[CIAM-F6-Working_Group] Re: HTG final task options
- From: Guy Revel <guyrevel@xxxxxxxx>
- To: ciam-f6-wg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 15:05:39 +0200
Hello Robert,
At 11:05 11/08/2009, you wrote:
I am in favor of the development of an automated onboard timing
system. It should be self powered (tiny plug-in Lithium batteries
are used e.g. by the free flight community for their homing systems
to find back landed models after far away D/T. - dimensions 4x35 mm,
weight 0.8 g) and self contained in a compact package. Dimensions
should be kept minimal, overall mass preferably less than 5g.
We should probably start developing the system for a specific
category, and F3K/F6D seems appropriate, and thereafter
integrate/add the requirements for the other categories. Timing the
duration flight in F3B is by far not the most demanding part of the
organiser's task in an F3B competition. Detection and timing of base
crossing is much more demanding ;-)
Experimentation will define what is possible and at what cost. I
would also favour a fully-integrated system including battery, it may
be dependent upon the amount of power necessary. But at this point I
don't think a system has to be developed for a specific category. The
reason is, apparently we will need a two-axis or, more probably, a
three-axis accelerometer system, what exactly we want to detect then
is mostly a software problem, so the same system could be used for
various competition class by selecting a software option or several
versions of the module could be produced with various softwares.
When investigating the idea, I discovered that accelerometers are
increasingly fitted to mobile phones, just to name one device, so the
cost of miniature accelerometers is definitely going in the
acceptable range. Possibly the main limiting factor may not be the
sensors, but the transmission unit and this may justify having two
different types. One transmitting the information in real time
(exactly what we want for WAG or any event designed to capture
spectators' interest, another one simply recording the times. The
choice would be made on cost, size and weight.
We have been told Jeti may be interesting working with the project,
in fact I would think that they may be interested adding an
acceleration sensor to their present range of telemetry sensors.
During my F3B days we computed a maximum acceleration of 60 G during
the speed turn. It may be interesting recording similar information
with present-day equipment; it may help, for instance, defining the
needed spar strength for a specific task and reaching the minimum
weight by eliminating guesswork. So, for our purpose at this point,
we just need to record acceleration values in varius conditions
during flights, analyse the results and extract from there what
defines a launch and a landing. Also I am talking accelerometers, but
it may not be the best or the only method, we need different ideas as well.
F3B speed and distance is not within the scope of the present
development project which is, basically, to detect the beginning and
the end of a flight. Of course, Tomas may have different ideas for
this class, but it is not related with the F6 classes and WAG's
spectators information and is something that may best be discussed
within the F3 Soaring sub-committee..
The solution for breaking the tie in F6D has been proposed here:
Increase slot time by increments till the winner emerges. The total
duration of the contest is in principle not an issue. At the wag,
the slot times for various categories was in principle limited but
some flexibility was effectively available. Thus, if we require e.g.
45 minutes to fly all eliminatory and finals, let us ask for an
extra 15 min in order to break a possible tie. This would allow for
extra 4, 5 and 6 minutes fly-offs needed to break an inprobable tie.
Robert
I am not so sure as you are. For one part, I found the actual WAG
2009 schedule quite loose with a lot of idle time between events, but
you should not stay on the impression that it will remain the same at
future WAG events. I have the experience of World Grand Prix where
any slot could not be extended by even thirty seconds. The main
problem in this respect at WAG 2009, in my opinion, is that most
sports had no previous experience of how tight it may be (and must be
to keep spectators' interest high). For another part, please remember
that the longer the flights, the less interesting they are for
spectators as it just looks as if nothing is happening. I will,
however, welcome any proposal as my initial proposal to go down to a
tighter timing was not supported nor rejected, but no alternative
proposal was made.
Guy R.
Other related posts:
