[NSRCA-discussion] Noise rules

[Michael Wickizer]

Lance / Gray:

How does the 103 db at 10 feet over hard surface translate to a grass field 
/ strip?

Thanks
Mike


>From: Gray E Fowler <gfowler at raytheon.com>
>Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Noise rules
>Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 08:20:26 -0500
>
>John
>
>To add to Lance's experience (he and I authored that specific noise rule)
>most of the loud boys start out having no idea how loud they really are.
>103dB is real easy to obtain , almost all of our planes are under 100. 3dB
>= 2X loud. The "A" weighting discards any sound below 500mhz. This is
>important as "bass" does not irritate but can easily place you over the
>limit. 1000 to 4000 is the most irritating to Mr Bob Complainer. This
>brings up problem #2 which is large supersonic prop tips. Guess what
>frequency they pop at??? right at 1000-2000 and now matter how quiet on
>the ground the plane is, a supersonic prop in a dive will not only piss
>off the neighbors but club members too. We dealt with this by limiting
>prop size...that is making the IMAC type planes go to 3 blades. You cannot
>believe the grief I got by putting this in place....a guy spends over
>$5000 on his plane and then bitches about having to buy a $150 prop. He
>ended up selling his whole rig...plane, 5th wheel to haul it and all. The
>prop issue is much more contrversial, and harder to regulate. Our rules
>state "no supersonic props" so if at the field and you hear it any club
>member can ask that person to stop flying. How to enforce that I do not
>know but luckily the rules alone got rid of all the problems...that is,
>nearly all those people quit, which was not the intention, but hey......we
>still have our field and only one psychotic lady to deal with-and the
>County/Judges on our side.
>
>We never have to check now. Like Lance mentioned if someone brings out a
>plane above 103dB you will know it immediately. By the way the IMAC planes
>4 years ago were 107-108 dB at 10 feet WITH supersonic props while flying.
>  That is about 3.4 times louder than a pattern plane plus prop noise.
>
>A wise Vulcan once told me "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of
>the few", or something like that.....
>
>
>
>Gray Fowler
>Senior Principal Chemical Engineer
>Radome and Composites Engineering
>Raytheon
>
>
>
>"Lance Van Nostrand" <patterndude at comcast.net>
>Sent by: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>06/19/2006 10:30 PM
>Please respond to
>NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>
>
>To
>"NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>cc
>
>Subject
>Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Noise rules
>
>
>
>
>
>
>John,
>I've been part of setting noise limit in 2 clubs.  One because I was an
>officer and we put them in place just in time because when the complaint
>came in the town saw that we were being proactive.  In the second, I got
>roped in because I had "experience".  I've got the same sound meter that
>they use at nats.  First rule is to get a great meter and spend the money.
>  You don't want to make a rule that limits a persons flying if, when you
>go to enforce it, the defensive pilot points out the uncertainty of your
>equipment.  McMaster Carr has a +- 1Db meter, which is as good as you can
>get.  Its self calibrating too, which is important since it will probably
>be stored at your field in the cold and hot.
>
>Second: I 've measured tons of planes from close and far, upwind and down
>and talked to observers.  You must not succumb to claims that you can
>measure from 25 feet (or more) and get reliable results.  Way too many
>variables.  Measer from 10 feet at a consistent location.  use A
>weighting, slow response to average the results.
>
>Third: after doing this twice with different observers 103dB limit (10
>feet over hard surface) is reasonable.  Thisis where both clubs ended up.
>It is a lenient threshold that few planes will exceed, but when they do
>you and everyone will know it.  If the law still complains you can lower
>it, but no one will say you are being too restrictive with this.  Even the
>loud boys will agree, but they'll probably violently oppose the concept of
>a noise rule.
>
>--Lance
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: John Ferrell
>To: NSRCA Mailing List
>Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 8:08 PM
>Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Noise rules
>
>If someone out there has a set of noise rules for a general purpose RC
>club? Especially a set that works.
>
>I cannot expect the masses to conform to pattern numbers, but I need
>something to start with. "Reasonable" does not seem to mean the same thing
>to every one.
>
>
>John Ferrell    W8CCW
>"My Competition is not my enemy"
>http://DixieNC.US
>
>_______________________________________________
>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


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