An Overwhelming Weight- A Heavy Issue

[George Kennie]

Buddy,
There's absolutely nothing wrong with your position, just that it's
futile. If the program is FAI driven(which it is), then it is pretty
much pointless for us to go off
on our own in some direction that will render participation at the
Nats level illegal.
Do you then acquire a stable of two pattern aircraft, one heavy bird
for the local pattern scene and another reserved strictly for Nats
participation. I realize the rediculum suggested in this scenario,
but there will always be the need to own that "EXPENSIVE" Nats
airplane in order to comply with the FAI standard.I don't think you
can ever expect the Nats to adopt a double standard. One for 401 to
404 and another for FAI. The 401 to 404 pilots will always yearn for
the technological performance level of the TOP pilots and wont be
denied irrespective of the cost.
To assume that an inexpensive weapon will grow the sport, I think,
is an erroneous conclusion. There are tons of offerings out there
right now that meet all the requirements of the neophyte and beyond,
but you don't see Sportsman and Intermediate participants
overflowing the registration coffers on the local contest scene.
If a guy shows up with "heavy" or "cheap", he quickly becomes aware
that his weapon of choice doesn't perform up to the standard of "
that guy flying Masters", and quickly concludes, " Wow, if I'm ever
going to remotely resemble that level of performance I'm going to
need that type of aircraft and my "heavy and cheap" is never going
to provide me with the same advantage that he has".  If you try to
mandate that everybody has to fly "Heavy and Cheap", you will
quickly introduce a strain of deception and cheating the likes of
which has never been seen.
The thirst for the perfect airplane will never end and will continue
to drive the advances we all have come to expect, and to return to
bygone days will never be tolerated by the rulers of the
International Community. The motto has always been "Onward and
Upward", and as the grade steepens there will be many heavy
breathers lacking the fitness to emerge victorious at the summit.
That's probably why you see me in attencance as a spectator.
I still love ya, Buddy
Georgie

BUDDYonRC at aol.com wrote:

>  GSince you indicated that it is OK to let your voice be heard, I
> would like to pose a few questions which have aroused my curiosity
> while listening to all the very thoughtfully constructed debate on
> the weight issues.1. Since I assume that the positions stated
> against change are based on FAI rules being the basis for most top
> designs being produced today how could a change in the AMA weight
> limit effect the basis of design for FAI, the place where all
> state of the art designs of today emanate from as they would be
> lighter than any AMA increased weight limit should one be
> adopted?2. Doesn't the same argument that is being used today
> against a rule change hold true in reverse should FAI go to a
> higher weight limit in the future? If FAI weight rules were
> changed today wouldn't that make the new designs based on that
> change illegal unless the AMA changed it's rules accordingly?That
> being the case it seems to me that nothing significant will happen
> in regard to a mass change in design concept that will effect AMA
> pattern to any great extent if the weight rule is changed to allow
> a small increase aimed at reducing cost, among other things since
> most all top AMA pilots today are using designs based on FAI
> rules.Seems to me that logic gained from the discussion has
> indicated that an AMA weight change is not the issue the real rub
> comes about if FAI changes their weight rules, am I the only one
> or does anyone else see it this wayBuddy


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050301/24ab74a9/attachment.html