biting comment I have ever heard about FAI, almost Werwage-esque, and its not even his primary language. The problem is with the FAI administration, and how no matter how well everyone agrees on the right path forward, it doesn't matter, it can get torpedoed by the system at any point and no recourse. Bill Lee said it best the other day. The point being is that there isn't a lot of disagreement compared among the people who have a stake in it and know what they are doing.

   
« Last Edit: July 25, 2018, 10:15:13 PM by Brett Buck »

Offline Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 13717
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #128 on: July 25, 2018, 10:22:43 PM »
A US competitor was the world champion in 2016.  And the other thing that seems to be left out...the rest of the world is pretty damn good.  Igor is the best I've ever seen.

  Exactly. One thing doesn't go the way we want and in days, we are panicking over it. Trying to do better is always the point, but this hardly constitutes an emergency, when the next contest is 2 years away,

   Don't say stuff like that about Igor, it might go to his head. And, you know, I am standing right over here in earshot, come on, don't you care about other people's feelings? What, did you grow up in New Jersey or something?

    Brett

Offline Trostle

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3338
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #129 on: July 25, 2018, 10:40:18 PM »

"This topic comes up every two years and is bantered about and then nothing is done to improve the US results."

In order to avoid that, and in the interest of improving performance at the Worlds and promoting combat in general, a number of individuals and groups have stepped up and hosted full F2D rules combat events including at the Nats (Either double or triple elimination) during the year so that pilots/pit crews can fly in competition under the same criteria/rules they will see at the team trials or the worlds. Results this year in Landres; Junior World Champion and USA Team Podium (3rd)

F2B is seemingly the only FAI event not flown at the Nationals or at all during the year in the US for that matter. I really don't understand why you wouldn't want to fly the event at all. You can use the same equipment you use for AMA and/or use an ARF, an ARC,  or a RTF airplane. You can still retain all the AMA rules events as they are.

If the combat community would have refused to fly F2D and insisted on having only AMA combat events with a  BOM rule it would have been completely dead years ago. Instead it has had a strong resurgence, and F2D spec aircraft are by far the most popular aircraft in use.


You are getting a few facts turned around that twist the reality of what has happened over the years.  Yes, the the F2D combat team made a respectable showing this year with the Junior champion and the team placing 3rd.  This is one of the best showing of our F2D team for several years even though F2D events have been held held here throughout the US for a long period of time.  There is no question that our F2D teams have performed well over the years having at least 2 senior champions and several good team placings. 

However, since the FAI took on the current format for world Championships, starting in 1960, no country can match the record of the United States F2B teams in any modeling category in individual and team top placings.  (That is a period spanning 58 years.)   Furthermore, since the FAI adopted the AMA pattern for the F2B event in 1960, there has been and still is little difference between the FAI F2B event and our AMA Precision Aerobatics event.  Some procedures together with maneuver descriptions are slightly different and the F2B event incorporates K factors in their scoring.  However, airplanes and pilots that are competitive under one set of rules will be just as competitive in the other. 

The BOM rule we have for the AMA PA event is really a non issue.  It only applies to our Nationals.  In almost every other contest here in the US, the BOM is not required to compete, though appearance points are not awarded to non BOM models.  Some contests in some areas do not enforce the BOM rule and forego appearance points, just like F2B.  (Besides, at most contests, the appearance points for BOM models make very little difference in the placings of individuals in the skill classes in the Intermediate to Advanced categories.)  Even now, there are serious considerations in certain areas in Europe to adopt some sort of a BOM requirement for F2B.  A look at the field of aircraft in Landres shows a preponderance and a dominance of non BOM models which is making some wonder if a BOM requirement should be adopted.  (I am not speaking for all F2B competitors, but there is some discussion over there on the matter.)

Yes, the only F2B contest we have in the US is the Team Trials held every two years where F2B scoring/K factors are used.  But that fact does not alter anything that could or should be done to improve the performance of our F2B teams.  This year, our team placed 5th overall among 31 teams, or perhaps a better statement would be 5th overall among the 20 teams with 3 pilots.  And, if you include Orestes' placing instead of our 3rd placing team member, our team would have placed 3rd.  Not bad following the previous world championships held in Australia where our F2B was the team champion and one of those members was the World Champion.

The option to hold an F2B event here in the states is always available.  To my knowledge, no contest organizers have chosen that option except for our Team Trials.

If the argument comes to the point that the K-factor scoring in F2B emphasizes that we need to recognize more here in the states the importance of the high K-factor maneuvers (square loops, the square eights, the triangles, and the hourglass).  This matter really points out that the judges need to understand that our AMA PA rules emphasize the same things that the F2B rules do.  The guides for both AMA PA and F2B emphasize that judges should focus their attention on four major aspects of the stunt pattern:  SHAPE, SIZE, INTERSECTIONS, BOTTOMS  These guides do not include corners in that list.  Corners become a subset of Shapes.  The sharper the corner/turns in the squares and triangles and hourglass, the better the shape for which a better score is deserved.  There are a handful of pilots in this country that are taking this to the level seen from the top flyers in Landres.  It is only a matter of time that we see more pilots here with the flying skills to acquire the equipment/technology that is becoming more readily available that can be flown to match the emphasis given to Shapes without the need to resort to K-factors.

