114 MODEL AVIATION
Eric Henderson, 303 Shady Ln., Marlton NJ 08053; E-mail: [email protected]
RADIO CONTROL AEROBATICS
Sean McMurtry and his dad battled through a midair and
teething troubles, but Sean eventually made the F3A team.
Don Szczur with his Focus II and his son’s lucky-dog mascot. He
missed making the US F3A team by a point.
Quique Somenzini finished an impressive second place at this
year’s Nats, but not as a member of the US FAI F3A team.
Ireland, Canada, and the US. The judging
standards were not International Miniature
Aerobatic Club (IMAC) or FAI; they were
more of a hybrid, leaning heavily toward
precision and accuracy.
This contest was a who’s who of pilots.
A popular misconception is that it is an
IMAC event—definitely not an FAI F3A
competition. It is much better defined as
what it is rather than what it is not. The Don
Lowe Masters is a unique event flown with
large Scale versions of full-scale airplanes
which execute some serious precision
aerobatics.
If you look at the makeup of those who
were invited, you would see pilots from
both disciplines and a large group who has
flown both styles for many years. No matter
what their derivation, the one thing they all
had in common was that they could really
fly. “Best in the world” is not strong
enough to convey what we watched.
Brian Hebert, who performed the Known finals routines, is
rumored to be the next US F3A team manager.
THE DON LOWE Masters was held
courtesy of Pat Hartness and many sponsors
at the Triple Tree Aerodrome in Woodruff,
South Carolina, September 30-October 2.
This event is looking more and more like,
and probably will be, the new Tournament
of Champions (TOC) for RC Aerobatics.
I was honored to be invited to go down
there and judge. I was in some special
company, not the least of which was Don
Lowe himself. Judges came from England,
118 MODEL AVIATION
skilled pilots do not get to differentiate themselves until the finals. The
other side is that there is the potential for some pilots to make it who
are not ready or have not practiced the finals routines.
Regardless of all the preceding, the pilots who eventually form the
US team really do earn their places. What never gets enough attention
or appreciation is the need for an expert caller. The schedules,
especially the Unknowns, are extremely difficult. There is also a need
to provide funding for these team members, but that’s another column
in itself!
At this year’s Team Trials, the FAI F3A contestants flew P-05 for
three days, performing six rounds of the preliminary schedule. The
best score from each day was counted, and one best remaining score
from any of the three days was counted.
The top six pilots won at least one round each. Chip and Quique
carried four rounds of 1,000 points each. The finalists were:
1) Quique Somenzini: 1,000.00
2) Chip Hyde: 1,000.00
3) Jason Shulman: 991.63
4) Sean McMurtry: 989.19
5) Don Szczur: 988.22
6) Andrew Jesky: 970.38
7) Troy Newman: 969.52
8) Kenny Lauter: 952.45
(Mike Caglia finished ninth.) A special mention goes to Sean
McMurtry, who had a midair in the first round of the contest. He and
his father then went to his backup model and spent most of the contest
getting it into competition shape. That got him into the finals.
Young Andrew Jesky made an excellent showing and will be a
force to be reckoned with in the future. (He too attended the Don
Lowe Masters.) Chip Hyde battled a bad throttle servo and still came
out near the top.
The finals uses a different method of totaling the scores. Round
One is a Known finals schedule (F-05). Round Two is the first
Unknown schedule. Round Three is another round of F-05. Round
Four is the second Unknown schedule.
The winner is determined by adding the best of the Knownschedule
scores to the best of either of the Unknown-schedule scores.
The results were:
1) Jason Shulman: 1,999.29
2) Quique Somenzini: 1,995.46
3) Chip Hyde: 1,986.72
4) Sean McMurtry: 1,982.53
5) Don Szczur: 1,981.24
6) Troy Newman: 1,824.25
7) Andrew Jesky: 1,747.80
8) Kenny Lauter: 1,701.20
Most notable was that Chip won both of the Known rounds.
Quique won the first Unknown, and Jason tied Sean for the second
Unknown. The system is finely balanced, and including a non-
Dave Guerin and Tony Stillman (third and fourth from left) are ex-
US team managers who have also run the Pattern Nats.
The airplanes were much bigger and a bit louder, but the
schedules still demanded accurate maneuvers. Spins and snaps had
to be executed correctly. A 1-point-per-5°-error standard was used.
