Weight limit discussion

[Ron Van Putte]

I am "George's father".

Ron Van Putte

On Feb 27, 2005, at 11:58 AM, David Lockhart wrote:

> Bill,
>  
> I think you make an interesting point regarding differentiation.  I 
> would point out that by competitive definition the majority in any 
> competitive event will not be "top notch".  I think I see some other 
> differentiations as well.
>  
> I see a group of flyers (let's collectively call them George for 
> purposes of this discussion) that have been in the event for a 
> substantial length of time.  George is/was a top pilot, or maybe never 
> was and never will be - but common to George is the long duration 
> spent in pattern.  George has seen a number of rules changes and 
> observed the motive/basis/desire that drove the rule change (almost 
> always with best intentions), and George has seen the unintended 
> consequences that resulted.  George is maybe trying to keep the 
> mistakes in the past from repeating.  Maybe George is tired of 
> throwing away perfectly good equipment that has been made obsolete by 
> yet another misguided rules change.  Maybe George misses those that 
> left the event to never return because of the specific rule changes, 
> or the resulting added expense to compete in the event that was the 
> unintended result of changing the rules.
>  
> I see a second group of flyers (let's call them Fred) who appear to be 
> unaware of the history of rules changes, unaware of unintended 
> consequences (in the past), or have not considered what effects 
> changes to the current rules might have beyond what is intended.  I 
> see a ton of enthusiasm from Fred, and believe Fred is truly 
> interested in making pattern more accessible to the masses.  I see 
> Fred on the average as new to pattern, or having less experience in 
> pattern than George, and Fred may be the future of pattern (no new 
> additions, the event will die).  But I see Fred covering a pretty big 
> range of demographics - experienced pilot (or not), flying lower or 
> higher classes in pattern, have a history in pattern, or being 
> relatively new to pattern - and it is not uncommon for Fred to achieve 
> better than average results in contests.
>  
> George is correct about history - and George has posed several 
> questions that have gone unanswered (to the best of my knowlegde) such 
> as -
> - When has a rules change resulted in pattern being less costly?
> - Why are the readily available planes that are easy to complete under 
> 11 lbs by any builder not being used in pattern by "Fred".  Not only 
> are these planes easy to build under 11 lbs, in many instances they 
> are also less costly.
>  
> George is very passionate about the event and the rules that shape the 
> event.  So is Fred.  George has watched the last few rules changes and 
> has unhappily been in the position to say "I told you so" when 
> unintended consequences came to fruition.  Fred is primed to say "I 
> told you so" when the weight limit is increased (lets assume 2007).  
> Fast forward to 2007 - it is the ONE year when heavier sport engines 
> and the slightly overweight (11.25 - 11.5 lbs) current designs will be 
> legal and reasonably competitive with the stuff the top guys are 
> flying (the same current designs, but at 10 lbs).  In 2007, Fred is 
> the happiest guy in pattern.  Late in 2007, after seeing a couple 2008 
> protypes that take full adavantage of the increased weight limit, 
> George is comtemplating changes - leave behind the current designs and 
> equipment that will be obsolete in 2008 (at any weight), or pack up 
> and leave the event.  George is unhappy about being able to say "I 
> told you so yet again" in 2008 - assuming George stays in the event.  
> In 2008, George may not be around to talk to Fred about why Fred's 
> plane is no longer competitive.  And maybe Fred, like George, will 
> leave the event, recognizing their equipment is obsolete and not 
> wanting to remain in the event uncompetitively, or at the expense of 
> upgrading all new equipment that is at a more costly level.
>  
> "I am George".
>  
> Regards,
>
>
> Dave Lockhart
> DaveL322 at comcast.net
>  
>  
> ----- Original Message -----
>  From: Bill Glaze
> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> Sent: Saturday, February 26, 2005 2:18 PM
> Subject: Re: Weight limit discussion
>
> I am still failing to see how widening the pool of available designs, 
> the use of which are optional, is going to add to the expense, when 
> these airplanes are of less expense.  Nobody of any knowledge is going 
> to opt for a heavier airplane if they can afford to buy a lighter 
> airplane, true.  If availability of the better airplane alone is the 
> only consideration, then I can certainly see how it could become a 
> money race.  (sound familiar?)  But, the state of the art equipment 
> belongs, and is a must-have, as I see it, only in the upper classes.  
> And, even with some top of the line stuff in the hands of a lesser 
> flyer, I believe we'll find the more practiced person will always have 
> the advantage.  We've all seen that again and again.
> Does anyone notice the differentiation here between the handful of 
> extremely top-notch flyers, and the (by far) majority of us?
>
> John Ferrell wrote:
>
> This one gets an "Amen"!
>  
> John Ferrell   
>  http://DixieNC.US
> We need to start catering to the lower classes more and helping grow 
> the sport that way, not making large rules changes that in the end are 
> just going to drive up the cost even more.
>
> Arch
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 7387 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050227/bdad83a0/attachment-0001.bin