Besides, we do not need the rest of the world to tell us what the rules should be for our AMA PA event. 

Keith



Offline jose modesto

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 842
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #130 on: July 25, 2018, 11:31:13 PM »
Keith our challenge in AMA nationals is to include the corner in judging training
No additional points are currently given for tight corners

The 2017 Nat’s judged by FAI judges may have rendered different outcom
Paul,Orestes and  m hiki would of placed higher
In previous Nat’s 1990’s the placing definetly would be different.

Our challenge is that FAI as currently judged has an emphasis on very hard corner and 4’ bottoms
Our AMA has an emphasis on size,shape and intersection  bottoms can vary through out a flight

AMA and FAI are truly different contest based on judging emphasis.
This difference can’t be trained for  by pilots or judges once every two years
It is what it is

FAI should reward in some fashion a builder flyer. Not full BOM but something
Until that accurs SHARKS RULE
jose modesto


Offline Reptoid

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 437
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #131 on: July 26, 2018, 02:37:38 AM »
You are getting a few facts turned around that twist the reality of what has happened over the years.  Yes, the the F2D combat team made a respectable showing this year with the Junior champion and the team placing 3rd.  This is one of the best showing of our F2D team for several years even though F2D events have been held held here throughout the US for a long period of time.  There is no question that our F2D teams have performed well over the years having at least 2 senior champions and several good team placings. 

However, since the FAI took on the current format for world Championships, starting in 1960, no country can match the record of the United States F2B teams in any modeling category in individual and team top placings.  (That is a period spanning 58 years.)   Furthermore, since the FAI adopted the AMA pattern for the F2B event in 1960, there has been and still is little difference between the FAI F2B event and our AMA Precision Aerobatics event.  Some procedures together with maneuver descriptions are slightly different and the F2B event incorporates K factors in their scoring.  However, airplanes and pilots that are competitive under one set of rules will be just as competitive in the other. 

The BOM rule we have for the AMA PA event is really a non issue.  It only applies to our Nationals.  In almost every other contest here in the US, the BOM is not required to compete, though appearance points are not awarded to non BOM models.  Some contests in some areas do not enforce the BOM rule and forego appearance points, just like F2B.  (Besides, at most contests, the appearance points for BOM models make very little difference in the placings of individuals in the skill classes in the Intermediate to Advanced categories.)  Even now, there are serious considerations in certain areas in Europe to adopt some sort of a BOM requirement for F2B.  A look at the field of aircraft in Landres shows a preponderance and a dominance of non BOM models which is making some wonder if a BOM requirement should be adopted.  (I am not speaking for all F2B competitors, but there is some discussion over there on the matter.)

Yes, the only F2B contest we have in the US is the Team Trials held every two years where F2B scoring/K factors are used.  But that fact does not alter anything that could or should be done to improve the performance of our F2B teams.  This year, our team placed 5th overall among 31 teams, or perhaps a better statement would be 5th overall among the 20 teams with 3 pilots.  And, if you include Orestes' placing instead of our 3rd placing team member, our team would have placed 3rd.  Not bad following the previous world championships held in Australia where our F2B was the team champion and one of those members was the World Champion.

The option to hold an F2B event here in the states is always available.  To my knowledge, no contest organizers have chosen that option except for our Team Trials.

If the argument comes to the point that the K-factor scoring in F2B emphasizes that we need to recognize more here in the states the importance of the high K-factor maneuvers (square loops, the square eights, the triangles, and the hourglass).  This matter really points out that the judges need to understand that our AMA PA rules emphasize the same things that the F2B rules do.  The guides for both AMA PA and F2B emphasize that judges should focus their attention on four major aspects of the stunt pattern:  SHAPE, SIZE, INTERSECTIONS, BOTTOMS  These guides do not include corners in that list.  Corners become a subset of Shapes.  The sharper the corner/turns in the squares and triangles and hourglass, the better the shape for which a better score is deserved.  There are a handful of pilots in this country that are taking this to the level seen from the top flyers in Landres.  It is only a matter of time that we see more pilots here with the flying skills to acquire the equipment/technology that is becoming more readily available that can be flown to match the emphasis given to Shapes without the need to resort to K-factors.

Besides, we do not need the rest of the world to tell us what the rules should be for our AMA PA event. 

Keith
Not sure which Facts I got twisted around but I wasn't trying to list the history of F2D. Just pointing out a trend.

Currently there are 6 Double or Triple elimination 2 day F2D contests during the year which is an all time high and several more than a few years ago. These draw contestants from all over the US along with several international competitors. Rylans dad, Randy Ritch of Ritches Brew sponsored and organized the one in Houston, TX (which I attended) a month before the Worlds as a Tune-up for the Team.  All the team members were there except Mark Rudner who is currently residing in Denmark (and he won a Euro World Cup a couple months prior).  Two weeks later was a two day double elim in Kansas City.
     This year was the first podium finish for the US F2D team since 2002 When Mike Willcox was World Champion. In 1982 Tom Fluker was World Champion and this Year Rylan Ritch won two medals, Junior World Champion and Third F2D Team.

I'm not advocating changing anything since I don't fly Stunt competitively (I do fly the pattern a couple times every Friday morning though). It just sounded to me like some sour grapes over the judging and the results in France. I still believe if one is serious about winning the Worlds, it would be best to fly the exact same rules, including K factor and all the nuances more than once a year.
Regards,
       Don
       AMA # 3882

Offline Trostle

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3338
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #132 on: July 26, 2018, 10:28:48 AM »
Not sure which Facts I got twisted around but I wasn't trying to list the history of F2D. Just pointing out a trend.

Currently there are 6 Double or Triple elimination 2 day F2D contests during the year which is an all time high and several more than a few years ago. These draw contestants from all over the US along with several international competitors. Rylans dad, Randy Ritch of Ritches Brew sponsored and organized the one in Houston, TX (which I attended) a month before the Worlds as a Tune-up for the Team.  All the team members were there except Mark Rudner who is currently residing in Denmark (and he won a Euro World Cup a couple months prior).  Two weeks later was a two day double elim in Kansas City.
     This year was the first podium finish for the US F2D team since 2002 When Mike Willcox was World Champion. In 1982 Tom Fluker was World Champion and this Year Rylan Ritch won two medals, Junior World Champion and Third F2D Team.

I'm not advocating changing anything since I don't fly Stunt competitively (I do fly the pattern a couple times every Friday morning though). It just sounded to me like some sour grapes over the judging and the results in France. I still believe if one is serious about winning the Worlds, it would be best to fly the exact same rules, including K factor and all the nuances more than once a year.

You are suggesting that there is something wrong with our process of selecting our F2B teams.  Yet we have flown our AMA PA rules since before the FAI adopted our pattern.  Our teams still have the best record over the years from the earlier periods of F2B competition to the recent past of 10 to 15 years where some form of K-factor scoring has always been used.  I am only suggesting that there is nothing wrong with our program.  When our top fliers go to our Team Trials, they know that they are being judged with the FAI K-factors.  These top fliers can adjust their patterns accordingly and their record in world class competition proves it.

I mentioned in my previous post the successes our combat teams have had in the past.  I was in Sweden in 82 and watched Tommy Fluker beat the Russian in a rematch.  I was there when Mike Wilcox won and led the US team to win.  I was in Landres this month but did not get to watch any of the US combat team matches.  Congratulations to Rylan Ritch and the entire US F2D team for their success.  To win anything at the World Championships in F2D competition is an awesome achievement as it is in any of the other three FAI CL world competitions.

I think that the emphasis on shapes (including corners) is being shown to us by our top fliers with our AMA PA scoring system and judges guide.  (Our judges guide is a direct lift from an earlier version of the F2B judges guide.)  David, Paul, Brett, Howard, Derek, Orestes, Chris, Richard, Joe, Kenny and others are showing the way.  (Apologies to other deserving fliers not named here.)   I will suggest that our judges need to pay more attention to the judges guide which emphasizes all aspects of the pattern - SIZE, INTERSECTIONS, BOTTOMS, SHAPE.  The top fliers in Landres not only had shapes (meaning shapes with sharp corners) with outstanding bottoms but also had good sizes.  Attention to these factors was more apparent to me across the board than any of the other seven World Championships I have attended.  For those who think it necessary for us to use FAI scoring, they are perfectly welcome to organize such contests.  There is nothing to keep them from doing so.  Meanwhile, I think our teams will continue to do well.

Also, my respect to the F2B judges this year.  60 flights on that fourth day!

Keith
« Last Edit: July 26, 2018, 02:18:48 PM by Trostle »

Offline jose modesto

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 842
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #133 on: July 26, 2018, 01:17:35 PM »
Keith. No disrespect to our team.
This is not about the rules it’s about the judges emphasis.
Our rules their  rules are fine. 
Wen the new guys saw the corners that were being flown by the top pilots,they were surprised. They had never seen planes fly the pattern that aggressively with size shape and intersections.

The 2017 team trials was an aberration as the finals were flown in extreme weather conditions.

The top pilots at the worlds flew like a Paul Walker and Orrstes. (FAI Orestes) very tight corners with 4’bottoms  excellent shapes

In our AMA nationals as currently judged a tight corner with excellent shapes can be beaten by a smooth accurate pattern with higher bottoms and not as tight a corner,

In FAI judging,the smoth pattern with softer corners,excellent shape,size and intersections would not beat
A pattern flown the same with sharper corners. Fact.
 Our best pilot C Rud do to equipment limitations was forced to fly a very accurate Size,Shspe and intersection pattern to 7th place  with a plane that could corner he gets a medal

The question is valid with our current AMA Judging were corners are last  SHAPE,SIZE,INTERSECTIONS CORNERS
For FAI judging were the order is CORNER,SHAPE,SIZE AND INTERSECTIONS
our emphasis must change for future team selection.

You and I had many candid conversation at the worlds which do to political correctness we can’t have in public.
Jose  modesto





Offline Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 13717
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #134 on: July 26, 2018, 04:19:54 PM »
Also, my respect to the F2B judges this year.  60 flights on that fourth day!

   That is at least somewhat related to the rest of the conversation, of course. If you are getting tired, particularly on the 4th day with this sort of schedule, your tendency is likely focus on one thing rather than maintaining a balance and some perspective. I probably haven't done 60 flights, but I have probably done 50+ on occasion (in the blistering 100 degree Central Valley Sun) and you can almost get something like "highway hypnosis" after a while, where the flights all start looking alike and you are doing things like forgetting where they are in the pattern, what maneuver comes next, etc. To maintain concentration, it's very easy to decide or unconsciously to focus on *one thing*, just because that's all you can manage.

   The issue of judge fatigue is one that the FAI has steadfastly disregarded. The two-circle format probably reduces the effects of fatigue on the results, but doesn't make the judge's lives a lot easier. I think it is partly due to the reluctance to hire/acquire enough judges to do better than this, and partly because the obvious solution (4 circles) might make the contest take too long, since you don't usually have enough space to do them in parallel. Rounds should last about 3 hours at most, and it's unreasonable to ask for more than two rounds a day.

   When we had more than 100 entrants, it strained even the NATs arrangement to the limits and people were out tabulating until darn near dark during qualifying. Several notables and I had a discussion about what we would do if we had that on a regular basis - and the solution was ugly but obvious. You needed to have a pre-qualifying contest earlier in the week, or even the week or month before,  take about 20 each from each of 4 circles, and then those 80 went to conventional qualifying. We didn't routinely get that but for a while there in the mid-00's we were pushing the limits of reasonable. Seems like that's not going to be a problem (if anyone is inclined, please start another thread to discuss that one...) for the NATs, but it's pretty much always going to be that way for the WC. It needs to be considered because even with two circles, it's bordering on unreasonable.

     Brett

   

Offline Derek Barry

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 2830
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #135 on: July 26, 2018, 04:44:24 PM »
   That is at least somewhat related to the rest of the conversation, of course. If you are getting tired, particularly on the 4th day with this sort of schedule, your tendency is likely focus on one thing rather than maintaining a balance and some perspective. I probably haven't done 60 flights, but I have probably done 50+ on occasion (in the blistering 100 degree Central Valley Sun) and you can almost get something like "highway hypnosis" after a while, where the flights all start looking alike and you are doing things like forgetting where they are in the pattern, what maneuver comes next, etc. To maintain concentration, it's very easy to decide or unconsciously to focus on *one thing*, just because that's all you can manage.

   The issue of judge fatigue is one that the FAI has steadfastly disregarded. The two-circle format probably reduces the effects of fatigue on the results, but doesn't make the judge's lives a lot easier. I think it is partly due to the reluctance to hire/acquire enough judges to do better than this, and partly because the obvious solution (4 circles) might make the contest take too long, since you don't usually have enough space to do them in parallel. Rounds should last about 3 hours at most, and it's unreasonable to ask for more than two rounds a day.

   When we had more than 100 entrants, it strained even the NATs arrangement to the limits and people were out tabulating until darn near dark during qualifying. Several notables and I had a discussion about what we would do if we had that on a regular basis - and the solution was ugly but obvious. You needed to have a pre-qualifying contest earlier in the week, or even the week or month before,  take about 20 each from each of 4 circles, and then those 80 went to conventional qualifying. We didn't routinely get that but for a while there in the mid-00's we were pushing the limits of reasonable. Seems like that's not going to be a problem (if anyone is inclined, please start another thread to discuss that one...) for the NATs, but it's pretty much always going to be that way for the WC. It needs to be considered because even with two circles, it's bordering on unreasonable.

     Brett

 

Okay, I'll bite. Look for a new thread soon.

Derek

Offline jose modesto

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 842
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #136 on: July 26, 2018, 08:47:11 PM »
A story about judging fatigue
The just completed world championship during a break on the last qualifying day,a friend was allowed to sit in the tabulating tent.
 Two judges were complaining of to many flyghts. One said I can’t continue,I can’t see anymore  they all look the same. The sun is in my eyes,I’m tired.
I can’t continue.
The next round was the first of the finals..
The judges were overworked with the format used at the worlds.
It seems that F2b is the step child,at the worlds
On a side note. Team race drew a crowd like I have never seen. I dint realize how popular that event is in Europe.
Jose modesto

Online Peter Germann

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 400
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #137 on: July 27, 2018, 03:12:41 AM »
      The issue of judge fatigue is one that the FAI has steadfastly disregarded.

Steadfast?:

FAI Sporting Code 2018 Class F2B CL Aerobatics Page 11  Judging  4.2.11.

l) All contest organisers shall arrange at least one judges’ meal break per contest day. If the judging panel/s request it, extra time shall also be scheduled for additional judges' breaks (for example breaks of approximately 10 minutes duration at approximately 2 hourly intervals throughout each round).

m) In any contest, no judge shall be scheduled to judge more than 50 contest flights or perform a total of more than 10 hours of judging duty (whichever is the longer) within any single contest day. This time shall include the above judges’ calibration flight(s) but does not include the breaks.

Peter
Peter Germann

Offline Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 13717
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #138 on: July 27, 2018, 10:34:38 AM »
m) In any contest, no judge shall be scheduled to judge more than 50 contest flights or perform a total of more than 10 hours of judging duty (whichever is the longer) within any single contest day. This time shall include the above judges’ calibration flight(s) but does not include the breaks.

Peter

    Both of those are abusive, if adhered to - but, if the limit is 50, why were there 60, as Keith notes? Note also Jose's point, where the judges said they couldn't go on, or that they were fatigued to the point of "all looking the same", which is what I had exactly what I was having trouble with after I did something like 55 on several occasions, and I assure you the problem was evident long before the last few flights.

    To avoid this issue, you need to keep the length of a round (defined for these purposes as a discrete group whose scores are only compared to others in the group) to something less that 4 hours, and preferably around 3. If you adhere to the fixed 10-minutes slots, that's *18* flights - rather than 50ish. But, you shouldn't adhere to the 10 minutes fixed slots, either. Most fliers at this level will not need the 10 minutes, let them go as fast as they can manage it. Leave them the full working time if necessary, but discourage "tactical" use of the time, if they are not having a problem, they should be expected to go as soon as the previous pilot leaves, or move their airplane on while the previous flier is moving off. At our NATs, even with the 8-minute flight time, we have sometimes gone at fast at 7:30 a flight with the most experienced competitors, for several hours. 3 hours, that's 24 flights. Or roughly 1/4 a typical WC field.

     We manage this year after year, everyone cooperates because they have all judged themselves and they know that it is in the interest of the judges, and in their own interest, to keep the line moving. Anybody plays games, they get the message *very quickly*, and only in egregious cases does the allowed working time (which is about 11 minutes in AMA) even considered and very rarely is someone informed they are "on the clock".

   Curiously, the 1/4 just keeps coming up in this discussion - we are set to accommodate about 100 people, any more, and we start having issues. It means you need *4* groups/circles, not just 2, unless you want to spread out the qualifying over 4 days instead of 2. I note that while spreading it out is always dismissed because it "takes too long"  - but apparently there is usually plenty of time to do an entire World Cup ahead of time at the same site with the same people.

     We do 2 circles at our Team Trials, just exactly like the WC - except the most I can ever recall is about 20 entrants, not 100.

   That, Peter, is what the FAI brain trust has steadfastly disregarded with regard to this issue. 2 circles is better than one in only one regard - the round only goes for one day, so you only get the ballooning and weather variation associated with 8-10 hours, not *36*. We manage to come up with the necessary resources every year. Warren and Shareen had agreement for more than a year to do exactly the same thing at the 2004 WC - which was torpedoed by the usual FAI "forces unknown" a few months before the contest.  Nous ne pouvons pas laisser les Américains simplistes et arriérés nous montrer, n'est-ce pas?

    We made this argument long ago when Igor was running the message board, very carefully with examples, analysis, etc. As soon as it was noted that we had been *doing it for 40 years* at the NATs, then, people crawled out of the woodwork to come up with objections. The resulting *compromise* is what we wound up with, and ended up with the situation Keith and Jose described above.

   It also tends to explain why the WC judging has tended, over many decades, to home in on one aspect of a flight (formerly 5' bottoms, and now tight corner) and arguably not give an assessment of a variety of factors. When you are tired, your tendency is to to try to keep your focus on *something*, and because you are tired it cannot be *everything*.

   This is a clear example of how best practices are not even seriously considered and certainly there seems to be no movement to analyze the problems we find WC after WC and solve them. Every year, we examine what we are doing and make changes that seem to drive the situation to a more fair and equitable result and a more even chance for everyone involved. I don't see anything like that happening in the FAI - in fact, we had a series of suggested changes like getting rid of half the maneuvers in order to make it, er, something, maybe "spectator-friendly" that everyone across the world disagreed with, a majority opinion to include appearance point to keep it from turning into a purely buy-and-fly operation (that, as a completely unexpected side effect, making the commercial exploitation of the event by a few chosen manufacturers less likely and less lucrative) that was again torpedo by the mysterious forces unknown.

    This is why Bill was upset the other day and this is why Derek and I finally got fed up with it about a year ago. Just to my pserspective, I don't see the FAI (as a group) making the sorts of assessments and changes to practices or rules that are geared to improve the fairness or accuracy that we do on a regular basis. Again, if it was *just* the international stunt fliers, we wouldn't have a problem, if it was just the F2B working group, we wouldn't have a problem. But as is abundantly clear from both the results of the "proposals"  - which are at best *merely suggestions to be reworked by the same "forces unknown" with unknown qualifications or motivations*, and the actuality (Serge's comment about "taking the checks and putting "F2B Circle" on a picture of a potato field", to paraphrase), and again, driving the judges far beyond their capability to maintain a ridiculous "compromise" situation intended to ensure that it will always be possible to have it in a days driving distance of Western Europe.

   We know EXACTLY HOW TO DEAL WITH ALL THESE PROBLEMS, but to do so, we need to make changes to FAI processes. They are time-proven in real contests for decades, it's not an experiment and it addresses exactly the problems we have had for years. These changes do not selectively benefit *anyone* or *any group*, in fact, they benefit everyone by *making the contest more fair* and *leveling the playing field for all competitors*. And incidentally, not killing the most important people involved in operating it.

