Topic: What more can the BMFA do for silent flight ?

I'm ready to be shot to pieces on this ? 

I don't know if you guys are aware, but there is a Silent Flight Technical Committee that looks after all things Silent Flight WRT to the BMFA.
Now do you feel that the BMFA Provides a service other then insurance and an agreement for BMFA Members to fly National Trust Land.
There are a few guys that are involved with the top levels of Silent Flight that actually do more then just fly gliders and I salute you and thanks you for your efforts.

Can more be done to support all aspects of gliding and silent flight or do you feel that more can be done.

One thing to make people aware of is that BARCS make up 90% of the SFTC, is this a problem or will it forward the progress of silent flight ?

Would love to know what you think ?

Cheers
Jon

One thing to make people aware of is that BARCS make up 90% of the SFTC, is this a problem or will it forward the progress of silent flight ?

A second thing to be aware of is that Tech Committee members are elected, usually for 2 year terms.
 
Pete

Is Jon Edison our man on there? Or am I out of date?

Z

Is Jon Edison our man on there? Or am I out of date?

Z

http://www.bmfa.org/tech/rcsf/index.php

RCSFTC Members

    Ian Duff
    Chas Dunster
    Stephen Mettam
    Chris Moynihan
    Clive Needham
    Mike Proctor FSMAE
    Graham Wicks

Now do you feel that the BMFA Provides a service other then insurance and an agreement for BMFA Members to fly National Trust Land.
There are a few guys that are involved with the top levels of Silent Flight that actually do more then just fly gliders and I salute you and thanks you for your efforts.

Can more be done to support all aspects of gliding and silent flight or do you feel that more can be done.

WHat is it that you feel could be done that isn't being done?

PDR

Personally, I feel competition has become the become far too expensive and that there are no beginner classes anymore. In thermal that used to be 100S, but forget winning in that without a Tracker, F3f is slopes only regularly run comp and again very expensive. We need:

1. Beginner classes
2. to encourage manufacturers to produce kits for the bottom end ie suitable for beginners, preferably in the UK

Perhaps one way forward in thermal would be a say 2m R/E/S woody class with promotion out of that to the elite classes, via progression eg 2m full house etc. With something similar in electric to again encourage beginners/youngster who don't want a huge outlay to start with.


T e obvious answer in slope would be a resurgence of the 60" EPP class, but again we need manufacturers for these in the UK/Europe, not having to import from USA might help!

my tuppence worth

Agree with Bill on most of what he says.
Even  on the e-soaring at club level to compete at club level a 2m will cost  circa £200 per model to compete with a chance of getting in the top 3. With a lot of luck I won my class  and then they ask why I do not wish to fly the open class?!
If you want to fly open then just add another £1000 to that per model ....oh and it helps if you have 2 pref 3 models to cover the conditions!!!

About time the One Design contests made a comeback. Build only as stock with a realistic minimum weight.

How about an Easy Glider-e class.
Stock Easy Glider with Stock motor pack and cheap servos ?

Zim, Jon Edison on the SFTC as a BARCS Rep with no votes, and BARCS are 90 odd %, Clive is the only "Non" BARCS Member.

Jon

The times that this question has risen it's head over the years, i have lost count of.

BARCS was originally formed in the early 1970's 72 I think, due to the SMAE, as it was then having little interest in Silent Flight.
This became the prime mover on all things glide orientated, for some 30 years untill BARCS became affiliated to the BMFA/SMAE for the main reason of having an imput into running F3j & to have insurance as the one that BARCS had was going to finish.

I would suggest that now both BMFA & BARCS are more interested in supporting international events, than the sport type of flyer who are mainly interested in a more laid back approach to competition flying as has been suggested in this link.

Let us take a look at some of the classes mentioned.
100S as has been mentioned, has only one reasoble following in the Midlands arround the Peterborough area,where they run comps, that as has been said are dominated by "Tracker" models (could even be called a one design class now) This came about with the introduction of winches, as was the case with Open Class glider Comps.

The E Soaring class of silent flight, when started in 2007, with a 200Watt/kilo power limit, looked to be the way to go, but this is now dominated by moulded models since the introduction of the Height Limiter Switch for the 2009 season where although the height is set to 200 metres, the power limit was dispensed with. This imediately loaded the dice in favour of expensive moulded models which could not compete before as the was also a weight limit of 2 kilos in regards to the power allowed 400watts max.

I started the "Bartletts League" events to cater for a cheaper alternative type of event , without to many restrictions, as to what you would need to take part. Basis is a 10 minute slot, no launch window. Landing bonus as was used in Open class.
Launch can be200watts per kilo for 22 seconds or HL switch also CAM switch set to 200 metre max or 30 seconds run time.
Model classes are Open, 2 Metre, !00s and Foam Models
You can fly 2 models per event, with a nominated one on the day for the overall result on the day, for that comp. That amounts to 12 comp flights per competitor if you fly 2 classes.( probably more than some flyers put in in a days sport flying). Both count towards an overall League for the classes stated.
So say you entered Foam & 100s Class, you would record a score fore the league in that class, with total added up for the end of year awards.
Also we have proper Trophy's at the end of the year not the naff bitts of paper that seem to be the norm from both organisations to indicate success at events now.
This year I have discontinued the Foam class through lack of Interst and even the 100s  has not been well supported, though it was judged at the time to be an event that would bring a lot of the old wooden 100s models out and convert them for electric power.
There has been much debate in the E Soaring ranks of the lack of support for the 2 Metre class at the comps. This is due I think in that you can only fly 1 of the classes at those competitions, dual entry is not allowed.

I feel that what Dave Platt said, is very true in that times have changed and the modern generations interests are no longer what we were & are interested in, so any money put into trying to encourage young people into the hobby might as well be put down a drain.
Before I retired from working in a large comprehensive school, I started up a modelling group for those who might be interested. Had 12 to begin with but this dwindled to 4 after about 4 months.

So what your effectively saying is that BARCS were formed due to the fact that gliding was getting very popular in the 70's and the BMFA were not as interested that much in gliding (Granted.)
But through the years haven't we seen the time where BARCS really did start to struggle for membership hence the reduction in membership fees.

For many years F3F for example has had quite a large following, and split between the various leagues there was probably 60+ pilots.
Yet I did find if very odd that BARCS were not involved with F3F or F3B (Dont know if that was a good thing or bad thing ?)

It took a recent split from this forum by the F3F pilots (Well some of them, and BARCS offered these refugees a home to air there views) to join BARCS and get BARCS involved with F3F.
Now it seems that the SFTC are 90% BARCS Members, so are BARCS looking to take over all things soaring competition wise and help guide the BMFA with silent flight ?

When I attended the SF Nationals last year at Cottesmore it did feel that the BMFA put us there as we were out of site and out of mind.
The check in at the main gate was just attended by a grumpy guard that clearly didn't want to be there.
There were not any clear instructions where to go and no one from either BARCS or the BMFA directed people to the correct location on the air field we kind of had to drive around until we saw someone that we recognised.

The F3B and the E-soaring events did seem to be very close, with e-soar models coming onto the distance course which did at the time cause a lot of confusion on the buzzers, the F3B could of been set-up 200 meters further down and the e-soar could of been 200 meters further upwind to help keep them apart.

The write up in the BMFA News seemed to lack a great deal of interest in silent flight and on the whole the event felt more like a general league comp.
With the exception of the BMFA Chair handing out the certificates at the end of the comp, Clive CD'ing the event and a visit from Jon Edison, I very much doubt we would of seen anyone from the BMFA.

Looking at silent flight its not as sexy as scale, jets, aerobatics, heli's or pylon racing, but each soaring event deserves to have the same accolade nationally from the BMFA as the others.

I know that there are limited funds available to run joint events and one has to be compromised for the success of the other and model flying does need a large area to house all. (Which kind of narrows it down to military areas.)
Which is my point, maybe the SF NAtionals should be held on a different weekend at its own venue (Wetland or some other larger area that could house all events over a weekend.)

But the BMFA is not just for competing, its also about its membership and what BMFA can do to forward silent flight in general.

Do you want some salt and vinegar to go with all those chips on your shoulders?

FWIW silent flight (like free flight) has always been at a seperate venue because it has completely different airspace requirements - you can't accomodate soaring events on a site whose airspace has to be partitioned and controlled to prevent models from different flightlines colliding with eachother.

FWIW(2) - if it was the 2011 SF Nats at Cott the gatehouse grumpiness was probably more to do with what the government had recently done to the airfield's principle occupants (Joint Force Harrier) than the model plane event.

PDR

FWIW (2) yeah that maybe had something to do with Grumpy Guard I guess.

