Weight Limit

[Atwood, Mark]

Bill... I'm sure Dave will chime in, but in the meantime, I'll take a
stab.  

I don't think Dave is trying to imply that a slight weight change
"Costs" more to build.  The added cost is more complicated.  Increasing
the weight limit will start a whole cycle (as it did when we changed
displacement rules) of redesigning aircraft.  New designs cost
money...It's like R&D...and those cost manifest in higher kit costs.
New designs means new setups.  For the advanced modeler, that means
buying multiple sets of Props, plugs, fuels, blah blah blah to figure
out the new "Hot" set-up.  In addition, it makes all of the "back-up"
supplies we carry obsolete.  All costs MORE money.  

Any idea how many 11x7 3/4 Rev Up props I have in the basement?? Spares
for when the Supertigers where the hot setup?  How about pairs of
retracts?? Glow plugs? Or APC 12x12's for my YS 61 long strokes...  Have
any old Hatori 650 tuned pipes laying around?  Offset headers?  Silicone
couplers? Can't imagine how much money is in "spare parts" that I never
used because we changed setup.  

That's for the advanced Pattern geek...   For the newbie, the cost is
worse because the "used" aircraft market becomes non-existent
UNLESS...they're willing to fly an outdated airframe...something that
clearly they don't wish to do or this whole discussion would be moot and
they'd be flying Prophecy's...

So on one side...the beginner has to spend more because there's very
little "used" fare on the market...and on the other side...the advanced
modeler "Eats" even more cost because his old plane no longer has the
value it had prior to the change.

More money, more money, and more money.

Lastly...it puts some of our cottage manufactures out of business...it's
too expensive for some of them to change designs weekly.  They can't
sell enough of one plane to recover the design and molding costs.  That
one I have personal experience with.

So yes...it's not specifically the weight that will add cost...it's
simply the CHANGE that will increase cost...across the board.

-Mark
Well Dave??  How'd I do? :)

-----Original Message-----
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]
On Behalf Of Bill Glaze
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 6:58 PM
To: NSRCA Discussion
Subject: Weight Limit

Dave:
I hold no particular opinion on a weight limit change; at least, not 
yet.  But, I have rather gained interest in the discussion as a
bystander.
So, I am curious.  You seem to equate weight with cost, as if we were 
buying these airplanes like a Sirloin steak, on a per pound basis.
Now, I have a couple of 14 pound Extra 300's that are powered by Moki's.
Both of them (at 80 inch wingspans, similar to pattern size wise) cost 
less than any of my pattern airplanes, have greater performance, and fly

very well.  I have no doubt that I could have spent more money, but it 
would not have improved the breed.  I did, of course, build them from 
kits.  I could have built them heavier, but that, too, would be
pointless.
If, and I stress if, all other factors are to remain the same except 
weight, how can you come up with weight equating to cost?  Particularly 
now, that Y.S. has upped the ante with their new 1.60?  Which, arguably,

is aimed at the pattern market.
I perhaps missed the message in this thread that explained your stand.  
Interested to see it again.
Thanks

Bill Glaze

=================================================
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.