Weight Limit

[Wade & Barbara Akle]

Ron,
What you stated is called the rule of UnIntended Consequences!
Wade


>From: ronlock <ronlock at comcast.net>
>Reply-To: discussion at nsrca.org
>To: discussion at nsrca.org
>Subject: RE:  Weight Limit
>Date: Sat, 09 Nov 2002 12:01:35 -0500
>
>If we remove the weight limit, nothing dramatic happens in the short term.
>
>The few pilots with ll lb and a few ounces birds will be relieved, and 
>that's
>
>nice.  Overall, there is little impact.
>
>Over the longer term, our models will get larger. There is room in a 2 
>meter
>
>box to stick in a lot more airplane than we currently have. And our 
>designers
>
>will do that, since bigger is better.
>
>Fuselages will get taller and thicker. Wing area will grow to carry the 
>extra,
>
>to about how much more? 1,400, 1,600 squares? Since we don't
>
>have engine rules, getting larger engines is just a matter of letting the
>
>manufacturers catch up. Props and landing gear gets bigger. So do exhaust
>
>systems, batteries, servos, etc. We probably get more scale appearance.
>
>Every time we let models get bigger, they fly better, present to judges
>
>better, and judges seem to score them better. So most of us will feel it's
>
>necessary to go larger to stay competitive.
>
>Larger in general, means more money and time to buy, build, maintain,
>
>and transport.   Does the existing active pattern community want that?
>
>Is it good for recruiting and pattern participation in the future?
>
>Ron Lockhart


_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

=====================================
# To be removed from this list, send a message to 
# discussion-request at nsrca.org
# and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
#