  I think the resistance to this effort, on the other hand, seems largely about people in Western Europe trying to ensure that they maintain control over *their* organization. In the USA, we call this "The Good Ole Boy network" and it is the chief point of controversy we have had over the years, the end goal being to root out and remove anything like it. I see no movement on this front, far from it, it is maintained at the expense of everything else.

     Brett

Online Peter Germann

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 400
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #139 on: July 28, 2018, 03:48:49 AM »
Thank you, Brett

May I suggest that you open a related topic on the F2B Working Group Forum?

rgds. Peter
Peter Germann

Offline Derek Barry

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 2830
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #140 on: July 28, 2018, 06:41:23 AM »
    Both of those are abusive, if adhered to - but, if the limit is 50, why were there 60, as Keith notes? Note also Jose's point, where the judges said they couldn't go on, or that they were fatigued to the point of "all looking the same", which is what I had exactly what I was having trouble with after I did something like 55 on several occasions, and I assure you the problem was evident long before the last few flights.

    To avoid this issue, you need to keep the length of a round (defined for these purposes as a discrete group whose scores are only compared to others in the group) to something less that 4 hours, and preferably around 3. If you adhere to the fixed 10-minutes slots, that's *18* flights - rather than 50ish. But, you shouldn't adhere to the 10 minutes fixed slots, either. Most fliers at this level will not need the 10 minutes, let them go as fast as they can manage it. Leave them the full working time if necessary, but discourage "tactical" use of the time, if they are not having a problem, they should be expected to go as soon as the previous pilot leaves, or move their airplane on while the previous flier is moving off. At our NATs, even with the 8-minute flight time, we have sometimes gone at fast at 7:30 a flight with the most experienced competitors, for several hours. 3 hours, that's 24 flights. Or roughly 1/4 a typical WC field.

     We manage this year after year, everyone cooperates because they have all judged themselves and they know that it is in the interest of the judges, and in their own interest, to keep the line moving. Anybody plays games, they get the message *very quickly*, and only in egregious cases does the allowed working time (which is about 11 minutes in AMA) even considered and very rarely is someone informed they are "on the clock".

   Curiously, the 1/4 just keeps coming up in this discussion - we are set to accommodate about 100 people, any more, and we start having issues. It means you need *4* groups/circles, not just 2, unless you want to spread out the qualifying over 4 days instead of 2. I note that while spreading it out is always dismissed because it "takes too long"  - but apparently there is usually plenty of time to do an entire World Cup ahead of time at the same site with the same people.

     We do 2 circles at our Team Trials, just exactly like the WC - except the most I can ever recall is about 20 entrants, not 100.

   That, Peter, is what the FAI brain trust has steadfastly disregarded with regard to this issue. 2 circles is better than one in only one regard - the round only goes for one day, so you only get the ballooning and weather variation associated with 8-10 hours, not *36*. We manage to come up with the necessary resources every year. Warren and Shareen had agreement for more than a year to do exactly the same thing at the 2004 WC - which was torpedoed by the usual FAI "forces unknown" a few months before the contest.  Nous ne pouvons pas laisser les Américains simplistes et arriérés nous montrer, n'est-ce pas?

    We made this argument long ago when Igor was running the message board, very carefully with examples, analysis, etc. As soon as it was noted that we had been *doing it for 40 years* at the NATs, then, people crawled out of the woodwork to come up with objections. The resulting *compromise* is what we wound up with, and ended up with the situation Keith and Jose described above.

   It also tends to explain why the WC judging has tended, over many decades, to home in on one aspect of a flight (formerly 5' bottoms, and now tight corner) and arguably not give an assessment of a variety of factors. When you are tired, your tendency is to to try to keep your focus on *something*, and because you are tired it cannot be *everything*.

   This is a clear example of how best practices are not even seriously considered and certainly there seems to be no movement to analyze the problems we find WC after WC and solve them. Every year, we examine what we are doing and make changes that seem to drive the situation to a more fair and equitable result and a more even chance for everyone involved. I don't see anything like that happening in the FAI - in fact, we had a series of suggested changes like getting rid of half the maneuvers in order to make it, er, something, maybe "spectator-friendly" that everyone across the world disagreed with, a majority opinion to include appearance point to keep it from turning into a purely buy-and-fly operation (that, as a completely unexpected side effect, making the commercial exploitation of the event by a few chosen manufacturers less likely and less lucrative) that was again torpedo by the mysterious forces unknown.

    This is why Bill was upset the other day and this is why Derek and I finally got fed up with it about a year ago. Just to my pserspective, I don't see the FAI (as a group) making the sorts of assessments and changes to practices or rules that are geared to improve the fairness or accuracy that we do on a regular basis. Again, if it was *just* the international stunt fliers, we wouldn't have a problem, if it was just the F2B working group, we wouldn't have a problem. But as is abundantly clear from both the results of the "proposals"  - which are at best *merely suggestions to be reworked by the same "forces unknown" with unknown qualifications or motivations*, and the actuality (Serge's comment about "taking the checks and putting "F2B Circle" on a picture of a potato field", to paraphrase), and again, driving the judges far beyond their capability to maintain a ridiculous "compromise" situation intended to ensure that it will always be possible to have it in a days driving distance of Western Europe.

