HPA

I have been a member of HPA for many years.  I think I have supported the hobby pretty well. I was one of the firsts that proved laser engravers could be used to cut balsa and at a reasonable price.  I also introduced the craft cutter as a way to cut balsa.  I also gave tutorial on using Inkscape to make cut files for them. I have also been experimenting with foam as an option for replacing some parts. I designed and offered a freewheel hub for 3D printing.  Also designed a spoked wheel hub for landing gear. When HPA went down for the final time I joined Flying Aces Club I found one administrator to be absolutely rude about any sort of innovation.  So I would like to take time to thank the folks in this forum for putting up with my crazy ideas but I fear without innovation this hobby could be doomed.  Okay off my soapbox and I feel better.

Hi Philip,

I am a member of the FAC group on fb too and saw what/how happened.

In your post you raise many points, worthy of discussion.

I hope I will not be missunderstood with what I write.

To begin with, you are welcome for your thanks, although no one is having to "put up with anything" you post.
You are more than welcome to post, as long as it is related to the general guidelines (free flight and small scale RC) which it is.

Using foam as a structural member like you do, instead of heavy balsa is certainly an interesting idea, worth trying to say the least. So, no worries please.


Flying Aces Club is a very traditional organisation.
Correct or not, it is not up to me to say, decide or judge. It just is.

As such they accept/allow almost exclusively balsa construction for free flight models. Even there there might be some difficult gray areas, for example, vacuum formed plastic parts, are they allowed or not? What percentage of the model?

USA and Europe have quite different approaches to free flight scale models. In the US it is F.A.C. that has shaped the approach, favoring duration in the flying part and allowing certain scale deviations which would be totally unacceptable in Europe (for example a large propeller on the nose of a twin engined airplane with short nacelles).

Similarily, in Europe the flying focus is mostly realism, driven by the UK and Czech schools of thought, resulting in models generally heavier but much more scale looking. Painted finishes are the norm, compared to painted tissue.

The same with foam. Masterpieces made of hollowed foam for years now, pioneered by David Deadman, Peter Smart and Richard Crossley, or those amazing creations by Tonda Alfery, would probably get discualified at any F.A.C. event.

Different approaches, nothing wrong or right.

As to innovation, also a major part of our hobby. I have nothing against materials like carbon or foam or the use of lasers, 3D printing etc. One major note: As long as it is being done by the modeller and not purchased by someone else. And of course this applies only when we are talking about models for scale competition. For everyday flying, one can use whatever one wants.

Now, some limitations apply here as well. For example if someone were to post something about a 3m F5J performance motor glider, he would probably find the post deleted, so it is a matter of deciding what to allow and how to enforce that.

One final note irrelevant to the above but specifically to the use of foam, as I see it personally.
I repeat, it is a personal thing: I prefer balsa for scale models. I have used foam and use it for non-scale models and am all for it, for those who do like it.

I met Tonda Alfery in Belgium in 1988, he had magnificent peanuts from vacuum formed foam, great looking and flying. I even bought a kit from him back then. Could not - cannot build it.

Any material one uses is fine, especially if the result is as amazing as Tonda's.

Thanks for lending me your soapbox.

George

Thanks for your thoughtful comments I appreciate and understand your position.  I had offered to the administrator to delete my post on foam parts and he said nothing.  Then when I posted about a freewheel hub I designed for 3D print he again jumped on me.  I pulled all my posts and was ready to leave and I was contacted by one of their contributors and asked to try again.  I then posted a pic of a Guillow Arrow I had built using foam ribs.  I could have said nothing about the construction and no one would have known.  But I did mention that I used foam on the ribs and formers.  I got over 160 likes and am still continuing to get them.  But the admin who will remain unnamed blasted me and barred any mention of foam.  He also deleted most of the posts that were negative towards him.  I deleted all my posts and quit the group.  I was merely stating that at HPA I have never run into such rude behavior and closed minds.

As the Administrator states, the FAC is a very traditional organization. It seeks to preserve many of the historic aspects of the golden days of the stick and tissue model airplane hobby. Thus balsa wood and tissue are the primary building and covering materials allowed, with very limited exceptions.

That being said, as a member of the FAC, I was successful in getting the Remotely-triggered Dethermalizer (RDT) Provisional Rules added in the 2025-2026 FAC rule book. Now, if the Contest Director (CD) allows it, you can use RDT on your models to lessen the length of the recovery chases and/or increase the chances of recovering your model. RDT allows you to terminate a flight once it has achieved a max (120 seconds) or if your model begins to get into trouble, e.g., it is heading for a line of trees or a cornfield.

Like many fliers, I have had my share of unintended early DTs in contests when using viscous timers. This in turn has led me to set the viscous timer too long, to avoid an early DT, which can in turn, dramatically increasing the odds of having the model fly out of sight and not be recovered. While a band burner DT with an electronic timer allows precise DT trigger times, as explained above more advantages can be gained for the same weight penalty by using an RDT system.

Attached is a picture of my Korda Victory. This Old Time Rubber (OTR) model is equipped with RDT and it really needs this feature as it will consistently fly maxes (120+ seconds). Use of RDT was allowed by the Contest Director (CD) at the 2025 WESTFAC contest in Arizona, USA. I flew my Korda Victory model in that contest and won a Kanone in the OTR Fuselage event flying the same after scoring three maxes.

I set up my RDT system on each model so that I can easily transfer the on-board RDT circuit board and 25 mA LiPo battery from model to model.   

Personally, I would not use RDT on scale models due to the significant weight penalty it can impose on such models and the negative impact on their aesthetics. Scale models typically have less of a chance of being lost in a fly away due to their less efficient flight performance than OTR models.

On a different note, for a variety of reasons, there is a large contingent of free flight hobbyists, including myself, that decline to use Facebook. To each his own. I wish to thank the Administrator for setting up and monitoring this new HPA website to provide an efficient, helpful, and entertaining alternative for world-wide discussion of different aspects of the free flight hobby.

I understand completely. I had told him that I don't fly contests and only fly for fun. And offered to delete the post.  I didn't realize it was a site for only contest folks. He never responded and left it up. I get the foam problem not sure I understand the problem with the 3D printed freewheel hub. So far I have had 2 of their members contact me and ask me to come join their site. I guess I just don't understand the whole contest deal. To each his own but I don't think being rude is acceptable.

Hmmmmm..... all very interesting. I admit to being traditional in my approach to aero modelling.  But that has not prevented me from using materials such as foam for the core of floats on occasions and plastic sheet for say moulded wheel spats as examples.  I rarely if ever fly competitively but I still need to have my models as light as possible for the usual reasons.

That FAC prefer to maintain a traditional approach is fine and is welcomed by me. But perhaps they should (if they already do not) make it clear to people applying for membership that is what is expected of members.  There can be no purpose whatsoever in rudeness. Or being dismissive of others preferred practices.

Balsa was unheard of in the early days. and I recall I think it was Pelly Fry or maybe the Colonel who visited a model shop in Oxford Street (Jones?) and were shown a block of balsa wood.  The proprietor said it would never catch on and handed it over free of charge.

I like the idea of keeping traditions alive in all respects.  But I am not sure why some are obsessed with the idea. I recall at a vintage meet (again years ago) a chap proudly boasting he had never held a transmitter ins life and did not intend to.  Fine but nothing to be proud of surely?  The Colonel and Bert Judge did.

Why I wonder do some folk want to control the rest of us - in so many respects.  Is it a form of insecurity.

Not much of a contribution I admit but just wanted to post something as I have just rejoined and have not done anything aeromodellingwise worthy of posting.