Work of...
*Blushes* If you think that's OK, you should see some of the stuff that the experts knock together. Stunningly good work.
Amazing stuff!
Isn't it though? Way out of my league.
How is the flying part judged? And how does the “pilot” get it to land? Does the engine cut out after, say, 20 seconds?
For the scale stuff flight is judged on meeting some minimum qualifying time plus extra for time above the minimum. Often there are bonus seconds for ROG (rise off ground i.e. a take-off) to compensate for the reduction in endurance that goes with ROG* and an aesthetic judgement of "realistic" flight characteristics. I don't know how the realism bit is judged, one of life's mysteries on a par with the scoring for ice-dancing & rhythmic gymnastics to me.
All sorts of incredibly clever and astonishingly light electronic wizardry is available to those who use electric motors. Speed controllers that can be programmed to give a particular engine rev profile over a given timeframe. So a burst for take-off, drop to cruising revs at desired time/height and then wind the revs down to bring it into land. See Jon's Bristol Scout.
It's a bit simpler with rubber & CO2. Gravity wins after the motor no longer has enough torque (rubber) or gas (CO2) to keep the model at the Vmin required to hold level flight and after that you're into little more than a power assisted glide. See Richard C's Aeronca Chief.
*You often have to use smaller airscrews to avoid having ridiculously oversize and non-scale undercarriages.