Weight limit discussion

[Ron Lockhart]

The intent and goal of the 2 1/2 % over weight allowance as you desribe it is fine.
But the verbage for a such a rule  (allows "slightly" overweight of contemporary designs,
because of prop, repairs, etc)  is likely to be subjective and difficult to work with.

I sort of like the idea of allowing extra weight (say one lb?) for Sportsman only.
But then we have the situation of telling a successful Sportsman pilot that he has
to buy a new plane to move to Intermediate.  Attempts to aleviate that issue will
likley find us on a steeping slipper slope.

Ron Lockhart
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: BUDDYonRC at aol.com 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2005 5:14 PM
  Subject: Weight limit discussion


  Dave-Mark-Bob-John etc.etc.etc.
  As I said in my previous post I fully understand the reasoning from both sides of this issue and requested pro and con opinions on a possible solution which will satisfy the area that I think is driving this discussion. That is the absolute necessity to spend large amounts of money to reduce the weight of a model to bring it into compliance with the weight limit.
  Especially for those who cannot afford it and would like to participate in the Nat's 
  I have received suggestions that this issue could be resolved by adopting a penalty system similar to that now in place for the Noise Limit rule and another suggestion that would provide for a 2/12% over weight allowance. If you have an opinion I would like to hear it.
  Buddy    
    
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050228/605adfaa/attachment.html