[CIAM-F6-Working_Group] Re: HTG final task options
- From: "Mark Stockton" <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: ciam-f6-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 12:33:54 +0200
Hi Guy
There is no doubt that this is the future. Especially for F3J. The point I
wanted to make that a tip catch done correctly should not cause an movement
that a longitudinal accelerometer would detect at the moment of catch.
Regards
Mark
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has it's
limits."
-- Albert Einstein
---------- Original Message -----------
From: Guy Revel <guyrevel@xxxxxxxx>
To: ciam-f6-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 11:04:30 +0200
Subject: [CIAM-F6-Working_Group] Re: HTG final task options
> At 07:31 31/07/2009, you wrote:
> >Detecting a good tip catch is going to be an interesting engineering problem
> >as the plane never really stops flying.
> >
> >However I agree, it is an awesome idea.
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> Obviously there are problems to solve, but the main thing is that it
> can be done. We all have a natural tendency to keep what has been
> used for as long as we can remember without even asking the question
> whether there is another and better way.
> For instance, we can imagine that the launch moment with F3B or F3J
> could be detected from an electrical contact on the towhook or a
> pressure gauge. With F6D or F3K we can imagine a contact detector on
> the launch peg inner side or, again, with an accelerometer (the
> beauty of the thing with accelerometers is that the timing system
> could be entirely self-contained, just a drop-in unit in the
> fuselage with no connection to be done inside the glider, even
> electrical power could be in). Then the moment of catch or landing
> could be defined in the software with something such as: contact
> with the peg OR positive lateral acceleration (a tip catch) OR
> negative longitudinal acceleration (a landing). As said earlier,
> development would need experimentations and I am sure most of you
> would be ready to experiment. Another example: a landing/catch would
> normally be detected with a shock detector (longitudinal
> accelerometer) and experiments would be needed to define the minimal
> value , such as 60 G / 0.05 s (a small shock) or maybe 30 G / 0.5 s
> (a catch), etc. The main thing is that we must decide to launch the
> project, then built up a group of specialists in the needed domains
> (software, electronics, etc.). Finding the suitable detection
> methods is a matter of defining what may be suitable, then
> experimenting to validate it. We may need one, three or five years
> or more to develop a suitable system, but the basic thing is : do
> you really believe that, if nothing is done, in ten of fifteen years
> from now we will still be using hand held stopwatches (if such
> outdated devices are still available) to select a winner in a
> duration or speed event or at an F3J World Championship ?
>
> At this time, the only question is : do you think it worthwhile to
> start the project ? If yes, then we'll have to find the proper
> specialists (probably mostly out of our group) and begin
> development. Tomas mentioned that he approached Jeti and that they
> may be willing to work on such a project, but before this stage we
> must first define what we want. So please, are you in favour or not ?
>
> This leaves the initial question unanswered : what are your
> proposals to break a tie in the final round ? At least for 2011 and
> probably up to 2013 at least, we have to rely on hand held
> stopwatches, we need an agreement and a firm proposal by next October.
>
> Guy R.
------- End of Original Message -------
This list set up for FAI/CIAM F6 Working Group.
Archive of the list available at : ciam-f6-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Other related posts:
