*SPAM* Re: Rules Survey

[Ken Thompson III]

That's the $600.00 model, now it's up to me.

Ken
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nat Penton" <natpenton at centurytel.net>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 12:36 AM
Subject: Re: *SPAM* Re: Rules Survey


> Yes and you could be flying a $200 (sale )Excelleron and win in any class. 
> Nat
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Ken Thompson III" <mrandmrst at comcast.net>
> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 8:10 PM
> Subject: Re: *SPAM* Re: Rules Survey
>
>
>> Very true, Nat.
>>
>> A 600.00 plane or a 6000.00 plane, I'll still be flying Sportsman this 
>> year, :-)
>>
>> Ken
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Nat Penton" <natpenton at centurytel.net>
>> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 8:21 PM
>> Subject: Re: *SPAM* Re: Rules Survey
>>
>>
>>> Some of you are over estimating the importance of the airplane and 
>>> underestimating the potential of the pilot.                   Nat
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: "Bill Southwell" <bnbsouthwell at bellsouth.net>
>>> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 8:56 PM
>>> Subject: Re: *SPAM* Re: Rules Survey
>>>
>>>
>>>> Tom how so?  If there are available engines that actually hold up but 
>>>> are a bit more porky....but also a lot cheaper to own both in intial 
>>>> purchase and in up keep how can it lead to a more expensive airplane. 
>>>> Cost of the present designs are due to the materials and mathods of 
>>>> production required tokeep the weight down. A little more room would 
>>>> make more pedestrian material like balsa , ply. and foam to come back 
>>>> or at least make the average builder have hope.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tom Shaw wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You guys need to leave well enough alone.  With the unlimited engines 
>>>>> a higher weight limit is just going to ecourage larger more expenseive 
>>>>> airplanes.  That will amount to fewer flyers.
>>>>>
>>>>>     ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>     *From:* Gray E Fowler <mailto:gfowler at raytheon.com>
>>>>>     *To:* discussion at nsrca.org <mailto:discussion at nsrca.org>
>>>>>     *Sent:* Tuesday, February 08, 2005 4:25 PM
>>>>>     *Subject:* RE: *SPAM* Re: Rules Survey
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>     Here comes the dreaded weight debate again....
>>>>>
>>>>>     Consider this-Anyone in the upper level classes would not be too
>>>>>     smart to have a plane heavier than it needs to be.  But, lets
>>>>>     pretend there is a hot new Sportsman named uh lets see..... Chuck.
>>>>>     Chuck tears up 401 after 3 contests, and he is flying his best
>>>>>     airplane that most FAI guys would consider a toy (and I do not
>>>>>     mean the "foamie toys" pictured in last months Model Aviation
>>>>>     being held by  a guy named "Chuck")  and so moving up to
>>>>>     Intermediate halfway thru his first season, last 3 contests were
>>>>>     quite a challenge, BUT he places in 402 anyway!
>>>>>     In the off season, he saves his pennies, keeps his wife happy and
>>>>>     gets a used REAL pattern plane, built by someone who has a slight
>>>>>     heavy hand, and alas it weighs 11.5 lbs. Now this here Chuck is
>>>>>     good and pumped up and I would place money that this theoretical
>>>>>     person could place at the NATS, but his plane is over weight!!!!!
>>>>>     one more !
>>>>>
>>>>>     Sorry Chuck, even though you are flying at a disadvantage, we will
>>>>>     not let you play at the NATS........Oh unless you can spend $2k
>>>>>     more on another plane.
>>>>>
>>>>>     The story you have just read is about to be true, once we do not
>>>>>     let Chuck fly at this years NATS. But at least the French FAI rule
>>>>>     makers are happy.
>>>>>
>>>>>     Consider a weight change. It does not need to be across the board
>>>>>     and for the life of me I cannot imagine why it needs to align with
>>>>>     FAI.  Chuck will have a 5Kg plane *BY THE TIME HE REACHES FAI-*and
>>>>>     the French can be happy then*.*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> =================================================
>>>> To access the email archives for this list, go to
>>>> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
>>>> To be removed from this list, go to 
>>>> http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>>>> and follow the instructions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>>>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>>>> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.0 - Release Date: 1/17/2005
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>>> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.0 - Release Date: 1/17/2005
>>>
>>> =================================================
>>> To access the email archives for this list, go to
>>> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
>>> To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>>> and follow the instructions.
>>>
>>
>> =================================================
>> To access the email archives for this list, go to
>> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
>> To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
>> and follow the instructions.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
>> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.0 - Release Date: 1/17/2005
>>
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.0 - Release Date: 1/17/2005
>
> =================================================
> To access the email archives for this list, go to
> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
> To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
> and follow the instructions.
> 

=================================================
To access the email archives for this list, go to
http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.