134 Model Aviation April 2012 www.ModelAviation.com
The rules, while restrictive enough
to keep things simple, still allow a fair
amount of design creativity. Indoor
FF enthusiast, Kang Lee, took a look
at the top F1L models of the 2011
Nats. Variations include use of tiplets,
amount of dihedral, CG location,
Warren truss wings, and droop booms.
When a particular model tops the
standings in its category, people tend
to copy it. You end up with a bunch
of look-alike models in the air and it
can be hard to find yours. However, in
F1L, a clear favorite has not emerged.
The times of various models are still
close enough that competitors are
comfortable pursuing their own special
nuances. Viva la différence!
If you are looking for your next
challenge, consider F1L. There are
many designs to start with, and plenty
of variations to explore. They are fun to
fly in all ceiling heights, and will help
prepare you for more complex models.
Indoor FF Tools: A Stroke Watch
Top times in low-ceiling sites
invariably involve some sort of energy
management—usually through the
propeller. The goal is to use the hightorque
portion of the energy release
(instead of backing it off) without
out-climbing the site, and to keep the
model in the air during the low-torque
tail end.
Without such energy management,
M y F1L model has been nominated for the National Free Flight Society
(NFFS) Indoor FF Model of the Year, which is quite an honor. The airplane
has been a good performer at the Indoor FF Nats, with five wins, five silver
medals, and one third-place finish that was its lowest ever. That stellar record didn’t
take much effort, though; it is easy to fly. I’ve only built one and I only take it out
of the box once a year. I launch a couple of test flights, and put it up for its usual
times.
That got me thinking about what a nice starter category F1L is. It is a natural
second model after Limited Pennyplane (LPP), which I discussed in a previous
column.
F1L is limited to an 18-inch wingspan with a 3-inch cord, and has a set of rules
keeping its complexity low (solid motorstick and tailboom, no variable-geometry
propellers, etc.). The rules are the same as EZB, except for a minimum weight
limit of 1.2 grams (modern EZBs weigh roughly 0.5 gram and can be as light as 0.3
gram).
What a difference half a gram makes! EZBs are finicky, fragile, and challenging
to fly well. Each component is a delicate balance
between weight and strength, and must be in perfect
harmony with the rest of the model. Component flex
is inevitable, and is actually used to tame launches
(via motorstick bow) and emulate variable-pitch
mechanisms (through flaring propellers).
By comparison, F1L models are relatively stout and
simple. Wood selection is more important than in a
LPP, but not as demanding as the bigger, lighter classes.
Trim adjustments stay put, and motorsticks and wing
spars don’t contort excessively under launch loads.
F1L—International EZB
by John Kagan
[email protected]
PLUS:
> Stroke watches
> Indoor FF Nats update
> Indoor Fling
> Two new presidents
Left: Jim Richmond’s Nats
silver medal F1L has large
tiplets and a funky singletip-
dihedral rudder. Hood
photo.
Right: Larry Calliau uses
a unique propeller-blade
shape on his F1L, with a
wide root area to help it flare
more. Photo by Jeff Hood.
Kang Lee placed third at the Nats with a conventional layout
F1L. Hood photo.
www.ModelAviation.com April 2012 Model Aviation 135
you are left with a relatively small
section in the middle of the torque
curve, and you lose the energy and
associated time on either side.
Models such as the F1L get
their energy management through
aerodynamic deflection of the propeller
blades—called flaring propellers—
because variable-geometry mechanisms
are not allowed. Propeller blades are
offset, with their center of pressure
in front of the spar so that high loads
twist the blade to a higher pitch.
It is tricky to get the right amount
of change. Sanding the blade or spar
can increase the amount of movement,
but if you go too far there is not much
you can do to go in the other direction.
A propeller is tuned for a particular
ceiling height, so a collection is needed
if you fly in more than one site.
Other classes benefit from variable
pitch and variable diameter propellers.
The mechanisms are harder to
construct, but easier to fly. Springs,
hinges, and adjustment screws provide
a deterministic method of dialing in the
flight characteristics for a particular site.
The first milestone is adjusting
the propeller so that a no-backoff
flight stays under the ceiling and uses
almost all the turns in the motor. But
even with such an accomplishment,
there are tweaks that can improve
performance, such as adjusting the
amount of time the propeller stays
at high pitch, or how quickly the
propeller changes to full low pitch.