There was a significant difference when it came to the Freestyle
component, but that was to be expected. Freestyle is definitely the
crowd pleaser, and it certainly had my heart thumping when I was
in the front row!
A sort of déjà vu feeling kept running through my mind. In July
of this year I judged the FAI F3A Team Selection Finals in Muncie,
Indiana—another finals with almost the same top pilots (although
some names were different—most notably Christophe Paysant Le
Roux and Mark Leseberg).
In front of me were current and ex-World Champions who may
have been holding a prequel to the next F3A World Championships.
Jason Shulman, Quique Somenzini, Christophe, and Chip Hyde
placed, in that order. All of the US world team members were
competing: Jason, Chip, Sean McMurtry, and Don Szczur (team
alternate).
This leads me to how they made it onto the US FAI F3A team.
The Team Trials was combined with the AMA Nats event this year.
I am often asked why this is not always the case. Why don’t we
simply take the top three from the AMA event 406 (FAI) category?
I wish that there was a simple answer, but it is complicated.
First, the AMA contest is open to all members from anywhere in
the world. This year there were some Canadians and Argentineans
in the mix.
Second, the judges for a Team Trials are usually one per AMA
district, and they judge all of the entrants. At a Nats, the judges’
pool consists primarily of Masters (AMA event 404) contestants.
Third, compromises are made in judging. The heats at the Team
Trials were judged primarily by Nats Masters contestants. The FAI
Team Trials Committee chose the panel of judges for the finals, and
it contained some well-known, well-qualified judges.
Fourth, it gets sticky when the finals contains non-US pilots, or,
put another way, pilots who are ineligible for the US team. Some
argue that this denies potential pilots the chance to be in contention.
It also becomes problematic at best when you are flying in heats
against a pilot of, say, Quique Somenzini’s caliber. This year his
performance did depress scores of those who were unfortunate
enough to be in his group in every round.
Fifth, the FAI pilots never get to fly the more difficult F-05
schedules unless they make it into the finals. FAI differs from all
AMA classes in that it has two schedules for the pilots to learn: a P
series and an F series (Preliminaries and Finals respectively).
In Europe and in the World Championships, a semifinals routine
is flown that employs the finals routine. The finals, then, usually
comprises two Known and two different Unknown routines.
Because the semifinals system is bypassed, contestants enter the
finals without ever having been “tested” with a P-05 schedule.
There are two sides to this problem, one of which is that the more
Chip Hyde’s Pattern Double Vision biplane performed strongly
with the new YS 1.60DZ engine on the front.
team-eligible pilot has to have an effect on
the final outcome. It is also worth noting
how close Sean McMurtry’s and Don
Szczur’s scores were.
There is a golden rule in business: you
never report a problem without at least
having a proposed solution. My two cents is
that the FAI F3A Nats needs a bit of a
change to make it fairer and much more
attractive to those who travel so far to be
there.
The first change would be to scrap the
artificial grouping and seeding of the
pilots and get back to the sound practice of
running normal rounds. In a normal round,
all of the FAI pilots would get to fly in
front of the same judging panel. This
could be done on two sites in one
afternoon. Split the pilots into two groups,
and swap the judging panels at the halfway
mark.
The second change would be to run P-05
preliminary schedules only on Day One and
Day Two. Run pseudo semifinals with F-05
on Day Three. The word “pseudo” refers to
the fact that all pilots would be allowed to
fly in this semifinal round.
The third change would be that the
qualifying scores would be the total of a
pilot’s top four scores of the six rounds
flown. At least one score would have to be
from the third day (one round of F-05). If a
pilot had a bad Day One or Day Two and,
in a worst-case scenario, had two failed
flights, the four-flight total could include
both semifinal scores.
This system would achieve the goal of
having the pilots who make it into the finals
prove their finals-schedule skills. It would
also allow all of the FAI pilots to
experience both of the FAI schedules in a
competition environment.
Last, if there were non-US contestants
in a Team Trials, we would change the way
we tabulated the scores. We would have the
Nats results calculated as we currently do,
but we would remove the scores of those
who would not qualify to be on a US team.
Then we would recompute and renormalize
the scores to see who should be on the US
F3A team. It’s that easy!
Frequently Asked Question: “Should I
compete with a small model or a big model
in Pattern?” This question comes up all the
time, and the answer is fairly simple.
All Pattern airplanes are basically
designed to fly well and are intended to
perform the required maneuvers. The
bigger an airplane, the better it will handle
the wind and associated turbulence
(usually). A smaller model can and will win
a contest in the right hands. A better pilot
will eventually come through and win every
time.
