[NSRCA-discussion] Single motor rule. . .

[Jerry Stebbins]

Ron, what I heard from them was some"FAI top pilot" in California is testing it for them. However we (Lamar or I )never heard of him, and now do not remember the name. For us smaller motor(s) would be adequate at 200 watts/lb. and I asked about that. Got no response from Yeh other than "this is what they will be testing".
Jerry
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ron Van Putte 
  To: NSRCA Mailing List 
  Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 3:29 PM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Single motor rule. . .




  On Apr 12, 2006, at 3:19 PM, JShulman wrote:


    Anyone got measurements and weights on this set-up (motor set-up less props/spinner)?


  I saw it at Toledo and Maxx Product's Jarvis Yeh told me it puts out 5 horsepower.  At 746 watts per horsepower, that's 339 watts per pound for an 11 pound airplane.  200 watts per pound will give you extreme 3D capability.  That motor setup is more appropriate for a 20 - 25 pound airplane.


  Ron Van Putte


      -----Original Message-----
      From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Keith Hoard
      Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 3:26 PM
      To: NSRCA Mailing List
      Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Single motor rule. . .


      Gentlemen,

      Would this be legal in a pattern model?

      -- 

      Keith Hoard
      Collierville, TN
      khoard at gmail.com

       
    _______________________________________________
    NSRCA-discussion mailing list
    NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
    http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion




------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  NSRCA-discussion mailing list
  NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
  http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20060412/2b7cd653/attachment-0001.html