   We know EXACTLY HOW TO DEAL WITH ALL THESE PROBLEMS, but to do so, we need to make changes to FAI processes. They are time-proven in real contests for decades, it's not an experiment and it addresses exactly the problems we have had for years. These changes do not selectively benefit *anyone* or *any group*, in fact, they benefit everyone by *making the contest more fair* and *leveling the playing field for all competitors*. And incidentally, not killing the most important people involved in operating it.

  I think the resistance to this effort, on the other hand, seems largely about people in Western Europe trying to ensure that they maintain control over *their* organization. In the USA, we call this "The Good Ole Boy network" and it is the chief point of controversy we have had over the years, the end goal being to root out and remove anything like it. I see no movement on this front, far from it, it is maintained at the expense of everything else.

     Brett

Bingo!

Derek

Offline pmackenzie

  • Pat MacKenzie
  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 765
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #141 on: July 28, 2018, 08:02:40 AM »
   
   Curiously, the 1/4 just keeps coming up in this discussion - we are set to accommodate about 100 people, any more, and we start having issues. It means you need *4* groups/circles, not just 2, unless you want to spread out the qualifying over 4 days instead of 2. I note that while spreading it out is always dismissed because it "takes too long"  - but apparently there is usually plenty of time to do an entire World Cup ahead of time at the same site with the same people.

FWIW, qualifying did take place over 4 days, same in Perth and Poland.

There was no pre-contest this time. The one in Perth had a limit to the number of entries, not sure if that was the case in Poland.

There was a World cup the weekend before the W/C, but it was in Paris.

Pat MacKenzie
MAAC 8177

Offline Doug Moon

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2188
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #142 on: July 28, 2018, 08:57:36 AM »
A story about judging fatigue
The just completed world championship during a break on the last qualifying day,a friend was allowed to sit in the tabulating tent.
 Two judges were complaining of to many flyghts. One said I can’t continue,I can’t see anymore  they all look the same. The sun is in my eyes,I’m tired.
I can’t continue.
The next round was the first of the finals..
The judges were overworked with the format used at the worlds.
It seems that F2b is the step child,at the worlds
On a side note. Team race drew a crowd like I have never seen. I dint realize how popular that event is in Europe.
Jose modesto

That is insane and should never ever be the case in any event of this size.  That is just stupid.
I judged one nats with a low turnout and I was tired by the end of my duties.  I can’t imagine what these guys/gals had to endure for 60 flights. It's no wonder corner was the move of the day.

I saw some video here and there of practice and the corner may have been there but alot of other things weren't.  You know as soon as we get all these blinding corners going to the WCs the emphasis will shift to something else, it always does.  Used to be 5'.

I read above what BB wrote about the contest format and flow. Our US nats flows like water out of pitcher.  It is so smooth every time.  If there is an attempt the flier in waiting hops right on and it just keeps rolling.  Waiting full 10 minutes for each flier no matter what is in INSANE waste of time and energy.  The longer the judges are blasted by the sun even just standing there the more energy and focus they lose. 

If the goal of the WC is to choose the best pilot IN THE WORLD then format has to be setup to benefit the judges and the helpers in the best possible way.  That is giving them the least amount of exposure and working small groups of fliers.  Then and only then will those charged with choosing the best pilot in the world be able to truly focus on ALL aspects of the very large FAI sporting code judges guide and give their best assessment of the flying.  The judges chosen are all very competent judges the system should not take away their from ability but support it.

The US nats is a very attractive contests do to the fact that the structure is setup to best benefit those in charge of deciding who the best in the country will be at that time.
 
Doug Moon
AMA 496454
Dougmoon12@yahoo.com

Offline Trostle

  • 22 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3338
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #143 on: July 28, 2018, 10:19:20 AM »
FWIW, qualifying did take place over 4 days, same in Perth and Poland.

There was no pre-contest this time. The one in Perth had a limit to the number of entries, not sure if that was the case in Poland.

There was a World cup the weekend before the W/C, but it was in Paris.

Pat MacKenzie

OK, for what it is worth.  There were 4 days for the 4 qualifying rounds flown on two circles per FAI rules.  The top 15 finalists are based on the total of the best single flight from each circle.  With 83 fliers, the judges scored 41 or 42 flights each day.  (There were 93 pre-entries.)

There was no a World Cup competition this year in Landres prior to the World Championships.  Yes, the World Cup competition, at least prior to the World Championships in Australia and Poland limited the entry to a number around 60 with no limit as far as I know on the number from any one country.  The entry is based on first come, first served.

Keith

Offline Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 13717
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #144 on: July 28, 2018, 12:20:56 PM »
Thank you, Brett

May I suggest that you open a related topic on the F2B Working Group Forum?

rgds. Peter

    Not to be offensive, but, why? I opened this topic 15-ish years ago on Igor's board. This was how we got *two* circles. It was also opened by Warren Tiahrt and Shareen Fancher in 2002 in the run-up to the 2004 WC, it was "approved" by some FAI personages on multiple occasions, they planned everything accordingly. Until 3-4 months before the contest, then, it was "non non non, Américains stupides, we mustn't do that". And then we were back to ONE circle trudge to oblivion, with all the very predictable side effects.  Point being, *we already brought it up, multiple times, and got nearly nowhere*.