However, when the pilots’ abilities get
closer to each other, it is natural to want the
best equipment. The competitors will not
give their opponents any real or perceived
advantages. The more equal the equipment,
the more likely it is that the contest will be
decided by flying skill.
You can compete successfully with a
smaller airplane, such as one powered by a
.61 two-stroke engine or a 91 four-stroke.
Sooner or later you will develop the need
for equipment that is at least equal to—if
not better than—your opponent’s. Once this
happens, you are hooked!
Natural Disaster at Gator R/C—Update:
The following is paraphrased from an Email
sent by Diana Lakin.
There was a nasty fire at Gator R/C in
Brookline Station, Missouri. Diana and
Chris Lakin lost part of their house, and
smoke damage managed to ruin the rest. It
started in the main electrical feed to the
house; mother nature’s lightning was the
cause.
Apart from losing their home, Diana and
Chris lost approximately 15 airplanes/
helicopters. The company lost a great deal
of inventory. They were unable to answer
the telephone or E-mail for roughly two
weeks in September and October and are
concerned that many people will be
confused and may be getting angry. They
appreciate your patience and will try to get
back up and running as soon as possible.
My thoughts go out to Gator R/C and all
of you readers who have gone through this
season’s storms and many natural disasters.
I wish you and yours a swift return to
normality. MA
Edition: Model Aviation - 2005/01
Page Numbers: 114,118,120
Edition: Model Aviation - 2005/01
Page Numbers: 114,118,120
114 MODEL AVIATION
Eric Henderson, 303 Shady Ln., Marlton NJ 08053; E-mail: [email protected]
RADIO CONTROL AEROBATICS
Sean McMurtry and his dad battled through a midair and
teething troubles, but Sean eventually made the F3A team.
Don Szczur with his Focus II and his son’s lucky-dog mascot. He
missed making the US F3A team by a point.
Quique Somenzini finished an impressive second place at this
year’s Nats, but not as a member of the US FAI F3A team.
Ireland, Canada, and the US. The judging
standards were not International Miniature
Aerobatic Club (IMAC) or FAI; they were
more of a hybrid, leaning heavily toward
precision and accuracy.
This contest was a who’s who of pilots.
A popular misconception is that it is an
IMAC event—definitely not an FAI F3A
competition. It is much better defined as
what it is rather than what it is not. The Don
Lowe Masters is a unique event flown with
large Scale versions of full-scale airplanes
which execute some serious precision
aerobatics.
If you look at the makeup of those who
were invited, you would see pilots from
both disciplines and a large group who has
flown both styles for many years. No matter
what their derivation, the one thing they all
had in common was that they could really
fly. “Best in the world” is not strong
enough to convey what we watched.
Brian Hebert, who performed the Known finals routines, is
rumored to be the next US F3A team manager.
THE DON LOWE Masters was held
courtesy of Pat Hartness and many sponsors
at the Triple Tree Aerodrome in Woodruff,
South Carolina, September 30-October 2.
This event is looking more and more like,
and probably will be, the new Tournament
of Champions (TOC) for RC Aerobatics.
I was honored to be invited to go down
there and judge. I was in some special
company, not the least of which was Don
Lowe himself. Judges came from England,
118 MODEL AVIATION
skilled pilots do not get to differentiate themselves until the finals. The
other side is that there is the potential for some pilots to make it who
are not ready or have not practiced the finals routines.
Regardless of all the preceding, the pilots who eventually form the
US team really do earn their places. What never gets enough attention
or appreciation is the need for an expert caller. The schedules,
especially the Unknowns, are extremely difficult. There is also a need
to provide funding for these team members, but that’s another column
in itself!
At this year’s Team Trials, the FAI F3A contestants flew P-05 for
three days, performing six rounds of the preliminary schedule. The
best score from each day was counted, and one best remaining score
from any of the three days was counted.
The top six pilots won at least one round each. Chip and Quique
carried four rounds of 1,000 points each. The finalists were:
1) Quique Somenzini: 1,000.00
2) Chip Hyde: 1,000.00
3) Jason Shulman: 991.63
4) Sean McMurtry: 989.19
5) Don Szczur: 988.22
6) Andrew Jesky: 970.38
7) Troy Newman: 969.52
8) Kenny Lauter: 952.45
(Mike Caglia finished ninth.) A special mention goes to Sean
McMurtry, who had a midair in the first round of the contest. He and
his father then went to his backup model and spent most of the contest
getting it into competition shape. That got him into the finals.
