[F3A-Discussion] Rule proposals
steve hannah
shannah956 at yahoo.com
Sun Mar 26 12:09:29 AKDT 2017
I've been thinking about this one since the discussion I had with Jerry Budd at the Hemet contest last weekend.
I really think there are some benefits to going with 12s.
First, I think the whole argument about costs spiraling if we go to 12s is not a valid argument. Costs will spiral with 10s setups and they will probably spiral at a faster rate than with 12s. 12s setups allow us to leverage the heli motors, batteries, and esc's. These are by far and away more prevalent than our niche market 10s setups we run today. The market size and competitive nature of the 12s setups are really more favorable to pattern than continuing to rely on one or two niche market suppliers of competitive 10s motors. Who, in their right mind, is going to spend their money improving performance and capability of a motor that (if their lucky) will be sold to maybe 100 customers a year.
Pattern is not a market driver. Heli's, quadcopters, and EDF's are.
Heli motors are absolutely viable in pattern. Look at the power and performance of the Adverrun and the new offerings from BJ Park. These are all outstanding offerings that leverage the heli motors. But, we have to use motors that are perhaps not as optimal as we would if 12s were an option.
As for batteries, just go look at Hobbyking's website (where a lot of the guys get packs, at least those that don't get free or deep discount packs). How many 5s packs do you see on their website? Now, tell me how many 6s packs are offered at low prices.
The argument for losing out on the resale market is not valid either. There are way more people flying 6s and 12s setups than 10s. You can recycle your motors, esc's and batteries to the 99% of the fliers that don't fly pattern.
I really think we should go with the flow, leverage the market, and jump onto the heli motor development curve targeted at 12s batts.
From: Ron Ellis via F3A-Discussion <f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us>
To: f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2017 9:24 AM
Subject: Re: [F3A-Discussion] Rule proposals
I also agree with Mr. Lockhart. This isn't as much a safety restriction as it is a history lesson. If we had started out with 12s it would have been nice, since we now see the popularity of 6s packs. But here we are and here we should stay. It will be better for the sport to do so.
-Ron
On 3/24/2017 10:49 AM, Dr. Mike Harrison via F3A-Discussion wrote:
#yiv5920365529 #yiv5920365529 -- _filtered #yiv5920365529 {panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv5920365529 {font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv5920365529 {font-family:Tahoma;panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}#yiv5920365529 #yiv5920365529 p.yiv5920365529MsoNormal, #yiv5920365529 li.yiv5920365529MsoNormal, #yiv5920365529 div.yiv5920365529MsoNormal {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;}#yiv5920365529 a:link, #yiv5920365529 span.yiv5920365529MsoHyperlink {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv5920365529 a:visited, #yiv5920365529 span.yiv5920365529MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:purple;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv5920365529 p {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12.0pt;}#yiv5920365529 span.yiv5920365529EmailStyle18 {color:#1F497D;}#yiv5920365529 .yiv5920365529MsoChpDefault {} _filtered #yiv5920365529 {margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}#yiv5920365529 div.yiv5920365529WordSection1 {}#yiv5920365529 I agree with David. Enough is enough. Power limits should be set. Cost is very elitist and out of control. Mike From: F3A-Discussion [mailto:f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us] On Behalf Of Jon Lowe via F3A-Discussion
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2017 7:44 AM
To: Dave Lockhart <davel322 at comcast.net>; f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us
Subject: Re: [F3A-Discussion] Rule proposals Dave, I'm on the AMA rules committee, and we are debating a 12s proposal submittal for AMA classes. Would you mind if I quote your treatise below for the benefit of the other members not on the F3A list? Jon On Sep 1, 2016 7:19 PM, Dave Lockhart via F3A-Discussion <f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us> wrote:
I’ve been flying pattern since the early 1980s….and have come to be fond of a couple answers to one question – Q – How much power is enough? A – Way too much. A – More. A – I’ll let you know when I find it. In the last 30 years of pattern history, the power used has always been the most available. Zero exceptions. The history of power limits as it were – Max engine size – 60 cubic in – everyone ran 60s with pipes (and many pushed high nitro low oil fuels for more power). Max engines size – 60 2C or 120 4C. This was to allow more diversity, lower noise, “friendlier” power, etc. Didn’t happen – everyone ended up running more expensive 120 4Cs (and many pushed high nitro for more power). Unlimited engine size - Again, to allow more diversity, lower stressed powerplants, cheaper cost, etc. Didn’t happen (again) – everyone ran a limited number of purpose built more expensive 2C and engines (and many pushed high nitro for more power). Specific YS evolution – 120, 120AC, 120SC, 140, 140L, 140DZ, 160, 175, 185…….and running 30% nitro the entire history. Specific Electric evolution – (really the batteries) – ThunderPower 10s4p8000 4-6C, TP10s4p5300 10-12C, TP10s2p5400 18-20C, then several generations of 25C up to the current ProLite X (and similar offerings from other brands). The promise of every successive generation was more power, lower operating temps, and longer lifecycles. In just about every instance, more power was realized (and used)….and operating temps and lifecycles were not dramatically changed (since about generation 4 of about 8 generations). Any time the opportunity to escalate power (and costs) was available, it happened. All of Mark’s points are valid IF the power level remains CONSTANT. IF the power level INCREASES (and it will), the advantages Mark notes will not be realized…..but the detriments will be – increased cost to change motors, chargers, and lipos, and a reduced secondary market to which the 10S setups can be “recycled”. The nature of competition is to push the envelope and exploit any possible competitive advantage. 12S will be a competitive advantage, and the power level will go up. I see no reason why the historical trend of pattern and/or competitive nature will change. Given a suitable transition period, the power systems will all be 12S, and just as stressed as they are now with 10S. Regards, Dave From: Atwood, Mark [mailto:atwoodm at paragon-inc.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 2:44 PM