This is where a stopwatch that has
a “stroke-rate” feature comes in; it
is the easiest way to measure these
variables. You program the number of
events you will time (e.g. paddles on a
rowboat, miles in a lap of a racecourse,
or revolutions of a propeller), and the
units of the result (rpm, mph, etc.).
My watch is programmed to time five
propeller revolutions, and gives me the
resulting rpm.
Armed with such a tool, you can
determine when a propeller begins
changing pitch. At launch, the
propeller rpm will steadily decline
(assuming there are no other variables
such as flaring blades). After a period
of time, the rpms will level out or
begin to increase. This indicates that
the mechanism has moved off the
high-pitch stop and is in the process of
transitioning to low pitch.
People often ask me if my F1D
model has “switched to low pitch
yet,” as though it is a singular event,
similar to flipping a light switch. I tell
them that it has been changing since
approximately 6 to 8 minutes into the
flight, and will continue for roughly
another 27 minutes.
The time of the initial change is not
the only variable that can be measured.
When I am tuning a new propeller
or adjusting to a new flying site, I
will often map the rpms at 2-minute
intervals for the entire flight.
The resulting graph can be analyzed
to determine such factors as launch
rpm, minimum rpm, transition start,
maximum rpm, transition finish,
transition rate, and final rpm.
One strategy is to fly at a very high
pitch initially, to use the high motor
torque as slowly as possible without
gaining a lot of altitude, and then
transition enough to climb to the
ceiling as the torque starts to come
down. My flying buddies and I call that
“climbing on the spring.” At the 2008
F1D World Championship, I theorized
that it would be more efficient to
climb on the initial burst, with a
less extreme initial pitch, and then
transition only enough to maintain a
level cruise as the torque declined.
While I was restructuring my flight
profile, German competitor Lutz
Schramm logged some great test hops.
Teammate Brett Sanborn and I took
a seat and mapped one of his flights
using a stroke watch. No need to quiz
him or dig through his flight log; we
saw by our graph that Lutz was using
a nearly identical strategy, which was
useful corroboration.
After you have stocked your toolbox
with the Indoor FF essentials and
you progress to variable-geometry
propellers (it might even help with
flaring propellers, though I haven’t
tried that yet), consider a stroke watch
to expand the amount of data at your
fingertips.
Left: The author’s 2012 National Champion
F1L features big polyhedral that is the result
of guessing at the span of the flat planform
during a last-minute build more than 10
years ago. Hood photo.
Below: Leo Pilachowski’s F1L features a flat
wing with small tiplets. Leo is new to the
game, but is quickly working his way into the
top ranks. Hood photo.
Bill Gowen’s droopboom
F1L is a multipletime
Nats champion.
Hood photo.
Indoor FF Nats Update
If you have ever thought about
attending the AMA Indoor FF Nats and
NFFS US Indoor Championships at East
Tennessee State University (ETSU), this
is the year to make it happen.
The school’s basketball conference
has required ETSU to install a new
set of banners that obstruct the main
flying area. This is tragic for Indoor FF,
because this is one the best sites we’ve
found so far. Rock-solid air stability and
immunity to outside weather conditions
make the Mini-Dome ideal for delicate
models, despite the introduction of “Big
Blue,” the scoreboard, a few years ago
which chopped off a slice of the flying
space.
The good news is that AMA
executive director Dave Mathewson
has generously agreed to finance the
removal and reinstallation of the
banners one time, allowing the 2012
event to take place. The bad news is
that the future of the event at this site
is uncertain.
Come enjoy five days of flying in this
legendary site, May 23-27, 2012, as we
concurrently try to find another venue
and work to see if there is an affordable
way to stay.
Indoor Fling
A late entry to the “notable 2012
Indoor FF contests” is the Indoor Fling
in Pontiac, Michigan, jointly hosted by
the Cloudbusters Model Airplane Club
and the Detroit Balsa Bugs. After two
previous sites—both inflatable domes—
blew down, the May 6, 2012, version
will now be held at the Ultimate Soccer
Arena’s permanent Category III-height
building.
The contest features AMA and Flying
Aces Club classes, plus a Phantom
Flash event for beginners. Two on-site
restaurants complete the picture.
