Free Flight: Indoor
Bud Tenny
Correction
A GOOF! In the previous column (September 1985), there were four flight profile graphs. The two on the right should be swapped top-to-bottom to match the captions. Sorry 'bout that!
New model class
By the time you read this, the 1986–87 AMA rule book should be ready for distribution. The major change you will see is that Paper Stick is changing to Intermediate Stick. The basic model is essentially the same; no other changes in model specifications were made. However, the covering can now be commercial plastic in place of the formerly required paper covering. Existing Paper Stick models will still qualify, but will fly against an approximate 0.007 oz. weight penalty (the difference between light condenser paper and the latest plastic films).
Although Paper Stick has been a "traditional" event we will miss, there are at least two important aspects to the change:
- Plastic-covered Indoor models may be an idea whose time has come. Pennyplane models have used plastic film (Microlite) for years, but models with no minimum weight will pose interesting new problems.
- Models built to the new rules can qualify for entry in the FAI Indoor program. Admittedly, Intermediate Stick models won't compete at top FAI competition level, but they should help newcomers gain FAI competition experience. Intermediate Stick models will be easier to handle than full-house FAI models and will offer similar building challenges.
A salute!
I have noted here before that all Indoor fliers owe a great deal to the National Free Flight Society and to Tony Italiano. NFFS has annually sponsored the U.S. Indoor Championships, which has become the leading Indoor competition arena in the U.S. Tony has been the sparkplug of the USIC, building it to a very successful meet in a short time. Meanwhile, Tony isn't content to rest on his laurels. On a recent visit to Italy, he diligently searched for the origins of Pirelli, hoping to establish a new source of rubber. According to a letter I received recently, he may have uncovered a lead. Perhaps we will have a more complete report soon; but meanwhile, let's have a big hand for Tony Italiano!
Nats planning
Many of you may have flown at the 1985 Indoor Nats, or else you may have heard about the rather crowded schedule on the first day. Easy B, Pennyplane, and Manhattan Cabin were all scheduled in the same five-hour period, leaving very little time for needed repairs, etc. If you flew more than one event, many fliers were disgruntled when the CDs would not extend the flying time to match the longer hours scheduled for other events to be flown the next two days.
Why not? Basically, contest management is obligated to conduct a contest under the same conditions described in the entry blank. With the Nats, which has a longer planning cycle and requires advance entry, this principle is even more important. However, these very same factors—required advance entry and long planning cycle—can lead to possible errors which may wreak hardship on contestants. One assumption is that the contest is defined by the entry blank. For the first time, anyone besides Nats planners could review the setup and entry blank; once published, the contestant has limited options when dealing with unsatisfactory conditions short of boycotting the meet.
What's the answer? The best way to attack the problem is to go to the top—the Nats planners are responsible only to the AMA Executive Council. Your "in" to the Executive Council is your District vice-president. If you are concerned, as I am, that these unfortunate incidents can only harm the Nats, you should share your concern with your VP. If enough of us can generate a concerned Executive Council, maybe we can solve the problem.
Editor's note (RMcM.)
Bud Tenny's view of this situation is not shared by some of the AMA HQ personnel associated with Nats planning and administration. They point out that, if a problem in scheduling—such as noted by Bud—is brought to the attention of the planners far enough in advance of the actual start of the contest, a considerable amount of "fine-tuning" can be made in the published schedule, more so the earlier the inputs. They also point out that the schedule for the 1985 Nats was published in the May 1985 issue of Model Aviation (which was mailed out late in March), yet nothing was heard from the Indoor fraternity in response to that early publication. In the meantime, the National Indoor Model Airplane Society has been invited to have a representative at the 1986 Nats planning meeting.
In any case, a "boycott" would be counterproductive and is certainly not the only alternative a contestant has. Coordination between the contestants and the contest management should be tried first, to see what can be done to help the situation. A practical proposal to solve the problem is always more effective than a negative or boycott-type reaction.
With respect to the necessity to "generate a concerned Executive Council," the inference that the Council is not concerned about such situations is inaccurate. The Executive Council is, has been, and will be intensely interested in the successful operation of any AMA Nats. They devote considerable amounts of time and energy each year in attempting to assure that the Nats operation runs smoothly and well. Modeler comments—either favorable or unfavorable—on any aspect of the Nats are always received with great interest by Executive Council members—your elected AMA vice-presidents, president, and Executive vice-president. Don't ever hesitate to communicate with them on any matter you think would improve our enjoyment of the hobby.
When is steering not steering?
A number of CDs have been observing a new steering tactic—"accidentally" allowing the model to bump into the balloon during the climb. As a result, the model usually stalls, losing altitude. When this is done with an "overcooked" model, the net result is that the climb can be slowed enough to avoid contact.
The Indoor Contest Board issued an interpretation on steering last year, and the interpretation becomes part of the new rule book due out by January 1986. The text of the interpretation is: "Steering is intended to alter the direction of flight and the general location of a model when it is approaching the structure of the building. The intent of the rule is to avoid influencing either the altitude of the model or its rate of climb or descent during the period of steering."
The following is only my opinion, but I have heard that it is shared by other CDs: An incident can only become official if a specific incident is referred to the Indoor Contest Board for an interpretation. The basic tactic of contacting the model with the balloon instead of the string is acceptable. The result of the balloon/model contact—loss of altitude—seems to violate both the basic steering rule as spelled out in the FAI section of the rule book and the definition in the ICB interpretation. An "accidental" contact is too easy to claim if the balloon is being held by the flier at the time of contact.
My opinion again: there must be a better way to prevent the model from climbing too high. In fact, there is considerable sentiment developing to place additional controls on the use of steering in international contests. Over the years, it seemed like a good idea to embrace several FAI rules and procedures to strengthen the FAI program by bridging the gap between AMA and FAI modeling.
Certainly, our FAI Indoor Teams have steadily improved, and this may have been a factor. However, unlimited steering for all classes of AMA Indoor models is proving disruptive at some contests. Adding practices which may ultimately be ruled abusive of the steering rule may be the last straw.
Speaking of FAI...
By the time you read this, the 1984–85 Team Selection Program will be completed by the Finals at Akron. Three hard-working fliers from a highly talented field will be our team for the 1986 Indoor World Championships. Immediately, they will begin preparing for the "big one." Part of this task is to get the models there in one piece.
The four photos show some solutions used by contestants at previous U.S. contests. One major concern in overseas travel is customs inspections. How do you explain (in a foreign country) that you can't possibly open the box in that drafty room? One pair of photos shows the boxes used by Bud Romak and Larry Cailliau. Their answer—show off the box contents with big Plexiglas windows!
A second concern is easy access to the models in the box. The other pair of photos shows how some individuals solved the problem. Pete Andrews' box at the 1972 World Champs opened in the middle, allowing easy access to both the front and rear sections. The Swiss team at the 1984 West Baden World Champs had a box devoted to props and tools.
Help me: I've lost track of who sent me the photos of Bud Romak's and Larry Cailliau's boxes—if you recognize your work, claim them, and I'll see that you get credit.
Bud Tenny, P.O. Box 545, Richardson, TX 75080.
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
