NFFS Indoor Committee - 2012/07

The latest incarnation of the National Free Flight Society (NFFS) Indoor FF
Committee has kicked into gear. Members include Brett Sanborn, Jim Buxton,
Kang Lee, Bill Gowen, Larry Coslick, and me. The group’s charter is to support
and promote Indoor Free Flight through NFFS, Indoor’s of cial AMA SIG. Easy
enough, right?
Our top-level goals include increasing participation in both NFFS and Indoor
FF in general and maintaining our national-level  ying sites. We want more people
participating in Indoor because more participants equal more
fun.
Secondly, a broader base simpli es the process of keeping the
major sites we already have and  nding new ones to enjoy. We
want people to join NFFS because of the value of it and because
membership will help us all cooperate toward achieving our
common goals.
The committee has brainstormed a set of tasks designed to
attack these goals from a variety of angles. One way to increase
participation is to build it from the ground up with local activity
feeding the larger regional events, which in turn provides the
numbers to support the big, national-level
sites. Envision local activity as the roots,
with many small pockets of frequent
activity, probably in smaller, lower-cost
sites and possibly in the winter months as
an alternative to Outdoor  ying.
Empirically, a common set of ingredients
is apparent in local groups, allowing them
to reach a self-sustaining critical mass.
There is usually a strong personality
at the center who is passionate about
some form of aviation, and who keeps
enthusiasm high and everyone informed
through mediums such as newsletters or
mailing lists.
Doc Martin led the Miami Indoor
Aircraft Model Association (MIAMA)
group in Florida, Doc Hacker was the
godfather of Indoor FF in Cleveland,
George Armstead Jr. cofounded
the Glastonbury Aeromodelers in
Connecticut, and Laurie Barr was the
Archbishop of Cardington in England.
Who is ready to  ll their shoes?
The Indoor committee can’t create
these personalities, but we are looking
for ways to help identify and support
them. Contact me if you are, or know of,
someone who  ts this bill.
Successful local groups have places to
 y. Some people may  nd construction
fun, but without a venue where our
airplanes can take to the air, we might as
well be making display models (not that
there’s anything wrong with that). Sites
range from the ubiquitous school gym, to
the DC Maxecuters’ National Building
Museum sessions in Washington, D.C.
We’d like to collect information from
those who have  gured out how to
gain access to these valuable venues.
Hopefully their knowledge will help
others obtain local sites of their own.
Join the discussion on the NFFS website
forum to share your experiences (see the
“Sources” list).
NFFS Website
The NFFS website now includes a
section covering Indoor activity. Pictures,
video, results, and text are presented for
each event. Webmaster Alan Petersen has
been experimenting with various formats,
and is currently using a chronological
timeline page with links to the details.
Our goal is to include every Indoor
session in the United States, from the
largest national meets to the most
intimate local events.
If you have participated in an Indoor
session, make sure that it gets posted.
I expect I’ll be amazed at how much
activity is occurring that I don’t know
about.
Alan’s preferred format is to have
results in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet,
text in a Microsoft Word document, and
photos and video on a hosting website
such as Picasa, Webshots, or Photobucket.
If you are computer savvy, you
can send your
information to
Alan directly (see
“Sources”). If you
need assistance,
contact me and I’ll
help you get set up.
Increasing Participation
Another method for increasing
participation is to lure people from
similar activities. Two that spring to mind
are Outdoor FF and Science Olympiad.
Outdoor is fun, but wouldn’t it be
better without the chase bikes, sunburn,
rattlesnakes, and blown-out days?
Okay, I’m just teasing! Outdoor FF is
challenging and satisfying in its own right.
Many people fly both, but we’d like to
bring a few more into the Indoor fold.
A plan is in the works to feature an
Indoor contest during and near the
Outdoor Nats. We hope to attract
Outdoor fliers in the evening or before/
after their contest, and introduce them
to the joy of Indoor. Keep an eye out for
more information and stop by if you are
around.
A significant portion of Indoor activity
involves Outdoor fliers who are looking
to satisfy their aviation urge when it is too
cold and windy to fly outside. Dedicated
Indoor fliers do their most serious efforts
during the warm months when most big
sites are available and flying conditions
are at their best (yes, even Indoor is
affected by the weather!), but there is still
value in recognizing and supporting those
who participate in a part-time fashion.
One proposal we are investigating is a
Winter Nationals to supplement Indoor
FF Nats held in May/June. Finding an
available site will be more challenging
in the winter, since other people tend to
want to be inside too (go fi gure), but we
hope to work something out.
Science Olympiad
Science Olympiad (SO), an
elementary, middle, and high school
science competition program, has
been another great source of Indoor
participants—students, parents, and
teachers alike. One of SO’s many events
is Wright Stuff, a rubber-powered Indoor
FF model contest.
As I frequently cite, the US Junior F1D
program did a complete 180° turnabout
when SO graduates began competing in
other AMA Indoor events. The US hasn’t
gone without a Junior podium spot since
the fi rst of them took up F1D in 2002.
Wright Stuff is on rotation with a set
of other model aviation-related events
such as helicopters, balloon-launched
gliders, hand-launched gliders, and
possibly capacitor-powered airplanes.
Rubber-powered models are slated to
return in roughly two years. However,
each of these events has enough of a
connection to Indoor to be an effective
development tool.
In addition to the SO mentoring that
many Indoor fl iers already do, we’d
like to organize some demonstrations
(I’ve had a good reception simply
fl ying a model around while the kids
gather for awards at the end of an SO
contest), and point interested people
toward information that they can use
to bootstrap themselves into Indoor. A
section of the NFFS website is going to
be dedicated to how-to articles, resource
references, and other useful guidance.
After we’ve caught the attention of
a potential Indoor fl ier, we need to set
the hook. A recurring lament is that the
beginner Indoor events get overrun by
elite fl iers and are no longer attractive to
newcomers, and that we therefore need
to exclude experts.
That sounds plausible, but there is a
fundamental fl aw in the reasoning; our
activity is largely about exploring the
many intricate nuances required to fl y
longer, and an “expert” is simply someone
who is reasonably successful. Many
beginners will become experts before
long, and we can’t retroactively kick
them out.
A secondary fl aw is that most Indoor
fl iers are attracted by the challenge,
and dumbing down an event to make
it “beginner friendly” is the opposite
of a challenge. Some categories are
intentionally less complex, which
makes them more accessible, but there
is really no such thing as a “beginner”
event.
There are ways to entice beginners,
however. The Limited Pennyplane
Pro/Am, held at the Indoor Nats, has
introduced dozens of people to our
activity in the past few years. The new
rule that amateur participants need to
return their donor model back to the
pool will help perpetuate the event. We
intend to expand this program to the
other national-level contests.
Another proposal is a set of
achievement levels, modeled after
the League of Silent Flight (LSF)
Soaring program, that both beginner
and experienced fliers can strive for.
The goals would stay the same, so
each newcomer has the same set of
challenges.
The initial task would be relatively
easy, but still significant for a newcomer
(something such as a 5-minute flight
with any Indoor model), and subsequent
challenges would be more difficult.
People accomplishing each level would
have their names listed on the NFFS
website. Keep an eye out for more details.
If you have any ideas for the Indoor
Committee, or would like to help out,
contact me. Most of all, go flying and
enjoy Indoor!
Round Valley Dome
I had the opportunity to participate
in the inaugural Round Valley Dome
contest in Springerville, Arizona, this
past March. This great Category III site
covers a previously underserved area in
the Southwest.
Tom Price discovered the site several
years ago and proposed using it for
model airplanes to the school board.
He was met with a resounding “no.”
Tom didn’t give up, although it would
take years of persistent effort. He finally
got an appointment to meet with the
superintendent, and invited Steve Riley
along.
Steve brought a Pennyplane to
illustrate what they wanted to fly. The
superintendent responded, “Oh, that’s
the kind of model you’re talking about?”
Seeing the model for himself made
the difference. They arranged some
educational AMA Cub sessions for the
science students and were soon on their
way to scheduling the first contest. (I
hope Tom and Steve can share more
details of their success that will be
posted on the NFFS website.)
The Round Valley Dome is slightly
below the Category III limit, with tons
of air and floor space. Translucent panels
in the roof keep the dome warm, even
in the cold fall or spring months. The
resulting noontime hotspots on the floor
create some interesting air.
I would previously have labeled the
turbulent conditions as subpar, but
after getting schooled at the F1D World
Championships in the effective use of
strong thermals, I now see it as a new
skill to learn.
Steve is currently planning the next
contest that will likely be held in March
or April of 2013. Keep an eye out for
more details. If you live within driving
distance, you owe it to yourself to
schedule a model aviation weekend in
Springerville. You can also fly into any
of the major cities nearby and enjoy a
scenic drive as a bonus.
Johnson City Update
In my last column, I relayed that the
new banners in the Eastern Tennessee
State University Mini-Dome could
put the future of Indoor at this site in
question.
I am happy to report that the Indoor
committee has debated the topic
and decided to set the issue to rest. A
relatively small surcharge of $25, over
an average of roughly 50 participants,
will cover the current cost of removing
and replacing the banners on an ongoing
basis. Nobody wants endless cost hikes,
but this one was deemed worthwhile for
such an important site. We will attempt to
negotiate a lower fee for dealing with the
banners.
Searches for other sites will continue.
Johnson City is a world-class venue, and
not easily replaced, but it is in our best
interest to have some backup options in
the pipeline.