Young Andrew Jesky made an excellent showing and will be a
force to be reckoned with in the future. (He too attended the Don
Lowe Masters.) Chip Hyde battled a bad throttle servo and still came
out near the top.
The finals uses a different method of totaling the scores. Round
One is a Known finals schedule (F-05). Round Two is the first
Unknown schedule. Round Three is another round of F-05. Round
Four is the second Unknown schedule.
The winner is determined by adding the best of the Knownschedule
scores to the best of either of the Unknown-schedule scores.
The results were:
1) Jason Shulman: 1,999.29
2) Quique Somenzini: 1,995.46
3) Chip Hyde: 1,986.72
4) Sean McMurtry: 1,982.53
5) Don Szczur: 1,981.24
6) Troy Newman: 1,824.25
7) Andrew Jesky: 1,747.80
8) Kenny Lauter: 1,701.20
Most notable was that Chip won both of the Known rounds.
Quique won the first Unknown, and Jason tied Sean for the second
Unknown. The system is finely balanced, and including a non-
Dave Guerin and Tony Stillman (third and fourth from left) are ex-
US team managers who have also run the Pattern Nats.
The airplanes were much bigger and a bit louder, but the
schedules still demanded accurate maneuvers. Spins and snaps had
to be executed correctly. A 1-point-per-5°-error standard was used.
There was a significant difference when it came to the Freestyle
component, but that was to be expected. Freestyle is definitely the
crowd pleaser, and it certainly had my heart thumping when I was
in the front row!
A sort of déjà vu feeling kept running through my mind. In July
of this year I judged the FAI F3A Team Selection Finals in Muncie,
Indiana—another finals with almost the same top pilots (although
some names were different—most notably Christophe Paysant Le
Roux and Mark Leseberg).
In front of me were current and ex-World Champions who may
have been holding a prequel to the next F3A World Championships.
Jason Shulman, Quique Somenzini, Christophe, and Chip Hyde
placed, in that order. All of the US world team members were
competing: Jason, Chip, Sean McMurtry, and Don Szczur (team
alternate).
This leads me to how they made it onto the US FAI F3A team.
The Team Trials was combined with the AMA Nats event this year.
I am often asked why this is not always the case. Why don’t we
simply take the top three from the AMA event 406 (FAI) category?
I wish that there was a simple answer, but it is complicated.
First, the AMA contest is open to all members from anywhere in
the world. This year there were some Canadians and Argentineans
in the mix.
Second, the judges for a Team Trials are usually one per AMA
district, and they judge all of the entrants. At a Nats, the judges’
pool consists primarily of Masters (AMA event 404) contestants.
Third, compromises are made in judging. The heats at the Team
Trials were judged primarily by Nats Masters contestants. The FAI
Team Trials Committee chose the panel of judges for the finals, and
it contained some well-known, well-qualified judges.
Fourth, it gets sticky when the finals contains non-US pilots, or,
put another way, pilots who are ineligible for the US team. Some
argue that this denies potential pilots the chance to be in contention.
It also becomes problematic at best when you are flying in heats
against a pilot of, say, Quique Somenzini’s caliber. This year his
performance did depress scores of those who were unfortunate
enough to be in his group in every round.
Fifth, the FAI pilots never get to fly the more difficult F-05
schedules unless they make it into the finals. FAI differs from all
AMA classes in that it has two schedules for the pilots to learn: a P
series and an F series (Preliminaries and Finals respectively).
In Europe and in the World Championships, a semifinals routine
is flown that employs the finals routine. The finals, then, usually
comprises two Known and two different Unknown routines.
Because the semifinals system is bypassed, contestants enter the
finals without ever having been “tested” with a P-05 schedule.
There are two sides to this problem, one of which is that the more
Chip Hyde’s Pattern Double Vision biplane performed strongly
with the new YS 1.60DZ engine on the front.
team-eligible pilot has to have an effect on
the final outcome. It is also worth noting
how close Sean McMurtry’s and Don
Szczur’s scores were.
There is a golden rule in business: you
never report a problem without at least
having a proposed solution. My two cents is
that the FAI F3A Nats needs a bit of a
change to make it fairer and much more
attractive to those who travel so far to be
there.
The first change would be to scrap the
artificial grouping and seeding of the
pilots and get back to the sound practice of
running normal rounds. In a normal round,
all of the FAI pilots would get to fly in
front of the same judging panel. This
could be done on two sites in one
afternoon. Split the pilots into two groups,
and swap the judging panels at the halfway
mark.
The second change would be to run P-05
preliminary schedules only on Day One and
Day Two. Run pseudo semifinals with F-05
on Day Three. The word “pseudo” refers to
the fact that all pilots would be allowed to
fly in this semifinal round.
The third change would be that the
qualifying scores would be the total of a
pilot’s top four scores of the six rounds
flown. At least one score would have to be
from the third day (one round of F-05). If a
pilot had a bad Day One or Day Two and,
in a worst-case scenario, had two failed
flights, the four-flight total could include
both semifinal scores.
This system would achieve the goal of
having the pilots who make it into the finals
prove their finals-schedule skills. It would
also allow all of the FAI pilots to
experience both of the FAI schedules in a
competition environment.
Last, if there were non-US contestants
in a Team Trials, we would change the way
we tabulated the scores. We would have the
Nats results calculated as we currently do,
but we would remove the scores of those
who would not qualify to be on a US team.
Then we would recompute and renormalize
the scores to see who should be on the US
F3A team. It’s that easy!
Frequently Asked Question: “Should I
compete with a small model or a big model
in Pattern?” This question comes up all the
time, and the answer is fairly simple.
All Pattern airplanes are basically
designed to fly well and are intended to
perform the required maneuvers. The
bigger an airplane, the better it will handle
the wind and associated turbulence
(usually). A smaller model can and will win
a contest in the right hands. A better pilot
will eventually come through and win every
time.
However, when the pilots’ abilities get
closer to each other, it is natural to want the
best equipment. The competitors will not
give their opponents any real or perceived
advantages. The more equal the equipment,
the more likely it is that the contest will be
decided by flying skill.
You can compete successfully with a
smaller airplane, such as one powered by a
.61 two-stroke engine or a 91 four-stroke.
Sooner or later you will develop the need
for equipment that is at least equal to—if
not better than—your opponent’s. Once this
happens, you are hooked!
Natural Disaster at Gator R/C—Update:
The following is paraphrased from an Email
sent by Diana Lakin.
There was a nasty fire at Gator R/C in
Brookline Station, Missouri. Diana and
Chris Lakin lost part of their house, and
smoke damage managed to ruin the rest. It
started in the main electrical feed to the
house; mother nature’s lightning was the
cause.
Apart from losing their home, Diana and
Chris lost approximately 15 airplanes/
helicopters. The company lost a great deal
of inventory. They were unable to answer
the telephone or E-mail for roughly two
weeks in September and October and are
concerned that many people will be
confused and may be getting angry. They
appreciate your patience and will try to get
back up and running as soon as possible.
My thoughts go out to Gator R/C and all
of you readers who have gone through this
season’s storms and many natural disasters.
I wish you and yours a swift return to
normality. MA
Edition: Model Aviation - 2005/01
Page Numbers: 114,118,120
114 MODEL AVIATION
Eric Henderson, 303 Shady Ln., Marlton NJ 08053; E-mail: [email protected]
RADIO CONTROL AEROBATICS
Sean McMurtry and his dad battled through a midair and
teething troubles, but Sean eventually made the F3A team.
Don Szczur with his Focus II and his son’s lucky-dog mascot. He
missed making the US F3A team by a point.
Quique Somenzini finished an impressive second place at this
year’s Nats, but not as a member of the US FAI F3A team.
Ireland, Canada, and the US. The judging
standards were not International Miniature
Aerobatic Club (IMAC) or FAI; they were
more of a hybrid, leaning heavily toward
precision and accuracy.
This contest was a who’s who of pilots.
A popular misconception is that it is an
IMAC event—definitely not an FAI F3A
competition. It is much better defined as
what it is rather than what it is not. The Don
Lowe Masters is a unique event flown with
large Scale versions of full-scale airplanes
which execute some serious precision
aerobatics.
If you look at the makeup of those who
were invited, you would see pilots from
both disciplines and a large group who has
flown both styles for many years. No matter
what their derivation, the one thing they all
had in common was that they could really
fly. “Best in the world” is not strong
enough to convey what we watched.
Brian Hebert, who performed the Known finals routines, is
rumored to be the next US F3A team manager.
THE DON LOWE Masters was held
courtesy of Pat Hartness and many sponsors
at the Triple Tree Aerodrome in Woodruff,
South Carolina, September 30-October 2.
This event is looking more and more like,
and probably will be, the new Tournament
of Champions (TOC) for RC Aerobatics.
I was honored to be invited to go down
there and judge. I was in some special
company, not the least of which was Don
Lowe himself. Judges came from England,
118 MODEL AVIATION
skilled pilots do not get to differentiate themselves until the finals. The
other side is that there is the potential for some pilots to make it who
are not ready or have not practiced the finals routines.
Regardless of all the preceding, the pilots who eventually form the
US team really do earn their places. What never gets enough attention
or appreciation is the need for an expert caller. The schedules,
especially the Unknowns, are extremely difficult. There is also a need
to provide funding for these team members, but that’s another column
in itself!
At this year’s Team Trials, the FAI F3A contestants flew P-05 for
three days, performing six rounds of the preliminary schedule. The
best score from each day was counted, and one best remaining score
from any of the three days was counted.
The top six pilots won at least one round each. Chip and Quique
carried four rounds of 1,000 points each. The finalists were:
1) Quique Somenzini: 1,000.00
2) Chip Hyde: 1,000.00
3) Jason Shulman: 991.63
4) Sean McMurtry: 989.19
5) Don Szczur: 988.22
6) Andrew Jesky: 970.38
7) Troy Newman: 969.52
8) Kenny Lauter: 952.45
(Mike Caglia finished ninth.) A special mention goes to Sean
McMurtry, who had a midair in the first round of the contest. He and
his father then went to his backup model and spent most of the contest
getting it into competition shape. That got him into the finals.
Young Andrew Jesky made an excellent showing and will be a
force to be reckoned with in the future. (He too attended the Don
Lowe Masters.) Chip Hyde battled a bad throttle servo and still came
out near the top.
The finals uses a different method of totaling the scores. Round
One is a Known finals schedule (F-05). Round Two is the first
Unknown schedule. Round Three is another round of F-05. Round
Four is the second Unknown schedule.
The winner is determined by adding the best of the Knownschedule
scores to the best of either of the Unknown-schedule scores.
The results were:
1) Jason Shulman: 1,999.29
2) Quique Somenzini: 1,995.46
3) Chip Hyde: 1,986.72
4) Sean McMurtry: 1,982.53
5) Don Szczur: 1,981.24
6) Troy Newman: 1,824.25
7) Andrew Jesky: 1,747.80
8) Kenny Lauter: 1,701.20
Most notable was that Chip won both of the Known rounds.
Quique won the first Unknown, and Jason tied Sean for the second
Unknown. The system is finely balanced, and including a non-
Dave Guerin and Tony Stillman (third and fourth from left) are ex-
US team managers who have also run the Pattern Nats.
The airplanes were much bigger and a bit louder, but the
schedules still demanded accurate maneuvers. Spins and snaps had
to be executed correctly. A 1-point-per-5°-error standard was used.
There was a significant difference when it came to the Freestyle
component, but that was to be expected. Freestyle is definitely the
crowd pleaser, and it certainly had my heart thumping when I was
in the front row!
A sort of déjà vu feeling kept running through my mind. In July
of this year I judged the FAI F3A Team Selection Finals in Muncie,
Indiana—another finals with almost the same top pilots (although
some names were different—most notably Christophe Paysant Le
Roux and Mark Leseberg).
In front of me were current and ex-World Champions who may
have been holding a prequel to the next F3A World Championships.
Jason Shulman, Quique Somenzini, Christophe, and Chip Hyde
placed, in that order. All of the US world team members were
competing: Jason, Chip, Sean McMurtry, and Don Szczur (team
alternate).
This leads me to how they made it onto the US FAI F3A team.
The Team Trials was combined with the AMA Nats event this year.
I am often asked why this is not always the case. Why don’t we
simply take the top three from the AMA event 406 (FAI) category?
I wish that there was a simple answer, but it is complicated.
First, the AMA contest is open to all members from anywhere in
the world. This year there were some Canadians and Argentineans
in the mix.
Second, the judges for a Team Trials are usually one per AMA
district, and they judge all of the entrants. At a Nats, the judges’
pool consists primarily of Masters (AMA event 404) contestants.
Third, compromises are made in judging. The heats at the Team
Trials were judged primarily by Nats Masters contestants. The FAI
Team Trials Committee chose the panel of judges for the finals, and
it contained some well-known, well-qualified judges.