Join the fun, and help make this
contest a success at its new site.
New Leaders
Congratulations to AMA’s new
president, Bob Brown, and new NFFS
president, John Lorbiecki.
Bob’s campaign statement highlighted
the value he places on AMA and FAI
competition, vital parts of Indoor FF.
The Indoor community has some
important work ahead, and will
certainly benefit from AMA’s continued
support. We look forward to working
with Bob to keep Indoor FF alive and
well through projects such as the Indoor
FF Nats, flying-site procurement, and
the World Championships program.
John has international competition
experience—his son is a Junior F1J
world champion—and has already posed
some interesting ideas for the Indoor
community, including rotating the
Indoor FF Nats across the country, and
eliminating the Builder of the Model
rule. Whatever is decided, Indoor FF
will benefit from the attention and fresh
thoughts.
More good times lie ahead, and this
is the perfect time for everyone to get
involved and help guide our progress.
Correction
In my previous column I identified
Brett Sanborn’s new Category IV F1D
record as 38:03 (my previous record).
His new record is 38:36.
Sources:
2011 Nats F1L discussion
http://bit.ly/AADYN3
2012 AMA Indoor FF Nats
www.modelaircraft.org/events/nats.aspx
2012 Indoor Fling
http://bit.ly/yPzc5D
NFFS
www.freeflight.org
Edition: Model Aviation - 2012/04
Page Numbers: 134,135,136
Edition: Model Aviation - 2012/04
Page Numbers: 134,135,136
134 Model Aviation April 2012 www.ModelAviation.com
The rules, while restrictive enough
to keep things simple, still allow a fair
amount of design creativity. Indoor
FF enthusiast, Kang Lee, took a look
at the top F1L models of the 2011
Nats. Variations include use of tiplets,
amount of dihedral, CG location,
Warren truss wings, and droop booms.
When a particular model tops the
standings in its category, people tend
to copy it. You end up with a bunch
of look-alike models in the air and it
can be hard to find yours. However, in
F1L, a clear favorite has not emerged.
The times of various models are still
close enough that competitors are
comfortable pursuing their own special
nuances. Viva la différence!
If you are looking for your next
challenge, consider F1L. There are
many designs to start with, and plenty
of variations to explore. They are fun to
fly in all ceiling heights, and will help
prepare you for more complex models.
Indoor FF Tools: A Stroke Watch
Top times in low-ceiling sites
invariably involve some sort of energy
management—usually through the
propeller. The goal is to use the hightorque
portion of the energy release
(instead of backing it off) without
out-climbing the site, and to keep the
model in the air during the low-torque
tail end.
Without such energy management,
M y F1L model has been nominated for the National Free Flight Society
(NFFS) Indoor FF Model of the Year, which is quite an honor. The airplane
has been a good performer at the Indoor FF Nats, with five wins, five silver
medals, and one third-place finish that was its lowest ever. That stellar record didn’t
take much effort, though; it is easy to fly. I’ve only built one and I only take it out
of the box once a year. I launch a couple of test flights, and put it up for its usual
times.
That got me thinking about what a nice starter category F1L is. It is a natural
second model after Limited Pennyplane (LPP), which I discussed in a previous
column.
F1L is limited to an 18-inch wingspan with a 3-inch cord, and has a set of rules
keeping its complexity low (solid motorstick and tailboom, no variable-geometry
propellers, etc.). The rules are the same as EZB, except for a minimum weight
limit of 1.2 grams (modern EZBs weigh roughly 0.5 gram and can be as light as 0.3
gram).
What a difference half a gram makes! EZBs are finicky, fragile, and challenging
to fly well. Each component is a delicate balance
between weight and strength, and must be in perfect
harmony with the rest of the model. Component flex
is inevitable, and is actually used to tame launches
(via motorstick bow) and emulate variable-pitch
mechanisms (through flaring propellers).
By comparison, F1L models are relatively stout and
simple. Wood selection is more important than in a
LPP, but not as demanding as the bigger, lighter classes.
Trim adjustments stay put, and motorsticks and wing
spars don’t contort excessively under launch loads.
F1L—International EZB
by John Kagan
[email protected]
PLUS:
> Stroke watches
> Indoor FF Nats update
> Indoor Fling
> Two new presidents
Left: Jim Richmond’s Nats
silver medal F1L has large
tiplets and a funky singletip-
dihedral rudder. Hood
photo.
Right: Larry Calliau uses
a unique propeller-blade
shape on his F1L, with a
wide root area to help it flare
more. Photo by Jeff Hood.
Kang Lee placed third at the Nats with a conventional layout
F1L. Hood photo.
www.ModelAviation.com April 2012 Model Aviation 135
you are left with a relatively small
section in the middle of the torque
curve, and you lose the energy and
associated time on either side.
Models such as the F1L get
their energy management through
aerodynamic deflection of the propeller
blades—called flaring propellers—
because variable-geometry mechanisms
are not allowed. Propeller blades are
offset, with their center of pressure
in front of the spar so that high loads
twist the blade to a higher pitch.
It is tricky to get the right amount
of change. Sanding the blade or spar
can increase the amount of movement,
but if you go too far there is not much
you can do to go in the other direction.
A propeller is tuned for a particular
ceiling height, so a collection is needed
if you fly in more than one site.
Other classes benefit from variable
pitch and variable diameter propellers.
The mechanisms are harder to
construct, but easier to fly. Springs,
hinges, and adjustment screws provide
a deterministic method of dialing in the
flight characteristics for a particular site.
The first milestone is adjusting
the propeller so that a no-backoff
flight stays under the ceiling and uses
almost all the turns in the motor. But
even with such an accomplishment,
there are tweaks that can improve
performance, such as adjusting the
amount of time the propeller stays
at high pitch, or how quickly the
propeller changes to full low pitch.
This is where a stopwatch that has
a “stroke-rate” feature comes in; it
is the easiest way to measure these
variables. You program the number of
events you will time (e.g. paddles on a
rowboat, miles in a lap of a racecourse,
or revolutions of a propeller), and the
units of the result (rpm, mph, etc.).
My watch is programmed to time five
propeller revolutions, and gives me the
resulting rpm.
Armed with such a tool, you can
determine when a propeller begins
changing pitch. At launch, the
propeller rpm will steadily decline
(assuming there are no other variables
such as flaring blades). After a period
of time, the rpms will level out or
begin to increase. This indicates that
the mechanism has moved off the
high-pitch stop and is in the process of
transitioning to low pitch.
People often ask me if my F1D
model has “switched to low pitch
yet,” as though it is a singular event,
similar to flipping a light switch. I tell
them that it has been changing since
approximately 6 to 8 minutes into the
flight, and will continue for roughly
another 27 minutes.
The time of the initial change is not
the only variable that can be measured.
When I am tuning a new propeller
or adjusting to a new flying site, I
will often map the rpms at 2-minute
intervals for the entire flight.
The resulting graph can be analyzed
to determine such factors as launch
rpm, minimum rpm, transition start,
maximum rpm, transition finish,
transition rate, and final rpm.
One strategy is to fly at a very high
pitch initially, to use the high motor
torque as slowly as possible without
gaining a lot of altitude, and then
transition enough to climb to the
ceiling as the torque starts to come
down. My flying buddies and I call that
“climbing on the spring.” At the 2008
F1D World Championship, I theorized
that it would be more efficient to
climb on the initial burst, with a
less extreme initial pitch, and then
transition only enough to maintain a
level cruise as the torque declined.
While I was restructuring my flight
profile, German competitor Lutz
Schramm logged some great test hops.
Teammate Brett Sanborn and I took
a seat and mapped one of his flights
using a stroke watch. No need to quiz
him or dig through his flight log; we
saw by our graph that Lutz was using
a nearly identical strategy, which was
useful corroboration.
After you have stocked your toolbox
with the Indoor FF essentials and
you progress to variable-geometry
propellers (it might even help with
flaring propellers, though I haven’t
tried that yet), consider a stroke watch
to expand the amount of data at your
fingertips.
Left: The author’s 2012 National Champion
F1L features big polyhedral that is the result
of guessing at the span of the flat planform
during a last-minute build more than 10
years ago. Hood photo.
Below: Leo Pilachowski’s F1L features a flat
wing with small tiplets. Leo is new to the
game, but is quickly working his way into the
top ranks. Hood photo.
Bill Gowen’s droopboom
F1L is a multipletime
Nats champion.
Hood photo.
Indoor FF Nats Update
If you have ever thought about
attending the AMA Indoor FF Nats and
NFFS US Indoor Championships at East
Tennessee State University (ETSU), this
is the year to make it happen.
The school’s basketball conference
has required ETSU to install a new
set of banners that obstruct the main
flying area. This is tragic for Indoor FF,
because this is one the best sites we’ve
found so far. Rock-solid air stability and
immunity to outside weather conditions
make the Mini-Dome ideal for delicate
models, despite the introduction of “Big
Blue,” the scoreboard, a few years ago
which chopped off a slice of the flying
space.
The good news is that AMA
executive director Dave Mathewson
has generously agreed to finance the
removal and reinstallation of the
banners one time, allowing the 2012
event to take place. The bad news is
that the future of the event at this site
is uncertain.
Come enjoy five days of flying in this
legendary site, May 23-27, 2012, as we
concurrently try to find another venue
and work to see if there is an affordable
way to stay.
Indoor Fling
A late entry to the “notable 2012
Indoor FF contests” is the Indoor Fling
in Pontiac, Michigan, jointly hosted by
the Cloudbusters Model Airplane Club
and the Detroit Balsa Bugs. After two
previous sites—both inflatable domes—
blew down, the May 6, 2012, version
will now be held at the Ultimate Soccer
Arena’s permanent Category III-height
building.
The contest features AMA and Flying
Aces Club classes, plus a Phantom
Flash event for beginners. Two on-site
restaurants complete the picture.
Join the fun, and help make this
contest a success at its new site.
New Leaders
Congratulations to AMA’s new
president, Bob Brown, and new NFFS
president, John Lorbiecki.
Bob’s campaign statement highlighted
the value he places on AMA and FAI
competition, vital parts of Indoor FF.
The Indoor community has some
important work ahead, and will
certainly benefit from AMA’s continued
support. We look forward to working
with Bob to keep Indoor FF alive and
well through projects such as the Indoor
FF Nats, flying-site procurement, and
the World Championships program.
John has international competition
experience—his son is a Junior F1J
world champion—and has already posed
some interesting ideas for the Indoor
community, including rotating the
Indoor FF Nats across the country, and
eliminating the Builder of the Model
rule. Whatever is decided, Indoor FF
will benefit from the attention and fresh
thoughts.
More good times lie ahead, and this
is the perfect time for everyone to get
involved and help guide our progress.
Correction
In my previous column I identified
Brett Sanborn’s new Category IV F1D
record as 38:03 (my previous record).
His new record is 38:36.
Sources:
2011 Nats F1L discussion
http://bit.ly/AADYN3
2012 AMA Indoor FF Nats
www.modelaircraft.org/events/nats.aspx
2012 Indoor Fling
http://bit.ly/yPzc5D
NFFS
www.freeflight.org
Edition: Model Aviation - 2012/04
Page Numbers: 134,135,136
134 Model Aviation April 2012 www.ModelAviation.com
The rules, while restrictive enough
to keep things simple, still allow a fair
amount of design creativity. Indoor
FF enthusiast, Kang Lee, took a look
at the top F1L models of the 2011
Nats. Variations include use of tiplets,
amount of dihedral, CG location,
Warren truss wings, and droop booms.
When a particular model tops the
standings in its category, people tend
to copy it. You end up with a bunch
of look-alike models in the air and it
can be hard to find yours. However, in
F1L, a clear favorite has not emerged.
The times of various models are still
close enough that competitors are
comfortable pursuing their own special
nuances. Viva la différence!
If you are looking for your next
challenge, consider F1L. There are
many designs to start with, and plenty
of variations to explore. They are fun to
fly in all ceiling heights, and will help
prepare you for more complex models.
Indoor FF Tools: A Stroke Watch
Top times in low-ceiling sites
invariably involve some sort of energy
management—usually through the
propeller. The goal is to use the hightorque
portion of the energy release
(instead of backing it off) without
out-climbing the site, and to keep the
model in the air during the low-torque
tail end.
Without such energy management,
M y F1L model has been nominated for the National Free Flight Society
(NFFS) Indoor FF Model of the Year, which is quite an honor. The airplane
has been a good performer at the Indoor FF Nats, with five wins, five silver
medals, and one third-place finish that was its lowest ever. That stellar record didn’t
take much effort, though; it is easy to fly. I’ve only built one and I only take it out
of the box once a year. I launch a couple of test flights, and put it up for its usual
times.
That got me thinking about what a nice starter category F1L is. It is a natural
second model after Limited Pennyplane (LPP), which I discussed in a previous
column.
F1L is limited to an 18-inch wingspan with a 3-inch cord, and has a set of rules
keeping its complexity low (solid motorstick and tailboom, no variable-geometry
propellers, etc.). The rules are the same as EZB, except for a minimum weight
limit of 1.2 grams (modern EZBs weigh roughly 0.5 gram and can be as light as 0.3
gram).
What a difference half a gram makes! EZBs are finicky, fragile, and challenging
to fly well. Each component is a delicate balance
between weight and strength, and must be in perfect
harmony with the rest of the model. Component flex
is inevitable, and is actually used to tame launches
(via motorstick bow) and emulate variable-pitch
mechanisms (through flaring propellers).
By comparison, F1L models are relatively stout and
simple. Wood selection is more important than in a
LPP, but not as demanding as the bigger, lighter classes.
Trim adjustments stay put, and motorsticks and wing
spars don’t contort excessively under launch loads.
F1L—International EZB
by John Kagan
[email protected]
PLUS:
> Stroke watches
> Indoor FF Nats update
> Indoor Fling
> Two new presidents
Left: Jim Richmond’s Nats
silver medal F1L has large
tiplets and a funky singletip-
dihedral rudder. Hood
photo.
Right: Larry Calliau uses
a unique propeller-blade
shape on his F1L, with a
wide root area to help it flare
more. Photo by Jeff Hood.
Kang Lee placed third at the Nats with a conventional layout
F1L. Hood photo.
www.ModelAviation.com April 2012 Model Aviation 135
you are left with a relatively small
section in the middle of the torque
curve, and you lose the energy and
associated time on either side.
Models such as the F1L get
their energy management through
aerodynamic deflection of the propeller
blades—called flaring propellers—
because variable-geometry mechanisms
are not allowed. Propeller blades are
offset, with their center of pressure
in front of the spar so that high loads
twist the blade to a higher pitch.
It is tricky to get the right amount
of change. Sanding the blade or spar
can increase the amount of movement,
but if you go too far there is not much
you can do to go in the other direction.
A propeller is tuned for a particular
ceiling height, so a collection is needed
if you fly in more than one site.
Other classes benefit from variable
pitch and variable diameter propellers.
The mechanisms are harder to
construct, but easier to fly. Springs,
hinges, and adjustment screws provide
a deterministic method of dialing in the
flight characteristics for a particular site.
The first milestone is adjusting
the propeller so that a no-backoff
flight stays under the ceiling and uses
almost all the turns in the motor. But
even with such an accomplishment,
there are tweaks that can improve
performance, such as adjusting the
amount of time the propeller stays
at high pitch, or how quickly the
propeller changes to full low pitch.
This is where a stopwatch that has
a “stroke-rate” feature comes in; it
is the easiest way to measure these
variables. You program the number of
events you will time (e.g. paddles on a
rowboat, miles in a lap of a racecourse,
or revolutions of a propeller), and the
units of the result (rpm, mph, etc.).
My watch is programmed to time five
propeller revolutions, and gives me the
resulting rpm.
Armed with such a tool, you can
determine when a propeller begins
changing pitch. At launch, the
propeller rpm will steadily decline
(assuming there are no other variables
such as flaring blades). After a period
of time, the rpms will level out or
begin to increase. This indicates that
the mechanism has moved off the
high-pitch stop and is in the process of
transitioning to low pitch.
People often ask me if my F1D
model has “switched to low pitch
yet,” as though it is a singular event,
similar to flipping a light switch. I tell
them that it has been changing since
approximately 6 to 8 minutes into the
flight, and will continue for roughly
another 27 minutes.
The time of the initial change is not
the only variable that can be measured.
When I am tuning a new propeller
or adjusting to a new flying site, I
will often map the rpms at 2-minute
intervals for the entire flight.
The resulting graph can be analyzed
to determine such factors as launch
rpm, minimum rpm, transition start,
maximum rpm, transition finish,
transition rate, and final rpm.
One strategy is to fly at a very high
pitch initially, to use the high motor
torque as slowly as possible without
gaining a lot of altitude, and then
transition enough to climb to the
ceiling as the torque starts to come
down. My flying buddies and I call that
“climbing on the spring.” At the 2008
F1D World Championship, I theorized
that it would be more efficient to
climb on the initial burst, with a
less extreme initial pitch, and then
transition only enough to maintain a
level cruise as the torque declined.
While I was restructuring my flight
profile, German competitor Lutz
Schramm logged some great test hops.
Teammate Brett Sanborn and I took
a seat and mapped one of his flights
using a stroke watch. No need to quiz
him or dig through his flight log; we
saw by our graph that Lutz was using
a nearly identical strategy, which was
useful corroboration.
After you have stocked your toolbox
with the Indoor FF essentials and
you progress to variable-geometry
propellers (it might even help with
flaring propellers, though I haven’t
tried that yet), consider a stroke watch
to expand the amount of data at your
fingertips.
Left: The author’s 2012 National Champion
F1L features big polyhedral that is the result
of guessing at the span of the flat planform
during a last-minute build more than 10
years ago. Hood photo.
Below: Leo Pilachowski’s F1L features a flat
wing with small tiplets. Leo is new to the
game, but is quickly working his way into the
top ranks. Hood photo.
Bill Gowen’s droopboom
F1L is a multipletime
Nats champion.
Hood photo.
Indoor FF Nats Update
If you have ever thought about
attending the AMA Indoor FF Nats and
NFFS US Indoor Championships at East
Tennessee State University (ETSU), this
is the year to make it happen.
The school’s basketball conference
has required ETSU to install a new
set of banners that obstruct the main
flying area. This is tragic for Indoor FF,
because this is one the best sites we’ve
found so far. Rock-solid air stability and
immunity to outside weather conditions
make the Mini-Dome ideal for delicate
models, despite the introduction of “Big
Blue,” the scoreboard, a few years ago
which chopped off a slice of the flying
space.
The good news is that AMA
executive director Dave Mathewson
has generously agreed to finance the
removal and reinstallation of the
banners one time, allowing the 2012
event to take place. The bad news is
that the future of the event at this site
is uncertain.
Come enjoy five days of flying in this
legendary site, May 23-27, 2012, as we
concurrently try to find another venue
and work to see if there is an affordable
way to stay.
Indoor Fling
A late entry to the “notable 2012
Indoor FF contests” is the Indoor Fling
in Pontiac, Michigan, jointly hosted by
the Cloudbusters Model Airplane Club
and the Detroit Balsa Bugs. After two
previous sites—both inflatable domes—
blew down, the May 6, 2012, version
will now be held at the Ultimate Soccer
Arena’s permanent Category III-height
building.
The contest features AMA and Flying
Aces Club classes, plus a Phantom
Flash event for beginners. Two on-site
restaurants complete the picture.
Join the fun, and help make this
contest a success at its new site.
New Leaders
Congratulations to AMA’s new
president, Bob Brown, and new NFFS
president, John Lorbiecki.
Bob’s campaign statement highlighted
the value he places on AMA and FAI
competition, vital parts of Indoor FF.
The Indoor community has some
important work ahead, and will
certainly benefit from AMA’s continued
support. We look forward to working
with Bob to keep Indoor FF alive and
well through projects such as the Indoor
FF Nats, flying-site procurement, and
the World Championships program.
John has international competition
experience—his son is a Junior F1J
world champion—and has already posed
some interesting ideas for the Indoor
community, including rotating the
Indoor FF Nats across the country, and
eliminating the Builder of the Model
rule. Whatever is decided, Indoor FF
will benefit from the attention and fresh
thoughts.
More good times lie ahead, and this
is the perfect time for everyone to get
involved and help guide our progress.
Correction
In my previous column I identified
Brett Sanborn’s new Category IV F1D
record as 38:03 (my previous record).
His new record is 38:36.
Sources:
2011 Nats F1L discussion
http://bit.ly/AADYN3
2012 AMA Indoor FF Nats
www.modelaircraft.org/events/nats.aspx
2012 Indoor Fling
http://bit.ly/yPzc5D
NFFS
www.freeflight.org
