[SPAM] Re: *SPAM* Re: Rules Survey

[Jeff Hughes]

I remember DIck Hanson weighing in (a little pun there) on this subject. He said if there was no weight limit, he'd be designing a 1,600 square inch biplane to fit the 2M box. It's never ending. Something in the rules is always the limit that will drive cost to achieve an edge.  If people are worried about cost, a 90 size plane is competitive in the first 3 classes. 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: HankPajari at aol.com 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 8:24 PM
  Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: *SPAM* Re: Rules Survey


  I agree with Bill.  We can keep all the other parameters but raise the weight limit to allow the use of a gas engine. Besides I already have a ZDZ40 ;>)

  Gas engines are powerful, easy to tune, once set you almost never have to touch the needles, last forever, and are very reliable.  Gives the lower classes one less thing to worry about.  Not to mention gas is one heck of a lot cheaper than fuel.  The initial cost is comparable to a top of the line YS.

  If a guy is going to move up to FAI he is probably going to buy a new rig (every year) anyway so, as long as we stay close to the FAI specs, I don't see how we are diverging in a drastic way.

  But, I am a newbie to pattern and don't know all the arguments for both sides of the issue.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050209/c5c164f5/attachment.html