PDA

View Full Version : WHF view of the world



Bill Baker
27-Jul-10, 08:00 PM
This is the view of our HCGB and WHF president
Please Add your comments

For what it's worth my personal view is that the WHF should be the
regulatory authority for its member countries. It could be administered for
the WHF by the WHF Technical Director heading a small subcommittee. This
small subcommittee could start by collating rules and regulations from its
member countries and consolidate them. The outcome cold be voted on country
representatives by e-mail. There after each year, or more often if an
emergency arises, the committee would seek or receive comments and review
the rule books and the previous process repeated. This would require some
discipline from member countries which I'm sure the larger ones would assist
with. If this were to be adopted it would still be possible for member
countries to hold events outside of the WHF regs, although this would be
regrettable if it were to happen. Again I stress this is only my own views
and not that of the WHF.

Ewan Black
27-Jul-10, 08:20 PM
What's the context, Bill? This looks like one person's reply to a question rather than anything official and he seems at length to say so

loopy
28-Jul-10, 07:23 AM
The suggestion sounds like a very good way forward to me.

daly5546
28-Jul-10, 07:36 AM
I presume the aim is to have a uniform set of guidelines adopted by all countries and guided by the technical sub-committee.

Bill, are you proposing continuance of the 'one vote per country' system or would you go to proportional representation?

Chris

The Dragon
28-Jul-10, 08:04 AM
[QUOTE=Bill Baker;70289]This is the view of our HCGB =QUOTE]

No its not - it clearly says its Tony's personal view!

Bill Baker
28-Jul-10, 12:54 PM
What's the context, Bill? This looks like one person's reply to a question rather than anything official and he seems at length to say soEwan,
You are quite right it was in reply to my question as to why the WHF rules appear to be drawn up with little or no notice of the work done by national clubs.

The implication in Tony's reply is that the existing system is to blame for the apparent lack of consultation between the WHF and in this case the HCGB.
What we then have to ask ourselves is do we accept the same vision of the various national clubs being controlled by a remote committee. ?



To the Governing board of world hovercraft.
Dear All,
I and other F35 drivers are in the process of signing on to participate in the 2010 World Meeting .
On signing on a down load becomes available detailing the definition of the different craft in each Formula.

Printed above is the description pertaining to describe the F35 craft, if the wording of this is compared to the description in the attached F35 hand book you will see there are differences.

I find this particularly regrettable as a considerable amount of time was spent internationally in discussions when drawing up the F35 Handbook .
Care was taken to achieve a document that was un ambiguous and precise as to the guidelines within which an F35 hovercraft fitted in with the existing Formulas.

When this work was finished last year copies were sent to the EHF and American Hoverclub amongst others no dissenting opinions were received so publication went ahead in November and we in the UK have been Racing using these guidelines for the last 18 months.

I presume this to be a communication error that will be put right in the future.


THE REPLY
Further to my e-mail of the 24th of July I have now discussed your comments with my other Governing Board members. The proposed F35 rule definition was, although not formally minuted, briefly discussed at the last WHF Board meeting in Sweden. Following on from this an e-mail debate took place in which I took the lead. The result of which is the definition that appears in the latest WHF Competition Rule Book which was published in December 2009 and available on the WHF web site from that date. The reason for the new definition was while accepting that the HCGB has the most experience of F35 (formally F25) was to try and accommodate other views from other countries. I'm sure you will realise how difficult it is to get a consensus that meets with everyone's point of view. In these circumstances I confirm that the current rules as stated in the WHF Competition Rules 2009 will stand for the forthcoming world championships.

daly5546
28-Jul-10, 01:01 PM
Any proposals need to be with Chris Barlow by Friday 6th August to enable him to collate them and pass them on to WHF by Monday 9th August so there's not much time.

According to the WHF Constitution the Agenda + Meeting details are circulated a minimum of 8 weeks before the meeting.

This was raised to avoid any disappointment/ frustration. If this rule needs amending the method is available on the WHF site.

Please can anyone reading this make others aware.

Thanks

Chris

Bob Rennick
28-Jul-10, 01:58 PM
Ewan,
You are quite right it was in reply to my question as to why the WHF rules appear to be drawn up with little or no notice of the work done by national clubs.


Bill,

During my tenure with the WHF I never once received any notification from ANY club regarding their regulations or any regulation changes. Yet the WHF regs clearly state that when a National Club makes changes, they should inform the WHF so that they can keep abreast - and possibly keep aligned with - all the WHF member National Clubs. In fact, I used to actively contact numerous people within the HCGB (and several other clubs) to ascertain what was happening and even then, it was hard to keep up with it. Your notion that the WHF merely 'stands by' and takes "little or no notice" is just wrong.

Bob

Mr No Limits
29-Jul-10, 12:15 AM
Bill, I know you are referring to concerns over F35, but look at the response to a posting on the WHF bulletin board from last October. One reply from David Ryan.
http://hovercraft.org.uk/whf/forum.php?dossier=1&read=16
There has been time and the opportunity for discussion and there has been little response.

So what do you expect the WHF to do? They haven’t got time to go around asking every single member worldwide their opinions and collate the views. Those who want change need to be proactive giving adequate time and consultation periods for the Board to deal with their proposals. Here is your opportunity before the next WHC (2012), and with a club that is generally apathetic you could introduce or change rules to meet your wishes.

I agree with Tony Drake, the rules should be set from top down. Setting them at Worlds level will encourage the rest of the world to follow suit. What we have now is a system where individual countries are making their own rules and getting upset when they differ from the World regulations. F35 & F50 being classic examples of this.
The real problem is there are few people willing to put any effort in at WHF level because it doesn’t directly affect them, that is until a very important meeting comes round once every 2 years.

I suggest the HCGB, & EHF should consider agreeing to adopt the WHF rule book, then we might see some constructive changes.

David Ryan
29-Jul-10, 06:15 PM
"Bill, I know you are referring to concerns over F35, but look at the response to a posting on the WHF bulletin board from last October. One reply from David Ryan.
http://hovercraft.org.uk/whf/forum.p...sier=1&read=16 (http://hovercraft.org.uk/whf/forum.php?dossier=1&read=16)
There has been time and the opportunity for discussion and there has been little response."

I have been waiting for this to raise its head and am only surprised that it has taken so long.
The definition of F35 was opened by the WHF to all national clubs for discussion and input. As Conrad states the IHC was the only one to submit a reply, the implication being that the rest of the clubs were quite happy to accept what ever came down the line. As you can see from our post, we believe that the spirit of F25 should be carried forward into F35 (basic unmodified engines that do not need a constant supply of money and maintenance). If one wishes to tinker around with engines and improve their performance there are plenty of other formulae to particitate in.
For anybody not quite sure of the WHF definition of F35, I have included it below.

Formula 35
Single or multiple four stroke air cooled industrial engines with a total horse power not exceeding 35hp as specified on the manufacturer’s engine label(s) / name plate(s) and operating within the manufactures engine speed range. If this information is not available it is the drivers’ responsibility to provide documentary evidence to the satisfaction of the WHF Technical Director, or his representative, that engines meet these requirements.

sorgatz
30-Jul-10, 04:07 PM
I have to take an issue with what I am reading...

Here in the USA we have had an F25 program which is as strong as any other class. All of the US drivers took issue with an early adaptation of the (sept 2009) - proposed rule change from HCGB. Specifically it was the difference in engine rpm (4500 vs 3600). Kent Gano discussed with the club members and we concluded that while it changed the "spirit" of the 4-stroke formula, it wasn't going to directly effect us. In fact, myself and Graham Spencer emailed directly with Bill Baker, our concern with this difference.

My point here- the final rules omitted rpm. This is a vague statement to allow engine rpm within manufacturers specifications and allows such a large spread in torque, depending on how much money you are willing to spend. This turns the 4-stroke only class into a money pit rather than a design and innovation class, like it was originally intended.

Based on the adoption of WHF/HCGB into F35, the USA has decided to move to accept the class but with additional constraints. We will contain engine rpm to 3600 and the engine must be commerically made and factory stock condition. We FIRMLY believe that all 3 of these points are needed to keep with the spirit of the class. This class is the one entry point that a first time college team can create a design and afford to do so, which ultimately adds growth to our club and sport.

This issue hit a hotspot with me...

--off my soapbox--



I have been waiting for this to raise its head and am only surprised that it has taken so long.
The definition of F35 was opened by the WHF to all national clubs for discussion and input. As Conrad states the IHC was the only one to submit a reply, the implication being that the rest of the clubs were quite happy to accept what ever came down the line. As you can see from our post, we believe that the spirit of F25 should be carried forward into F35 (basic unmodified engines that do not need a constant supply of money and maintenance). If one wishes to tinker around with engines and improve their performance there are plenty of other formulae to particitate in.
For anybody not quite sure of the WHF definition of F35, I have included it below.

