Weight is not the issue!

[Thomas C. Weedon]

We had Sportsmen pilots at evey one of our D4 contests. I believe, as best
that I can remember, all of them had 60 size or smaller planes. Our rules
fit that kind of flying perfectly. Our District Champ had a sport aerobatic
trainer with a 50 or 60 size engine (can't remember). Sounds like we don't
need any more weight around here.
Tom
  -----Original Message-----
  From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On
Behalf Of George Kennie
  Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 2:24 PM
  To: discussion at nsrca.org
  Subject: Re: Weight is not the issue!


  As I perceive the viewpoint, it appears the weight raisers are saying that
if we allow heavier airplanes, then somehow this will save the Sportsman,
pattern-entering pilots, from the high expenditure of acquiring an
ultra-lite fully competitive 2-meter machine.If the goal is to save
wannabe's money, then a case could probably be made for a ruling making an 8
pound maximum allowable weight limit for Sportsman only, as a means of
leveling the playing field, both equipment wise and $ wise.In almost all
cases, this would assure the entering pilot that he would not be coming up
against someone flying his Uncle Quique's borrowed Smarragd.
  Georgie
  P.S. I didn't think about this too long, so it's kinda off the cuff.
  Buddy Brammer wrote:


    Thanks John/ Ron& Ron

    Now there are four!

    Buddy>From: "John Ferrell"
    >Reply-To: discussion at nsrca.org
    >To:
    >Subject: Re: Weight is not the issue!
    >Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 21:56:38 -0500
    >
    >I understand your frustration!
    >We put many man hours and suffered through strained personal relations
with our friends only to get a 20% return on the survey. Factor in that 5%
of the votes came from the committee and it only gets worse. On the other
hand, perhaps that if they remaining 80% is not interested, they should not
be considered.
    >
    >Would I do it again? Probably, because it is a job to be done and we
need to help out where we can. But I should add that a fresh team would be
best each cycle... at least that is my opinion at the moment!
    >
    >My position on the weight issue is pretty soft. It would not hurt to
give it a try at least in the lower clases at the Nats. But that is not my
project...
    >
    >John Ferrell
    >6241 Phillippi Rd
    >Julian NC 27283
    >Phone: (336)685-9606
    >Dixie Competition Products
    >NSRCA 479 AMA 4190 W8CCW
    >"My Competition is Not My Enemy"
    >
    >
    >
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: Buddy Brammer
    > To: discussion at nsrca.org
    > Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2002 8:49 PM
    > Subject: Re: Weight is not the issue!
    >
    >
    > If the intrest is such that we only have 20% of those flying pattern
who vote then how in the world are we going to get those outside of pattern
to try it? As I said before it is up to those in pattern to use every means
possible to maintain the intrest of those already flying pattern.
    >
    > An 80% vote on important issues would indicate to me that pattern is
alive and well. First of all I believe that most of the people who did not
vote failed to vote for reasons other than lack of intrest. What are they?
Every one is trying to figure out why new people are not stepping up to try
pattern when it looks to me we need to search out our internal problems and
make an effort to solve them. If I dont care and you dont care then who
does?
    >
    > Just searching for answers. Is anyone even interested?
    >
    > Buddy
    >

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20021118/fb9bdd6c/attachment.html