I guess your right PDR that SF and power don't really mix that well, and BH can only house so much.
I have really enjoyed camping at the nationals in the past, and must remember not to drink as much Stella and then go to watch the CL combat, cos that sound really does rattle the old brain after a few too many beers.
And would go again, cos its like a rc model flying festival, what with what goes on in the evenings especially now electrics and 2.4GHz have really transformed the hobby.

Yeah my shoulders are quite broad and I'm fairly think skinned and I like chips

But I guess were now not allowed to air our views on public forums anymore without upsetting someone !
We all have BMFA memberships for insurance, do we just use it for that ?
Do we like to read our monthly mag we get to keep up to date with whats going on ?

But the BMFA is not just for competing, its also about its membership and what BMFA can do to forward silent flight in general.

precisely 

precisely 

Agreed, but competition drives what manufacturers provide and if there is no entry level competition, there will be no entry level models! Biggest probelm for anybody wanting to get in to silent flight is the availability of basic kits. There are plenty of plans, but few good flying basic models. Foam is OK on the slope, but even the slope models available aren't great.

Again my tuppence worth and anyone is welcome to disagree, that's what discussion is all about

Bill,

I agree with you hole heartedly.
60" EPP slope pylon can be raced with Xit's or Zagi's (Ronnie will tell you).
Thermal wise we need and ARTF type foamie or woodie to be based around a formula.
There are plenty of easy gliders out there, that maybe a start, but of course you need to get people interested.

Maybe BARCS could do a flat field silent flight try out day.
Get members to come along with there models and have a fly in, then there can be cross pollonation between all aspects of soaring and we could maybe have stick stirring sessions during this fly meet.
F3B, J, K, E-Soring, F5B and J, and aero towing as well.
Just need to find a decent field in a central area where all can fit.

Jon

Agreed, but competition drives what manufacturers provide and if there is no entry level competition, there will be no entry level models!

Really? I'm not sure about that..If that were the case WOT4's would have an own make competition. So would Middle Phases and P6's on the slope, and I doubt that there are any wooden model kits that outsell those three. I agree, that competition can hone skills and development in some people, personally I'll probably never compete at any level, simply because of the expense not only of travelling but the cost of the hardware too--which is of course the topic of the thread.

Biggest probelm for anybody wanting to get in to silent flight is the availability of basic kits. There are plenty of plans, but few good flying basic models. Foam is OK on the slope, but even the slope models available aren't great.

Yep, with the advent of foam, the incentive to glue wood together has waned slightly, although my LMS tells me that balsa sales are up due to more plan building!  It takes time and patience and skill development to build a wooden model..if you've never done it before, the guidance from someone who can build is probably invaluable.. Incidentally, the build log list on here didn't include gliders when I last looked, although several have been built. 

Again my tuppence worth and anyone is welcome to disagree, that's what discussion is all about

Quite right too 

Yeah build logs have generally been radio installs and not builds.
I know there are a couple of the F3B lot that are rolling there own, would be nice to see what there doing.

Mark P's Phase 5 build of blog spots also looked great too.

I guess 60"EPP is probably the most basic entry level formula for soaring where any 60" foamie can be flown providing they have been built to the rules.
The major expense like doing comps in all classes including power is the cost of travelling.

Mark P's Phase 5 build of blog spots also looked great too.

Not wanting to rattle my own cage, but I did one too (P5). I'm sure I've seen a MP some time and a Bird of Time, but that might have been a few years ago.

The MP might be old but it can also be fitted with a power pod (would be electric now) for flat field soaring...and it is as simple and basic as they come...which I'm guessing is the point of the discussion?

Yup seen your "collective" P5 build, I have started to build a classic fosses, but other stuff keeps getting in the way, and now my garage has a leak in the roof I have stopped till thats fixed :(

in MP do you mean MINI-Phase ?

Sorry, no, Middle Phase.. I know it's only 60 inch, but as I say, it can be converted for flat field with a power pod. Millions must have been made over the years, so there's no shortage of guidance for the newbie. 

If gliders are to get more attention fron the BMFA the first thing to do is make sure your gliding club is being represented at area level. I can only speak about the area I was in involved with, and they were very receptive to new ideas and supportive of clubs that were "doing" things to promote modeling. I can honestly say that at the meetings I attended there was not one representive from a glider club present (although there were at least 2 gliding clubs affiliated to the area).

There I have managed an entire post on the BMFA without once moaning about the lack of representation for country members at Area level

When I attended the SF Nationals last year at Cottesmore it did feel that the BMFA put us there as we were out of site and out of mind.