Formula 35
Single or multiple four stroke air cooled industrial engines with a total horse power not exceeding 35hp as specified on the manufacturer’s engine label(s) / name plate(s) and operating within the manufactures engine speed range. If this information is not available it is the drivers’ responsibility to provide documentary evidence to the satisfaction of the WHF Technical Director, or his representative, that engines meet these requirements.

David Ryan
30-Jul-10, 08:52 PM
-"My point here- the final rules omitted rpm."-

This is not quite true. These engines are designed to opperate at 3600 rpm by the manufacturers. The reason that I did not specify a particular figure in my submission to the WHF was to allow for increases in rpm by the manufacturers in the future and to remove the need to change the rules if they did this.

As to modifying engines to increase rpm and hp output, there are 2 points that I would like to make:

1) Damage caused by overspeeding will immediately nullify the manufacturers warrenty (standard B+S warrenty conditions). In other words, these engines are designed to run at 3600 rpm and no more,

2) I contacted B+S directly and asked them if they would recommend or condone the modifications to increase the revs to 5500 rpm. They said that they knew of these modifications and who was doing them. However they refused to make any comment or recommendation about these altered engines,instead, refering me to the modifier. B+S oviously do want their engines running at 53% above the recommended.

If you look at the proposal put forward to the WHF, you will see that we stressed the use of unmodified engines. Unfortunately, this word was left out of the final definition. However, it is very specific about the top speed at which these engines can be run.

Bill Baker
9-Aug-10, 03:27 PM
Bill,

During my tenure with the WHF I never once received any notification from ANY club regarding their regulations or any regulation changes. Yet the WHF regs clearly state that when a National Club makes changes, they should inform the WHF so that they can keep abreast - and possibly keep aligned with - all the WHF member National Clubs. In fact, I used to actively contact numerous people within the HCGB (and several other clubs) to ascertain what was happening and even then, it was hard to keep up with it. Your notion that the WHF merely 'stands by' and takes "little or no notice" is just wrong.

Bob
Bob , This is a copie of an E mail sent to you and others sent sept 2009 this after descusion formed the basis of the F35 book sent to all the world and EHF members after ratification by HCGB
Hi All ,
I will attach the modified F35 hand book hopefully with the gist of the amended wording discussed very usefully on Saturday night at Jakes.

To summarise engines 1000cc at 4500 rpm OR 35 Hp engines run as per manufactures Specification.

Drop F4 as a Formula description.

Buoyancy adequate to support craft + extra 20 Kg per passenger.

I would like your input good and bad, and hopefully we can present the final agreed copy duly signed with as many signatures as possible collected at Towcester Race meeting, and then present it to the competitions Committee for ratification before the AGM .

We possibly also need to consolidate the feelings we expressed with regard to F35 griddling positions in in F3 races.
Regards to all Bill


----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Baker
To: Rob Trussler ; graham spencer ; Keith smallwood ; chris searle ; ken rigley ; Bob Rennick ; russell pullen ; Jon Pert ; barry oakley ; Graham Nutt ; Kip McCollum ; Keith ; Jake ; Duncan Hyde ; colin hales ; john Gifford ; warren Briggs ; Ewan Black ; Conrad Beale ; Bill Baker
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 8:03 PM
Subject: F35 at Jakes place


I have attached the basic format of F35
I will bring a Sheet to collect signatures agreeing to this concept, to be put before comps / Council to try and move this on in the hope that this formula will gain acceptance by the powers that be.

Bill Baker.

Bill Baker
9-Aug-10, 04:13 PM
Conrad said

[So what do you expect the WHF to do? They haven’t got time to go around asking every single member worldwide their opinions and collate the views. Those who want change need to be proactive giving adequate time and consultation periods for the Board to deal with their proposals. Here is your opportunity before the next WHC (2012), and with a club that is generally apathetic you could introduce or change rules to meet your wishes.


What I expect any organisation to do and particularly one that wants to speak for all of us , is to at least respond when it is sent a copy of formula clarification document on behalf of one of its members Namely the HCGB prier to its last meeting.
Not one response did I get personally having sent it to all members of the Worlds Federation and the HCGB representative
It is not my job as an individual to follow it up, we are told there are systems in place channels to be observed etc etc .
Whether you agree with the majority view of the British F35 drivers who helped compile this booklet is irrelevant . my point is can we have faith in decisions taken by this body as it now stands
Bill Baker.

sorgatz
9-Aug-10, 06:26 PM
The WHF message board isn't a good contrast for members to review the politics of the organization. There hasnt been a single public comment on it since Dec. 2009.

