Radio Control: Pylon Racing
Bill Hager 4 Holly Springs Dr. Conroe, TX 77302
New Rules?
In the March 1989 edition of the "Competition Newsletter" section of Model Aviation you had a chance to see how the Radio Control Racing Contest Board members performed with their Initial Vote on the proposed rule changes for 1990–91.
Let's look at these rules very closely. If they survive the forthcoming Final Vote, we will have to live with them very soon.
RCR 90-8
This restricts fuel used in Formula One to a content of 15% nitromethane, and would be supplied by contest management.
Formula One is the ultimate racing event in model aviation; just as nitro-burning dragsters are in auto racing. Next you will have someone wanting us to run stock engines. Where do we draw the line?
Let's look at some facts. With low-nitro fuel, we will widen the gap between those who are very good with engines and those who are just so-so. Some of us use nitro to keep up with those with a super-good engine.
Let's look at the extreme examples. Those going fast in FAI are all engine experts—yes, engine experts. When using no-nitro or 15% fuel, the engine that you had that was going well enough on 70% nitro won't run well on 15%. So what we will have to do is throw out all these engines and start over. I think that even those who support this rule change don't fully realize what it will really do.
If we end up using 15% nitro, we will be widening the gap between the average flier and the expert. Formula One will end up just like FAI with only two or three people dominating. Come on, guys! Wake up and talk to your district RC Racing Contest Board member.
Just an added note. I remember going to Lake Charles Nats where, in Quarter Midget, we burned up some good engines by using fuel that contained no oil—and it was supplied by a very well-known company.
One last note on this. It is hard enough getting people to put on a contest for Formula One today. If we now add to the CD's list of things he's gotta do a fuel problem or any additional cost, we will have even fewer contests to attend.
Please, guys. Get your RC Racing Contest Board member to vote NO on RCR 90-8 in the Final Vote.
RCR 90-13
This would have allowed 2 x 2 starts. The rule proposed to allow #1 and #3 planes to take off on the first flag, and #2 and #4 on the second flag. We have been using this for some time now, and it works. It makes for closer racing. Why not make it a rule?
BUT IT'S TOO LATE NOW! This proposed rule failed to survive the Initial Vote and is dead for this rules cycle. Did you tell your district RC Racing Contest Board member that he should have voted for it? Did he? (Only five did.)
RCR 90-18
This is another one that failed to pass the Board's Initial Vote and is now dead for this rules cycle. As I said before, we have not done much in the last 15 years. We are still using the same engines, props, etc.—and now along comes a new glow plug. A Nelson plug has been tested in races—one plug has been used for a full contest. This plug in some cases even added some rpm. Hey, guys! We have been using the same old type of glow plug forever. Think about it! Now something new, better comes along—shoot it down!
Some opponents cited its cost. No way! Those who used GoBees spent just as much. And to this date I've not seen another plug you could use twice. A single Nelson plug has been used in as many as five heats and was still going strong. Let's get our heads out of the sand.
Letter from Terry Till (Syracuse, NY)
I am writing this not only for you to hear a beginning racer's viewpoint, but also to stir up some interest in FAI Pylon. Currently I am racing Quickie, but I hope to move up to FAI as soon as I can afford it.
First of all, to see those names were on the top of the hill in Q500 at the '88 Nats was not much of a surprise. If Quickie is truly a beginner's event, then maybe something should be done with respect to the scheduling at the Nats or categorization of fliers.
By scheduling Q500 after Quarter Midget (QM), the QM fliers would then not have a chance to practice on a QM course and would not use Q500 as a warmup event for QM. Also, the Formula One guys couldn't really use Q500 as a practice session, since the course length would be different, and their timing would be thrown off.
It's impossible to discourage the prospective competitor—nor would I want to; however, what's the point in me going to the Nats and entering Quickie, knowing that much more experienced fliers are going to blow right by me? Stiff competition promotes character and makes you a better racer. But in this case, I feel the situation would discourage a "would-be" racer.
The other option would be to ban past winners of Q500 and individuals that entered higher-level events. This is not a viable alternative, but I mention it because in West Germany the national champion of their style of Quickie must go on to FAI if he or she wishes to race again. Which brings us to FAI.
FAI is the unlimited class of model pylon racing. The only restrictions for engines are prop and displacement. Other than that, you can modify the engine any way you know how.
In addition to that, the range of airplanes that can be modeled is much greater, which makes it more appealing for the operator.
The real reason for my interest in FAI is that it is the only world-class event. It is one thing to be the best in America, it is quite another to be the best in the world.
Because of these things, FAI seems to me to be a much more exciting and vibrant event than Formula One. Not that I'm putting down Formula One, but Formula One is so close to FAI with all the engine modifications and rules proposals, that FAI seems a natural progression.
As I stated earlier, I am a beginner, so my opinions might not count for much in the eyes of an experienced racer.
Terry, thanks for your letter. I agree with you 100%. I couldn't have said it better.
See you next month.
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