I wouldn't know how it felt, I was busy at Barkston all weekend, I do know a great deal of time and effort is spent every year trying to get a suitable venue for the silent flight nationals and they are certainly not put anywhere to be out of sight and out of mind.!

The check in at the main gate was just attended by a grumpy guard that clearly didn't want to be there.
There were not any clear instructions where to go and no one from either BARCS or the BMFA directed people to the correct location on the air field we kind of had to drive around until we saw someone that we recognised.

No idea why the guard was grumpy, but perhaps the lack of people directing others was due to the lack of willing volunteers from the SF community?? 

The write up in the BMFA News seemed to lack a great deal of interest in silent flight and on the whole the event felt more like a general league comp.
With the exception of the BMFA Chair handing out the certificates at the end of the comp, Clive CD'ing the event and a visit from Jon Edison, I very much doubt we would of seen anyone from the BMFA.

Both the BMFA Hon secretary and Vice chairman are very active SFer's and where at Cottesmore over the weekend. As for the write up, who did it??  Was he a silent flight flier??

Looking at silent flight its not as sexy as scale, jets, aerobatics, heli's or pylon racing, but each soaring event deserves to have the same accolade nationally from the BMFA as the others.

Indeed eash soaring event does deserve to have the same accolade nationally, and it does!!

Which is my point, maybe the SF NAtionals should be held on a different weekend at its own venue (Wetland or some other larger area that could house all events over a weekend.)

Get involved and suggest it as a solution.

But the BMFA is not just for competing, its also about its membership and what BMFA can do to forward silent flight in general.

Who do you consider the BMFA is??  Its not a them and us situation, its just us!!   The different disciplines are what those that participate in them make them.

Of course I know that any organisation is nothing with out its members !
Hence this thread, I didn't mean it to rub anyone up the wrong way, but its obviously rattled your cage !

Yeah the poor old country members get a harder deal then us club members.
They pay there subs and dont have a club to have a voice.
But we're all entitled to go to the AGM are we not ?

In a way I'm Glad that BARCS are getting more behind SF, it may make it more structured, but would be worried that SF Comps could become very BARCS orientated rather then how they are at the mo.

There are obviously Pros and Cons to everything.
J

The major expense like doing comps in all classes including power is the cost of travelling.

It's not just the cost - it's the dedication and effort. I flew [power] pylon for more than 10 years, and that meant roughly every third Sunday through the season getting up and on the road at 05:30 for a 150-200 mile drive to arrive at the site for 08:30. And then a similar drive home in the evening, usually getting home around midnight. Then there would be three Euro comps a year which involved setting off after work on Wenesday for a late-night boat and a 600-800 mile drive, three-four days of intensive flying and then a dash back for a late night boat on sunday evening - not to mention the world champs,,,

It's not what a lot of people consider to be "fun", not what they wanted to get out of the hobby. Competitive flying is something you either enjoy or don't; it's not for everyone.

PDR

At last! PDR hits the nail squarely on its head
What more can the BMFA do? - NO! -What more can the concerned individuals who are fuelling and prolonging this string want to do?, is a question I'd rather ask!
Brian is right, the Bartletts comps are a great concept but the very type of low cost foamie class suggested earlier in the string is the very one that is not being proceeded with due to (apparently) lack of interest! - uh! 
If the interest is there it WILL happen, all it needs is a focal point of a GROUP of interested potential competitors to provide the impetus and the basis of the competition(s) and to GET ON WITH IT!
Then, I promise you, it WILL happen
Yours ever optimistically
Pete

Jon - a similar question was asked at the BARCS AGM about the venue for the SF Nats etc... where and what could be done differently... it was relocated due to issues surrounding munitions and asbestos iirc.

At the AGM it was also asked that the BARCS forum be used as a focal point on the internet rather than spread around a few sites.. though this is a good question to ask on a forum such as this to see a wider cross section of views.... were you planning on summorising this over on the BARCS forum?

Oh by the way, I believe someone did very well in the SF Nats with an Easyglider a couple of years ago... (a certain Mr Lucas iirc)... so you dont have to spend mega bucks.  If you want to get in the top 3 of most things it comes down to money and time in the right proportions... nothing beats stick time at the end of the day - if you can live at the field with a set of fully charged batteries your in for a good chance at a top 3 finish. 

if you can live at the field with a set of fully charged batteries your in for a good chance at a top 3 finish. 