To: DaveL322 <DaveL322 at comcast.net>; f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us
Cc: Derek Koopowitz <derekkoopowitz at gmail.com>; Ramsey Don <donramsey at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [F3A-Discussion] Rule proposals So to chime in here… Yes, Amps kill… but the body has natural impedance that requires sufficient voltage to push through it. Right now if you accidentally short a 10S pack, (and I’m guessing many of us have) we don’t feel the jolt even though over 200amps have likely passed, but rather we typically just get burned on the skin (and melt a connector). This is because the resistance in your skin prevents the amperage from traveling through you. 50V won’t meaningfully impact that. Yes, it’s an increase, but not a dangerous one. It’s pretty universally accepted that 50v DC is safe at any amperage (from it being lethal) up to and including putting electrodes under the skin. Not something I’d advise trying. There are a number of strong upsides to this. We currently run our equipment very hard, and very hot. Up-ing the voltage by 20% would significantly reduce both and significantly increase the efficiency and tolerance of the systems in play. Weight would not be impacted as you would run lower capacity, higher voltage cells that would weigh roughly the same, but run cooler, last longer, and provide equal or longer flight times. The clear downside as mentioned would be a bit of retooling for those that want to change. Motor’s have to be wound differently, so a 12S Pletty is different from a 10S Pletty, though it’s the same motor casing and such, so it would be plug n play in the airframes. Batteries we buy pretty steadily just like we did fuel… so I would imagine most would simply replace motors when they put together new airplanes and phase in new batteries as a result. Charges would indeed be a brand new expense if you don’t currently have a charger that can handle 12S (many do as F3C and many others already run 12S.) Overall I would be interested in this simply due to the current excessive wear on our equipment from the high amperage loads and heat. Running 55amps vs 70amps reduces the strain on everything all the way down to the gauge of wire we run. MARK ATWOOD o. (440) 229-2502 c. (216) 316-2489 e. atwoodm at paragon-inc.com Paragon Consulting, Inc. 5900 Landerbrook Drive, Suite 205, Cleveland Ohio, 44124 www.paragon-inc.com Powering The Digital Experience On Sep 1, 2016, at 1:47 PM, DaveL322 via F3A-Discussion <f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us> wrote: Yes. Volts don't kill. Amps do. The potential for high amperage rates increases as voltage increases. I don't recall the specifics, but the amount of amps generally transmittable at 42v is significantly less likely to cause (human) harm than 50v....and that is where the 42v limit originally came from. I understand the technical benefits of using higher voltage power systems. That said, if we are going to obsolete 10s lipos, motors, and chargers.....and accept the increased health risk of 50v.....why stop at 12s? All the benefits of 12s (vs10s) would be further realized by going to 14s or 16s. 1, 3, 4, 5......all good. Regards, Dave Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note5. -------- Original message -------- From: Derek Koopowitz via F3A-Discussion <f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us> Date: 9/1/16 1:19 PM (GMT-05:00) To: Don Ramsey <donramsey at gmail.com> Cc: f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us Subject: Re: [F3A-Discussion] Rule proposals Thanks Don! BTW, if anyone has some additional thoughts on why going to 12 cells isn't going to harm someone (voltage wise), please let me know. I had heard (old wives tale perhaps) that moving above 50v of direct current increases the risk of death - actually I believe it is more the number of milliamps (current) that is lethal versus the voltage. On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Don Ramsey <donramsey at gmail.com> wrote:
Nice job Derek. I would hope all are approved. Don From: F3A-Discussion [mailto:f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us] On Behalf Of Derek Koopowitz via F3A-Discussion
Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2016 11:17 AM
To: f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us
Subject: [F3A-Discussion] Rule proposals Hi everyone, I've created 5 rule proposals that I will be submitting to CIAM to be considered for our next rules cycle. 1. Rule clarification on rolls in the same direction 2. Modify electric to use 12 cells instead of 10 3. Change the number of judges from 20 to 16 4. Allow a junior WC to fly in the next WC as a defending WC provided they are still a junior 5. Clarify the definition of a pilot/caller as a team See the attached. Let me know your thoughts ASAP so that I can get these submitted. BTW, if you'd like to see other rule changes, let me know and I can work on getting it submitted, if it makes sense. -Derek
_______________________________________________
F3A-Discussion mailing list
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
_______________________________________________
F3A-Discussion mailing list
F3A-Discussion at lists.f3a.us
http://lists.f3a.us/mailman/listinfo/f3a-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/f3a-discussion/attachments/20170326/310c2a46/attachment-0003.html>
More information about the F3A-Discussion
mailing list