[F3A-Discussion] FAI rules proposals

[Michael S. Harrison]

We haven't had a fundamental model size/weight/engine displacement rule
change in probably 20 years, yet there has been massive R&D, replacement of
equipment, cost changes(actually in many respects the costs have diminished
because of all the R&D.  So using the change of weight as the scapegoat for
rising costs doesn't hold a drop water.  It will have absolutely no effect
on any other classes unless the competitor chooses to do so.  I challenge
any of you that are opposed to the weight change to present at the next
competition with the equipment  you were flying with 10 years ago.  So I
strongly support a weight change for the betterment of the sport and to keep
our flyers and grow the number of competitors.  It will make it easier to
have a stronger safer craft as well.  
Mike 

-----Original Message-----
From: f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us
[mailto:f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us] On Behalf Of Atwood, Mark
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 2:57 PM
To: f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us
Subject: Re: [F3A-Discussion] FAI rules proposals

I think we're strong in favor of changing the unknown K-factor schedule
minimum from 74 down to 70.  That proved to be silly to implement at the
nats this past year.  That's likely to pass.  I'm personally not a fan of
the weight change rules given the concerns we've raised through our forums
as to how disruptive it will be to designs and current equipment which have
all be evolved to support the current rules.  It may help the very top end
of pattern, but it will most certainly hurt the sport in the middle ranks as
the costs increase across the board to support new R&D and a likely
replacement for all of our current equipment over a few years time (much
like when the engine displacement limit was removed).

Also not personally a fan of the "Barrel Roll" as the maneuver is highly
subjective in I ot's execution and judging compared to most of out current
maneuvers, but it is what it is.


Mark Atwood
Paragon Consulting, Inc.  |  President
5885 Landerbrook Drive Suite 130, Cleveland Ohio, 44124
Phone: 440.684.3101 x102  |  Direct: 440-229-2502
Fax: 440.684.3102
mark.atwood at paragon-inc.com<mailto:mark.atwood at paragon-inc.com>  |
www.paragon-inc.com<http://www.paragon-inc.com/>





On Mar 14, 2013, at 11:19 AM, Derek Koopowitz
<derekkoopowitz at gmail.com<mailto:derekkoopowitz at gmail.com>> wrote:

Everyone,

Attached is the agenda and all the rules proposals that are to be voted on
at the Plenary meeting next month.  I'd appreciate any/all feedback on them.
Just as a point of note... I've submitted a couple of proposals to bring the
F3M rules more in line with IMAC in hopes that we can get IMAC participation
to at least buy into the FAI concept.  During the next rules cycle I am
going to put a proposal in to adopt the IMAC rule of 1 point per 10 degree
deviation instead of the current 1 point per 15 degree.

Thanks!
<CIAM 2013 Plenary Meeting - Agenda R_C Aerobatics.pdf><Annex 7h - F3A
Schedule A-16 F3 Aero S-C.pdf><Annex 7i - F3A Schedule A-16 Aresti F3 Aero
S-C.pdf><Annex 7j - F3A Schedule F-17 F3 Aero S-C.pdf><Annex 7k - F3A
Schedule F-17 Aresti F3 Aero S-C.pdf><Annex 7l - F3A Schedule P-17 F3 Aero
S-C.pdf><Annex 7m - F3A Schedule P-17 Aresti F3 Aero S-C.pdf><Annex 7n - F3P
Schedule AP-15 F3 Aero S-C.pdf><Annex 7o - F3P Schedule AP-15 Aresti F3 Aero
S-C.pdf><Annex 7p - F3P Schedule AF-15 F3 Aero S-C.pdf><Annex 7q - F3P
Schedule AF-15 Aresti F3 Aero S-C.pdf><Annex 7r - F3P Schedule AP-15 Aresti
FRA.pdf><Annex 7s - F3P Schedule AF-15 Aresti FRA.pdf><Annex 7t - F3S Annex
5 F3 Aero S-C.pdf>_______________________________________________
F3A-Discussion mailing list
F3A-Discussion at lists.f3a.us<mailto:F3A-Discussion at lists.f3a.us>
http://lists.f3a.us/mailman/listinfo/f3a-discussion

_______________________________________________
F3A-Discussion mailing list
F3A-Discussion at lists.f3a.us
http://lists.f3a.us/mailman/listinfo/f3a-discussion