What a fantastic idea!

Z

IMHO it's not what they should be doing for us but what we should be asking of them

For instance I found no end of help in lots of aspects, I admit not from SFTC but I guess it's the same
My club wanted to get a slope examiner and we have been put on the right path to do so
I wanted to re open the Ashdown forest cross country open and now I have, trust me when I say this was no walk in the park
I dont think you can expect them to sit around trying to come up with ideas of how to help free flight when it is far more sensible to wait to be asked 

IMHO it's lack of effort at the bottom not the top

A Technical Committee should be handled like a beautiful woman - start with a few complementary words, then play with the top a little before focussing your effort around the lower regions where the most rewards are to be had...

PDR

The biggest problem I see time after time is:

you cant expect a comp to be there for you next year if you cant be ar5ed to go this year

yes I hear a lot of " you need £1000+ models"
you can fly almost any comp with almost any model
so dont give me that ball,
I have seen 60" die in my area, is it coz no one wants to spend £200+ on a foamy, no it's coz people just cant be ar5ed
this is the cheapest and easiest comp affordable to EVERYONE yet only the F3F flyers fly it
I have NEVER seen a planned combat only a few people having a "friendly"
The guy that won my XC comp last year did it with an EG and wins alot of esoar type comp with his easyglider
People just need to stop making excuses and get involved

We could start a special class for all those that "cant afford £1000+ models" then just not bother turning up, coz they wont   lol

some people just like to moan

Soap box is free now 

Jason I have done a couple of posts in the BARC Members only area about the future of BARCS.

Interesting you should say about the SF Nats, I know that its not that easy to find a venue large enough to house the whole thing, and also its not easy keeping everyone happy either.
Reading the SFTC meeting minutes its clear that a hell of a lot of time and effort (And Money) went into finding a suitable venue.

Competitions are only a success if enough people attend and the standard of flying is high enough to give people a real challenge.
The new F5J look interesting (I'm sure your watching that one Jason) as there is no emphasis on the type of models required.

Without the BMFA we would have no National Championships !

I wanted to re open the Ashdown forest cross country open and now I have, trust me when I say this was no walk in the park

But Allen, the Ashdown Forest xcountry is a walk in the park 

 

Jason I have done a couple of posts in the BARC Members only area about the future of BARCS.

Interesting you should say about the SF Nats, I know that its not that easy to find a venue large enough to house the whole thing, and also its not easy keeping everyone happy either.
Reading the SFTC meeting minutes its clear that a hell of a lot of time and effort (And Money) went into finding a suitable venue.

Competitions are only a success if enough people attend and the standard of flying is high enough to give people a real challenge.
The new F5J look interesting (I'm sure your watching that one Jason) as there is no emphasis on the type of models required.

Without the BMFA we would have no National Championships !

Indeed - F5J is an interesting breed of comp, penalised for launch hight so the lower you come off power and the longer you stay in the air the more you have a chance of wining unless the whole slot has a boomer rock through   I flew the Lawford 3 day esoaring which culminated with a F5J come on teh Sunday and it was a very interesting comp to fly.  Looking forward to doing some more of it this year.  It should be interesting to see what comes out on top from them with teh cash to splash.  Last year was Ava, Pike Perfect ET and the Stork 4.  I grabed a Stork4 and I am hoping it will see me through the coming season... famous last words!

You going to give it a go this year Jon?  Electric F3B should be interesting too..... maybe I should enter with the XPro ?

Cool Jason,

Its F3B for me this year Jason, would love to crack wining a few distance and duration slots and work on Speed.
You should come along and try the lekkie F3B, but would need and altitude limiter.

F3B is fairly challenging and getting your head around how it all works takes a season.

Jon

There I have managed an entire post on the BMFA without once moaning about the lack of representation for country members at Area level

Area Constitution paras 23(b) and 30(b) - Country Members can attend Area Meetings and take part in the debate, but do not have a vote.  The Area I am involved with has a standing invite for Country (and additional Club) Members to attend - it would be good to have more people turn up and take part! 
BTW, Country Members can also fill any of the Area Elected Officer posts with the exception of Area Delegate (automatically becomes a Director of the BMFA so therefore has to be a member of an affiliated Club).
Pete

So what your effectively saying is that BARCS were formed due to the fact that gliding was getting very popular in the 70's and the BMFA were not as interested that much in gliding (Granted.)
Spot on
But through the years haven't we seen the time where BARCS really did start to struggle for membership hence the reduction in membership fees.
The growth of moulded models led to this, then winches then finally when BARCS affiliated to the BMFA, a lot opposed this and dropped out

