Fw: NOISE

[Tony Stillman]

Here is the reply from Bob Skinner about FAI noise rules...

Tony Stillman
Radio South, Inc.
3702 N. Pace Blvd.
Pensacola, Fl 32505
www.radiosouthrc.com
800-962-7802
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Bob Skinner 
To: tony at radiosouthrc.com 
Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2002 2:12 PM
Subject: NOISE


Dear Tony

Many thanks for your message, which I read upon my return from the European Championships in Spain.

Be assured that there is no support for a lowering of the current noise limit.  I have in fact cautioned many proposers on the dangers of lowering the noise limit even further. A Belgian proposal was defeated some time ago, calling for 92dBA over tarmac/concrete and 90dBA over grass. On the other hand, it is going to be extremely difficult to convince the CIAM president that we desire a higher noise limit than the current 94dBA. We know that F3A models are of the quietest on the competition scene, and, ultimately, the judges still have the final say in whether a competitor should be penalised for a perceived noisy model.

In the near future I am going to canvas for modification to the noise rule so that the nose of the model is pointed into wind and the measurement still taken on the right-hand side. That will help in strong wind conditions. Also for consideration - 94dBA over all surfaces. In Belgium (2000 European Championship) we had prolonged rain which saturated the grass, and instead of the sound being absorbed (supposedly 2dBA), it was reflected from the water barrier, causing a problem for some fliers. We experienced the same in Singapore during the CAOCC 2000.

We did not have one competitor fail the noise test in Spain, and the lowest that I know of was 87dBA, which proves that standard equipment is quite capable of being operated quietly. Yes, I am aware that some (probably most!) are using a condition which results in a slightly lower rpm at the noise test. I've thought of designing a device that will record the servo travel during the noise test, and if the device should record a travel that exceeds the one at the noise test, there is reason to believe that a competitor cheated. But it becomes more complicated, with yet another device needed to run a competition. The judges cannot be cheated though, and a noisy model will soon receive the in-flight noise penalty.

Then of course, we try to keep the models reasonably quiet, and we try to enforce the manoeuvring area with the 60 degree left and right markers, only for some fliers to make their take-off turns from county to county!

Having said all this, I would like you to keep me informed on this matter. We would like people to fly, not to penalise or prevent them on a technical matter.

Best regards

Bob

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20020916/2db0ec4a/attachment.html