Technology and Paticipation

[Bob Pastorello]

Troy wrote: "Bob has stated he is going to be flying 90 sized ARFy in Masters."

Bob replies: Only until there is clear evidence of anti-90 sized airplanes scores from Judges.  I've flown it enough to know good and well that it is capable, and I'm capable of flying it.  Should be fun!

Go Broncos! <G>, er - ah - Who?

Bob Pastorello
NSRCA 199  AMA 46373
rcaerobob at cox.net
www.rcaerobats.net


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Troy A. Newman 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 5:38 PM
  Subject: Re: Technology and Paticipation


  OK but that is not what the rules say! put in a change for AMA pattern and if passed it will take effect in 2007. I'm just conveying the standard that has been set by the FAI Ciam committee on how they are interpreting the rules. The power generation is definitely a different form....The problem is the glow or gasoline chemicals get burned or used up to release their energy....The electric chemicals don't. Rather the energy that is stored in those chemicals gets used up. Over time yes the chemicals will change and not release the energy the same as they once did...But the definition of a battery is:A device for storing electric energy. A battery doesn't create energy it merely stores it and releases it. An electric motor uses this electricity to create power, DO WORK.
  The fueled IC engines use the fuel to create the power and DO WORK! Both have to be re-fueled at the end of a flight.

  Do you replace the chemicals in the batteries at the end of the flight? No because its the not the chemicals that are being used its the energy that is stored in those chemicals. 


  I would agree a Take off weight limit would be a possible solution. But a weight limit is a weight limit. The playing field is equal NOW. 

  I'm not against the electric stuff at all. I have been very exposed to it and I have flown it. I feel the same as Jason does it about.

  Is it an Advantage- NO
  Does it have advantages--YES Does it have some draw backs--YES
  Does it fly better--NO
  Does it fly worse--NO
  Does it have less power--NO
  Does it have more power--NO
  Is it cheaper--NO
  Is it cleaner--Yes
  Is it quieter--NO our meters and NATS meters read levels that show its actually the same


  Is it different YES 
  Is it exciting --YES

  I just think we need to not change the game to allow the new technology to take over the show. let everything be used. By changing the rules to allow electrics to weight without the batts is giving the E-Power the advantage..because now the guy can stick a Sears Diehard in it. 

  Electric is not at any disadvantage now against glow. Both can be easily made to make weight!
  So the argument is price for kits that can do Electric will limit us to PL and ZN kits because they are light enough and they cost too much. Well the Impact is like $800 and it will make weight JAS did it and Kicked my butt with it!

  I think if you drive the rules bigger it will make the results bigger. They are what they are...live with them.

  Bob has stated he is going to be flying 90 sized ARFy in Masters. If you choose to make this model your electric then what's the weight limit effect you. If you choose to build a PL Partner on E power that's your choice it can make weight too. The Impact, the Lazulite, ZN line has done the Evolis and the Enigma on E-power and they make the rules. The Brio from Piedmont should be in the same class we'll see how things go as the kits become available. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050109/87fc7f79/attachment-0001.html