For many years F3F for example has had quite a large following, and split between the various leagues there was probably 60+ pilots.
Yet I did find if very odd that BARCS were not involved with F3F or F3B (Dont know if that was a good thing or bad thing ?)
Barcs had a Slope Rep for a while but when he packed up no one else would do the job, they do not have one now so how about volunteering

It took a recent split from this forum by the F3F pilots (Well some of them, and BARCS offered these refugees a home to air there views) to join BARCS and get BARCS involved with F3F.
Now it seems that the SFTC are 90% BARCS Members, so are BARCS looking to take over all things soaring competition wise and help guide the BMFA with silent flight ?
Could they be the ones willing to do it plus felt that their views were not being represented

When I attended the SF Nationals last year at Cottesmore it did feel that the BMFA put us there as we were out of site and out of mind.
The check in at the main gate was just attended by a grumpy guard that clearly didn't want to be there.
There were not any clear instructions where to go and no one from either BARCS or the BMFA directed people to the correct location on the air field we kind of had to drive around until we saw someone that we recognised.
I flew E Soaring at Cottesmore and thought 300% better than the assault course that is Spitalgate venue, granted it was further from BH, suggest the guard on the gate was grumpy due to some of the signing in details not being adhered to. My helper/partners details had not been forwarded even though I had filled out the entry form on the back as detailed to do, with her details, so we had to be photographed etc before proceeding. Finding the way to where the flying was set up was not a problem, with the instructions given, but the distance between the events could have been greater, I would agree as the airfield was pretty big

The F3B and the E-soaring events did seem to be very close, with e-soar models coming onto the distance course which did at the time cause a lot of confusion on the buzzers, the F3B could of been set-up 200 meters further down and the e-soar could of been 200 meters further upwind to help keep them apart.

The write up in the BMFA News seemed to lack a great deal of interest in silent flight and on the whole the event felt more like a general league comp.
Agree there, the AMA news mag puts our one to shame being in the equivelent of our better modelling mags covering all aspects of model aircraft and is free to members.
With the exception of the BMFA Chair handing out the certificates at the end of the comp, Clive CD'ing the event and a visit from Jon Edison, I very much doubt we would of seen anyone from the BMFA.
[b]Robin Sleight, Mike Proctor,Graham Wicks, Chris Moynihan were ther at some stage even competing.

Looking at silent flight its not as sexy as scale, jets, aerobatics, heli's or pylon racing, but each soaring event deserves to have the same accolade nationally from the BMFA as the others.
Suggest it never has & never will we are in the minority whichever way you look at it. For many reasons it cannot be held at BH at the August jamboree which is a shame, money speaks louder than words

I know that there are limited funds available to run joint events and one has to be compromised for the success of the other and model flying does need a large area to house all. (Which kind of narrows it down to military areas.)
Which is my point, maybe the SF NAtionals should be held on a different weekend at its own venue (Wetland or some other larger area that could house all events over a weekend.)
The May FF weekend has been suggested but they say that there would be probems with wind changes with the FF needing the whole site. I personally think where there is a will there is a way, though with a lot of FF models using2.4 radio to assist there might be a problem there

But the BMFA is not just for competing, its also about its membership and what BMFA can do to forward silent flight in general.

BTW Barcs No 230 so have been there nearly from the beginning

Pretty sure there is a slope rep on the BARCS Committee now... seem to recall Robin mentioning him. Might well be wrong though. I think he was with Austin Guerrier at the AGM. 

It's Jon Edison for the record.

It's Jon Edison for the record.

There isn't a specific BARCS general slope rep. Martin Newnham is BARCS F3F rep on the committee.  Jon Edison is BARCS rep to the SFTC.

Simon

There isn't a specific BARCS general slope rep. Martin Newnham is BARCS F3F rep on the committee.  Jon Edison is BARCS rep to the SFTC.

Simon

I was not sure that there is one, I know there has not been one for some time. My apologies if there is

Hi,

Just to confirm BARCS asked me to join the committee last year to represent the F3F community, this was formalised when I attended the last AGM with my election.  Jon Edison and I also attend SFTC meetings, but only when F3F is on the agenda, this is in a none voting capacity.

This year I will be organising a 2 day F3F BARCS open to be run in Wales at the beginning of August.

Thanks

Martin