FAI code doesn't specify where base A and base B should be placed, so we didn't break code, I was CD that day and I followed an international common practice to place base A in the landing side. This practice was observed personally in VR2004 and VR2006, and I knew this practice from many international events from movies and conversations with famous F3F pilots. We put safety as the right most concern. Unfortunately someone didn't follow the rule stated clearly in the briefing that day to walk to the landing area, and as a result creating unsafe flying conditions. Therefore, the main cause of this is not because of placing base A in the left-hand side as someone suggested! The FAI codebook was thoughtfully compiled that day and safety has also been considered. In addition, we set a rule for not allowing pilot to re-enter the course that day, then obviously base A should be placed in the landing side.
Placing base A near a mountain can get better lift, of course, but this shouldn't be the most important factor as compared to safety and following comoon practice. Because landing in High Junk Peak is in the middle of the track anyway, there is no need to follow the common practice of base A on the landing side, this is why base A was arbitrarily set in the hill side to get better lift so to say – I still remember, the fastest record in HJP, the model was flown to base B (left side) first and then back to A side.
My original thought that landing is not specified in the FAI code, so I made a wrong assumption on point d) about pilot who controlling the model during the attempt for timed flight duration only, but actually landing in the assigned area is counted, so an attempt is inherent including timed flight and landing – sorry guys I can help you to land that breaks the code!
Quote:
Presuming we are playing F3F under FAI’s code (not a local hobby game), we must adhere to FAI’s F3F code
Yes, argee! That's why I follow the code all the time and help to set proper local rules for you guys. Perhaps, someone has said he followed and in fact didn't look at what have been done!
Quote:
Presuming most of us would gain height in the first 30 second on the base A side (of course, one could do it on base B side if he so wish, it is a fair deal).
No comment, that is your thought only, I have seen many pilots fly to base B first, then back to A, so the term “most of us” is not true to me.
Quote:
Presuming most of us are caring and considerate persons with sound logic.
Of course we do, to the best effort we can; say, not allow to re-enter the course, walk to the landing area far away, ask a helper to help pilot to walk; do these classify not caring and no sound logic?
Quote:
Presuming most of us could understand the codebook’s content.
I think so, particularly, I myself fully and duly compiled with the codebook as stated above. Following an international common practice doesn't mean we don't understand the content. The codebook does not specific you can't follow common practice to place base A on the landing side, right?
Quote:
Presuming the interpretation of the meanings in the codebook, is by reasonable appraisal or an established mechanism, instead of some individuals in authority
How come? For a law-trained professional, you must know the code has been always followed by us.
Ah, I made a mistake though today with point d) for claiming the right to help the less competent pilots to land.
Am I the one that exploit my authority to interprete the code for my own taste you mentioned here?
I was the CD with authority that day, I suggested to place base A on the landing side, but I did also say to you guys on site “if you are not happy, I have no objection for a swap". In order to get away of authority, I relinquished my role as CD this time to avoid further groundless accusation if it is referred as in here.
Quote:
Furthermore, our models are flying at 120km per hours on average. When it passed base A on left side, it would use only few second to fly back to base B. It would much faster when compared with the walking time of the pilot (about 20 seconds). Do remember many pilots said in last race ‘ I wait for him to walk a bit further before I launch’. Taking the safety as well as race efficiency into consideration, it seems viable.
As explained before we didn't allow re-entrance last time, so placing base A on the left side was incorrect!
This time, as I said, if we use Leung King racing/landing arrangement, where to place base A and base B is irrelevant because racing and landing is time separated. Instead, I suspect placing base A to the hill side is to suit someone own taste. For me, I mostly fly half in B, half in A, where A is to me is meaningless, but someone …
Quote:
For the landing site, there would only be one landing site. However, the codebook does not restrict the size of the site. We might set the area of the site extended to the paraguilder's field. So, simply land our model 20 meters away from the track on B base's side, would be within the definition of the rules. No matter someone lands on the old site.
So that mean with majority approval I can walk to the old site and land my plane there to help the organizer to squeeze a bit more time for running the contest. Sorry though I can't help less competent pilot to land.
I use up a bit of my 老苯，if you need more let me know.
More wind rather than more s... please!
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
煩呀