Fourth, it gets sticky when the finals contains non-US pilots, or,
put another way, pilots who are ineligible for the US team. Some
argue that this denies potential pilots the chance to be in contention.
It also becomes problematic at best when you are flying in heats
against a pilot of, say, Quique Somenzini’s caliber. This year his
performance did depress scores of those who were unfortunate
enough to be in his group in every round.
Fifth, the FAI pilots never get to fly the more difficult F-05
schedules unless they make it into the finals. FAI differs from all
AMA classes in that it has two schedules for the pilots to learn: a P
series and an F series (Preliminaries and Finals respectively).
In Europe and in the World Championships, a semifinals routine
is flown that employs the finals routine. The finals, then, usually
comprises two Known and two different Unknown routines.
Because the semifinals system is bypassed, contestants enter the
finals without ever having been “tested” with a P-05 schedule.
There are two sides to this problem, one of which is that the more
Chip Hyde’s Pattern Double Vision biplane performed strongly
with the new YS 1.60DZ engine on the front.
team-eligible pilot has to have an effect on
the final outcome. It is also worth noting
how close Sean McMurtry’s and Don
Szczur’s scores were.
There is a golden rule in business: you
never report a problem without at least
having a proposed solution. My two cents is
that the FAI F3A Nats needs a bit of a
change to make it fairer and much more
attractive to those who travel so far to be
there.
The first change would be to scrap the
artificial grouping and seeding of the
pilots and get back to the sound practice of
running normal rounds. In a normal round,
all of the FAI pilots would get to fly in
front of the same judging panel. This
could be done on two sites in one
afternoon. Split the pilots into two groups,
and swap the judging panels at the halfway
mark.
The second change would be to run P-05
preliminary schedules only on Day One and
Day Two. Run pseudo semifinals with F-05
on Day Three. The word “pseudo” refers to
the fact that all pilots would be allowed to
fly in this semifinal round.
The third change would be that the
qualifying scores would be the total of a
pilot’s top four scores of the six rounds
flown. At least one score would have to be
from the third day (one round of F-05). If a
pilot had a bad Day One or Day Two and,
in a worst-case scenario, had two failed
flights, the four-flight total could include
both semifinal scores.
This system would achieve the goal of
having the pilots who make it into the finals
prove their finals-schedule skills. It would
also allow all of the FAI pilots to
experience both of the FAI schedules in a
competition environment.
Last, if there were non-US contestants
in a Team Trials, we would change the way
we tabulated the scores. We would have the
Nats results calculated as we currently do,
but we would remove the scores of those
who would not qualify to be on a US team.
Then we would recompute and renormalize
the scores to see who should be on the US
F3A team. It’s that easy!
Frequently Asked Question: “Should I
compete with a small model or a big model
in Pattern?” This question comes up all the
time, and the answer is fairly simple.
All Pattern airplanes are basically
designed to fly well and are intended to
perform the required maneuvers. The
bigger an airplane, the better it will handle
the wind and associated turbulence
(usually). A smaller model can and will win
a contest in the right hands. A better pilot
will eventually come through and win every
time.
However, when the pilots’ abilities get
closer to each other, it is natural to want the
best equipment. The competitors will not
give their opponents any real or perceived
advantages. The more equal the equipment,
the more likely it is that the contest will be
decided by flying skill.
You can compete successfully with a
smaller airplane, such as one powered by a
.61 two-stroke engine or a 91 four-stroke.
Sooner or later you will develop the need
for equipment that is at least equal to—if
not better than—your opponent’s. Once this
happens, you are hooked!
Natural Disaster at Gator R/C—Update:
The following is paraphrased from an Email
sent by Diana Lakin.
There was a nasty fire at Gator R/C in
Brookline Station, Missouri. Diana and
Chris Lakin lost part of their house, and
smoke damage managed to ruin the rest. It
started in the main electrical feed to the
house; mother nature’s lightning was the
cause.
Apart from losing their home, Diana and
Chris lost approximately 15 airplanes/
helicopters. The company lost a great deal
of inventory. They were unable to answer
the telephone or E-mail for roughly two
weeks in September and October and are
concerned that many people will be
confused and may be getting angry. They
appreciate your patience and will try to get
back up and running as soon as possible.
My thoughts go out to Gator R/C and all
of you readers who have gone through this
season’s storms and many natural disasters.
I wish you and yours a swift return to
normality. MA