A more correct approach would have been to contact all the member leads through mail or email, and ask that they contact club members. I see on Bills' email to Bob Rennick, that none of the current WHF board members were emailed. Myself and others heard about the issue through the grapevine, hardly a solid solution to change. How much time would it really have taken, to contact the correct people?


Bill, I know you are referring to concerns over F35, but look at the response to a posting on the WHF bulletin board from last October. One reply from David Ryan.
http://hovercraft.org.uk/whf/forum.php?dossier=1&read=16
There has been time and the opportunity for discussion and there has been little response.

So what do you expect the WHF to do? They haven’t got time to go around asking every single member worldwide their opinions and collate the views. Those who want change need to be proactive giving adequate time and consultation periods for the Board to deal with their proposals. Here is your opportunity before the next WHC (2012), and with a club that is generally apathetic you could introduce or change rules to meet your wishes.

I agree with Tony Drake, the rules should be set from top down. Setting them at Worlds level will encourage the rest of the world to follow suit. What we have now is a system where individual countries are making their own rules and getting upset when they differ from the World regulations. F35 & F50 being classic examples of this.
The real problem is there are few people willing to put any effort in at WHF level because it doesn’t directly affect them, that is until a very important meeting comes round once every 2 years.

I suggest the HCGB, & EHF should consider agreeing to adopt the WHF rule book, then we might see some constructive changes.

David Ryan
9-Aug-10, 07:49 PM
"A more correct approach would have been to contact all the member leads through mail or email, and ask that they contact club members"
Each club was contacted, informed of the forum discussion, asked to let all members know and discuss. The clubs were then to post their ideas on the forum. This is exactly what the IHC did.

"What I expect any organisation to do and particularly one that wants to speak for all of us , is to at least respond when it is sent a copy of formula clarification document on behalf of one of its members."
The WHF response was to open up the topic to ALL member countries. The fact that this very democratic method was not made use of by the majority of clubs is not a reflection on the WHF but on the attitude of the clubs themselves. There is no sense in complaining about not being consulted if when clubs are consulted, they do not reply.

Philip
9-Aug-10, 08:36 PM
A more correct approach would have been to contact all the member leads through mail or email, and ask that they contact club members. I see on Bills' email to Bob Rennick, that none of the current WHF board members were emailed. Myself and others heard about the issue through the grapevine, hardly a solid solution to change. How much time would it really have taken, to contact the correct people?
I am a paid up member of more than one club and the only one that contacted me was the IHC, why could not others have done the same if they had concerns about the rules for F35 engines?

" Formula 35
Single or multiple four stroke air cooled industrial engines with a total horse power not exceeding 35hp as specified on the manufacturer’s engine label(s) / name plate(s) and operating within the manufactures engine speed range. If this information is not available it is the drivers’ responsibility to provide documentary evidence to the satisfaction of the WHF Technical Director, or his representative, that engines meet these requirements."

This seems a simple and straightforward rule which should allow anyone to compete without spending vast sums of money modifing engines, is this not the spirit of F35? Philip

hovmart
9-Aug-10, 09:27 PM
so how many out there busy taking there 28 hp engines out ?

atters
10-Aug-10, 07:19 AM
As far as I can gather, its not about the rule as such but the lack of communication.

This is always going to be a problem it looks like. I feel that if you want something done by a higher body it is your personal obligation to chase up on that body. One can not just sit back and expect that they do as you would being an enthusiast and racer, you would get to it in a hurry. Others are not like that and sometimes these things are sometimes pushed aside to deal with other issues that may be on the table at the time.

I speak from experience through struggling with several departments and groups.

Jon Pert
10-Aug-10, 11:42 AM
the lack of communication.



There, right there, is exactly the problem.

David Ryan
10-Aug-10, 12:24 PM
But a lack of communication on whose part?

atters
11-Aug-10, 07:20 AM
But a lack of communication on whose part?

It takes two to communicate...:confused:

Who cares on whose part, you cant communicate with yourself. OR can you?

If you are two sitting in a bin, one instigates by asking a question, if the other does not answer him, you just ask him again, if there is still no answer, you slap him to wake him up.

Maybe WHF needs a slap.