[CIAM-F6-Working_Group] Re: HTG final task options
- From: "Mike O'Reilly" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <ciam-f6-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 22:22:22 +0930
Hi Guy
I agree with Terry's comments regarding trying to implement some F3B style
tasks into F6D. In Australia we do not have enough entries or helpers or
equipment to do this.
We have about 12 serious F3B fliers now in the whole country and not so many
volunteer helpers. We have one big F3B event every 2 years. Most DLG fliers
are more interested in thermal based tasks.
Mike O'Reilly
From: ciam-f6-wg-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ciam-f6-wg-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Guy Revel
Sent: Wednesday, 8 July 2009 10:06 PM
To: ciam-f6-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [CIAM-F6-Working_Group] HTG final task options
All,
Thanks for your input on the matter. Mike, Kevin, may I have your opinion
please ?
If we want to go forward, it is time to make a first decision. So:
- Do you agree to replace the existing F6D final task with a new one derived
in some way from the F3K 5x2 task ?
Regards,
Guy R.
At 21:11 06/07/2009, you wrote:
My apologies for a late response to the discussion. It is the peak of the
contest season here and I have been on the road a lot.
The idea of introducing multi task requirements (F3B style) into F6D is
tempting but I believe not practical for a couple of reasons. Although F3B
is attractive and fun for competitors it is very labor intensive for the
organizers. This is the main reason the event is on the decline. Here in the
USA we are struggling to keep F3B alive. At best there are only a couple of
F3B contests in the nation each year. On the CIAM level we have difficulty
getting bids for F3B world and continental championships which indicates the
problem to be worldwide.
F6D is a very specialized event. I don't believe we should design the rules
to encourage a different model design than for F3K. Doing so would narrow
the interested pool of contestants even more.
Terry Edmonds
Other related posts:
