The place to discuss eSoaring height limited competitions, models, and tactics
It is currently Mon Sep 28, 2020 8:37 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 Posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Stablizers in F5J
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2019 8:38 pm 

Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2013 12:17 pm
Posts: 63
Regarding the use of stabilizers this is my response to the FAI proposal :-

a little addition to explain my reasoning with regard to stabilizers.

I feel that their use is mainly in the interest of safety. For example, Bill Haley planted a model in the power field at Wetlands 2 or 3 years ago. Had a stabilizer been fitted to that model, then upon a shout being heard that a model was going in, then he could simply have switched on the gyro, whether he believed he was flying the right model or not, it would not have crashed. Similarly, Brian Johnson at Buckminster last year.
My own problem has become one of eyesight. It would be easy to say 'do not exceed the limits of your vision' & leave it at that. Unfortunately my vision does not remain constant, & what is a safe distance at which I can fly one minute may not be the same the next. Using a gyro gives me a degree of security & greater safety. The disadvantage to using a Gyro is that it damps out the small deviations to normal flight that indicate lift. It does not make sense to me to use stabilisation while hunting for lift or while thermalling. There may, however be an application where the cg can be moved back by a fair margin, & the gyro tuned to make it flyable at this setting. This is something I have not yet experimented with.

Another point. How could this be policed? I have seen enough of international competition to know that there are people who will look for any advantage ( I am one of them). There are also people who could cheat & not be found out. A lot of the top end Graupner receivers incorporate a Gyro function. From Jeti you have to buy one with this addition. It is called a Jeti assist. If I took the cover off who would know? I'm sure you get my point.
To sum up, I think that this is readily available technology, which cannot be easily policed, I think it has to be embraced

Regards, Bob

 Profile Email  
 Post subject: Re: Stablizers in F5J
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2019 9:17 pm 

Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 4:30 pm
Posts: 730
Location: Isle of Wight
I am puzzled about all this fuss over stabilisers. They were accepted for F5 Classes at the 2016 Pleanary (if I recall the correct year) without any fuss. In fact some commentators applauded F5 for the promotion of emerging technologies. The information is available in the published minutes of the CIAM Plenary Meeting.

At the 2018 European F5 Champs, some competitors were using assisted stabilisation whilst others seemed unaware of the ruling. As a result a very loose interpretation of an existing F5J rule wording was used in an attempt to discredit their use.

Surely once Pleanary had accepted the use of stabilisation, this should override any consequential discrepancies arising in any earlier rule wording. The effort should be directed to revising the suspect rule wording to bring it accordance with the decision agreed by Plenary.

With the preponderance of receivers with the feature built in, how on earth a ban would be policed effectively is beyond my comprehension of model processing at a Championships.

 Profile Email  
 Post subject: Re: Stablizers in F5J
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2019 10:29 am 

Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 7:21 pm
Posts: 859
Hi Bob

I agree with both you and Paul.
Stabilization has been around a long time to have suddenly reared its head now. When it was agreed, it was against a view that "all technology should be embraced" which would enable all sensing and maybe even FPV!

In your case Bob, the smoothing (which some see as "deadening") is a useful safety addition. To others it should not be allowed at all. As you say detecting any such device is virtually impossible, so how are they to be handled by CD's


 Profile Email  
 Post subject: Re: Stablizers in F5J
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2019 12:56 pm 

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:52 pm
Posts: 244
Location: Blackburn
Well, this reminded me of some work I did with an Eagle Tree Guardian. It was on this forum, here … viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2874&start=30
That was just a use I found for it later. Originally I had wanted to look at “fly by wire” where the control inputs go through a computer and “it” decides the best way to do the task. As Bob points out, you could probably push the C of G right back and hence not have a downward component in the stability. Which “should” give a better glide performance.
This was set up on a 3 way switch. The first position was what you talk about – it keeps everything level. The second position being off. The third position maintains the exact position you left it in when you released the stick. (Really good to make you look good doing aerobatics)
I did not know what to expect in flight, hence the off switch. I put it in my Ava and did some test flights.
First, it really does not keep it flying in a straight line. It quickly goes off wherever it wants to go. It does all this with the wings level and no gain or loss of speed.
Secondly, it takes a lot to set up. If not exactly right it will climb and stall or it will dive at a rapid rate (Like a recent passenger aircraft).
Third, the Ava was perfectly set up to climb to 175m in 28sec. With this thing it just wanted to fly level.
Fourth, when reasonably well set up, after the climb, quickly switching to gyro reduced the stall that I can do so well.
I also had a play with the other mode (aerobatic) to see if it worked well circling in a thermal. My first problem was finding a thermal that I could circle in.
The whole process was very laborious and time consuming and I decided to chalk it up as just another one of my failures........ until I used it for training.
I also had it so that I could turn the gain up or down, which takes 2 channels. The Ava was fine because there is only rudder, elevator, brakes and motor. The Mpx Rxs I use are 6 or 7 channel, so that was fine. All my other planes are rudder, elevator, motor, 2 x aileron and 2 x flaps – which uses all 7 channels.
Mpx do a fancy bright orange gyro Rx, which is really expensive, so I did not go down that route.
I always imagined they would be illegal, so it was all done for fun with no real intention of going further.
Finally, before all the fuss about us flying over 400ft, I was planning on trying FPV. The idea being, that I could ride a thermal (with a good 4m glider) to 5 or 10,000ft – rather than my usual 2,000ft eyesight limit. Looking at what is available, they all have the gyro. Then they have GPS and even “return to home.” That would be fun, because if the video failed, or even the radio, it would just come back and circle over my head.
A lot want to ban these, because, with a better one than I was using, the GPS will keep it on the right heading. You could ride the boomer (to out of sight) and bring it back with the flick of a switch.

 Profile Email  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 Posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Powered by phpBB © 2002, 2006 phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.029s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]