Weight Limit

[Keith Black]

Larry, as I said I haven't formed an opinion on this topic yet, but I'm reading with great interest the various points of view. I'm quite logical, therefore solid arguments backed up with facts are what sway me.

Your reply to "recruiting new members, growing pattern" almost seems to be an argument against a weight limit. As you point out IMAC is quite successful in drawing large numbers even though their planes are outrageous in both size and price. This suggests that price is not necessarily a limiting factor. However, assuming that price were really a limiting factor we should be able to reduce prices by not having to use such high tech materials to keep the weights down. 

You also make a point that the weight limit has advanced designs and technology by forcing us to use the latest high tech materials and technology. This is probably true and I personally am a big fan of advances in new technology, yet with high tech materials comes higher costs. This seems opposed to the point that we should keep costs down because costs could be affecting local participation. Therefore I think your two points contradict each other. 

For the record, I absolutely don't want to see the price of pattern planes skyrocket or see the planes increase in size. One thing that appeals to me about pattern over IMAC is that I can have a top notch plane that is competitive on any level for around $1500 to $2000 and I don't have to buy a trailer to haul a 40% bird. In IMAC they're continually building them bigger and bigger, and one has to follow suite to be competitive. With our size limitations at least we don't always have to play catch-up on size with our competitors. We do of course have to play catch-up on design but that's the nature of any competition where equipment is a major component.

I know that changes often have unintended consequences. The question is will lifting the weight limitation cause an explosion in price or simply provide more economical and technically appealing options as others have suggested. Some will point out that the lifting of the engine restrictions caused undesired consequences, this is true but I for one think the pattern ships today are far more appealing and the sequences are much more interesting than those flown with the smaller zippy .60 size planes. Personally I think if it weren't for these changes you'd see even less participation in pattern and more of a movement to IMAC.

Keith Black
Still listening and waiting to be convinced ;-)


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Larry Diamond 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 9:50 AM
  Subject: Re: Weight Limit


  Keith,

  There are many differing opinions on the topic...Here is mine...

  >>recruiting new members, growing pattern

  If you look at the survey on RC Universe, I believe it confirm what some already knew. Participation is lacking because of local interest as the # 1 hitter...So, ask why is pattern not popular...One conclusion could be made that, to be competitive, you need a good plane with good equipment. This cost much more than an average sport flyer wishes to put out.

  There are some that say IMAC don't seem to have this problem. I'm not an IMAC'r, but I believe they are doing a great job in marketing there sport to the average sport flyer.

  Flying fields may get to be an issue with larger planes. Some fields may start to limit size that we fly contest at. If this happens it would be a direct hit on local interest. I am about 150 miles to the closest contest over the last couple years. Hopefully this next year can be different. This has been part of the reason I have not been attending contest. Family Time Vs Contest Time. The closest Pattern fliers to my area is 2 or 3 hours away. By nature, I'm a very competitive person. Golf was very frustrating to me and I couldn't get my scores below 90. I sold everything and vowed to never to play golf again....I forgot to mention that my score is for 9 holes <VBG>...Ever try to teach yourself something you don't know, and then try to set up a plane to fly well which you don't have that level of experience...It's taken two years to learn what I have. Mostly from this discussion group.

  >>advancing designs and technology

  The material that we see in pattern today are very light weight material and perhaps stronger. Engines are bigger and lighter with more HP. Titanium Push Rods, CF push rods, CF/ Kevlar Kits Vs Fiberglass. How many of those technologies would have made it in pattern if Size and Weight was not a limiting factor.

  I work in the Electronics Industry and manage very cutting edge products that push the limits of manufacturing. This leads to new ways of manufacturing. I managed a program a couple of years ago where we put a .018 inch cube electronic device on a .008 inch PCB board at over 100K assemblies per month. This would not have been necessary if the size of the product was increased. Comparing size and performance of electronics could be compared to advancing technology in Pattern Plane design. We would not be where we are today if cost and space was not a concern for electronic consumers. Everyone would have a PC the size of a closet and working on a 286 Turbo w/ EGA. Very high power for the consumer in the mid-late 80's.

  So, if we have gone as far as we can in advancing technologies with Pattern Design and Performance. I would agree to change the limit, -but not remove it-. I just don't think we are at that point.

  Again, Twisted perception from a twisted mind.

  Larry

    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Keith Black 
    To: discussion at nsrca.org 
    Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 12:14 AM
    Subject: Re: Weight Limit


    Larry,

    Honestly I haven't decided which side of this issue I'm on. Could you explain why you think increasing the weight limit would negatively effect the goal of recruiting new members, growing pattern and advancing designs and technology? I don't see the correlation.

    Thanks,
    Keith
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20021111/e9a613b8/attachment.html