     In any case, I am sure I could convince you and the other participants F2B group. With one notable exception, they are a very sharp bunch, they care about the results, and they understand the problems and the likely solutions. But as we were just reminded, yet again, that doesn't matter. We had agreement to get rid of K-factors, again on Igor's board, we submitted the "proposal", then, somehow, it was first a "two year experiment"(!) and then "dead", all without knowing who argued what, what they understood or did not understand, what their motives might have been, anything. Just gone, no further discussion was possible or worthwhile. You just announced another "proposal" was completely mangled to defeat its purpose, what is our recourse there? Nothing. We had an agreement to add appearance points, that went up in smoke (probably because the opponents also realized that our agreements mean nothing, they can get their way in secret meetings). We had a royal proclamation that *no one* voted on and was not even a proposal that knocked a lot of us COMPLETELY OUT OF THE FAI ENTIRELY.

Note nearly the identical points from 2004:

http://www.clstunt.com/htdocs/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=95655&mesg_id=95655

     I think the F2B group is a great group and the logical place to come up with FAI F2B rule changes. I and the USA have not always gotten our way, other countries representatives haven't necessarily gotten our way, either. But we have come up with useful and helpful proposals to solve real issues we have identified, a bit of arguing (which just proves everyone cares about the health of stunt), but we come up with good proposals that represent a decent compromise in most cases. Then it goes to the CIAM, and all our work goes up in smoke.

   I think you have been doing a great job of trying to get the right sorts of agreements and to air the different points of view. You group is the obvious starting place for what is desperately needed - an FAI F2B Rules committee, that votes on it, and the votes are binding and become rules. The AMA has had that for 35 years or so. But as long as it's just advisory, we can come up with whatever we want, and it doesn't make any difference.

     Brett

Offline Brett Buck

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 13717
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #145 on: July 28, 2018, 12:24:35 PM »

If the goal of the WC is to choose the best pilot IN THE WORLD then format has to be setup to benefit the judges and the helpers in the best possible way.

   Well, all the resistance, apparently insurmountable, to the well-known best practices, makes you wonder if that is the goal at all.

    Brett

Offline Doug Moon

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2188
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #146 on: July 28, 2018, 06:34:03 PM »
   Well, all the resistance, apparently insurmountable, to the well-known best practices, makes you wonder if that is the goal at all.

    Brett

....yup....one wonders....
Doug Moon
AMA 496454
Dougmoon12@yahoo.com

Online Air Ministry .

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • ******
  • Posts: 4978
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #147 on: July 28, 2018, 09:36:44 PM »
Id think ' Highest Achieving Pilot ' or somesuch .

Theres a LOT MORE TO IT THAN ' JUST ' THE PILOT .

Look at the scrabble in 50s & 60s Grand Prix . ' The Best ' was the best at avoiding stuff ups , wipe outs etc . HAD to have a Competitive Car ( or Motorcycle ) AND a ' suitable ' Team / Drive .

AND , best in WHAT conditionbs ?? Ideal or Atrocious . Might well be miles apart at the extremes .

Thus I think trying conditions may highlight compitance AND experiance . Assuming theyve had experiance of ' unflyable ? ? ?  Conditions . And a Suitable Aircraft . And POWERPLANT .  S?P D>K D>K

===================================================================================================================================

' One Make " say for instance yatsenko , would have the drawback of attrition . Avg W/C has a few terminals . Who Pays .  $ 3500 upfront insurace ?

Also Development of the art / craft / aerodynamic / structural package .

If F1 was ( say ) formular Ford , aLL WE'D HAVE IS FORULAR FORD  .  for a comparason / analogy .

60s T/R , Speed & F2B development / individual approaches WAS the Intresting part of the event . seen through magazines , in far off parts .

Turnig W/C F2B into a " One Make " event to me would be detremetal to its prestige and to its substance .Like reducing permissable wind Speed has .  S?P S?P VD~ H^^

« Last Edit: July 28, 2018, 10:37:18 PM by Matt Spencer »

Offline Peter Grabenstein

  • 2020 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 328
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #148 on: July 28, 2018, 11:10:18 PM »
More F2B WC 2018 Landres pics from Claudia.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/fesselflug/sets/72157699277330325


Peter


I hate pessimists, I prefer optimists.
Impossible is done immediately, miracles take longer.
I don't care who your father is ......... as long as I fly here,
Nobody walks, runs, floats or flies across my circle ......... not even to fetch fish, wine or bread.

Offline Dave_Trible

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 6135
Re: F2B World Championships
« Reply #149 on: July 29, 2018, 07:20:01 AM »
Thanks for the great photos.  It seems the days of the slab-sided fuselage are numbered.

Dave
AMA 20934
FAA Certificate FA3ATY4T94


Advertise Here
Tags:
 


Advertise Here