[NSRCA-discussion] weight limits for electrics?
John Pavlick
jpavlick at idseng.com
Sun May 14 21:15:01 AKDT 2006
Larry,
Yeah, you missed all the fun we had with this last year. Stuff like this
always comes up and then it dies out. You just picked at a scab. Your
observations are right in line with mine but sometimes it takes a while for
everyone (or at least most of us) to agree. The main problem is that the
current rules were written before the electrics became really popular.
That's why it doesn't seem to make sense. Unfortunately what would have made
sense would have been to weigh the airplane in a truly Ready to Fly
configuration i.e. WITH fuel or WITH Battery - but that would make a lot of
planes that are legal under the current rules illegal under the more
explicit rule (including some of mine). We don't want to go there (believe
me) so just try to lighten up your plane if it bothers you. Like I said, a
heavy plane is not an advantage so why worry about it? There are guys making
weight with 2-meter electrics so I would think that you shouldn't have too
much of a problem. What the current rules are doing is forcing you to have a
lighter airplane with a higher power to weight ratio. What's so bad about
that? My new "lean / mean" (legal) Focus flies better than the Miss Piggy I
had last year. Thank you Mr. Rulebook.
John Pavlick
http://www.idseng.com
-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Larry
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 12:54 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] weight limits for electrics?
Dave,
You make some good points even tho I don't necessarily agree with you 100%
:)
One point you brought up is particularly interesting. It sounds as tho the
weight limit was originally intended to create a "performance parity" as you
put it. I'm sure that was intended to be across the class rather than
between electrics and glow/gas
I agree, that equal weights are not going to guarantee performance parity
as far as power to weight ratio is concerned. Electrics are beginning to
edge into the lead there I think - or will be very soon. That's going to be
even more true as battery technology continues to develop and improve. If
electrics don't have the edge on absolute power, they do have many other
advantages.
It seems to me the only way to guarantee any kind of parity in that arena
would be to specify a specific max power to weight ratio. Something that
would be doable - weigh the plane, measure max rpm on the prop being used
and do some math and you would have a power to weight at the prop.
I think I mentioned early on that I could easily meet the weight limit if
I just changed packs. Same power out, slightly shorter run time (or re-prop
and have slightly less power at same run time) but almost a pound lighter.
Its definitely doable at ANY weight. There is another flyer on RC Groups
doing a Quest with a smaller motor and packs. He will be almost 2 pounds
lighter than me, but at less than 1/2 the power to weight.
Its just a matter of dollars :)
Larry
----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Lockhart
To: 'NSRCA Mailing List'
Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2006 7:31 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] weight limits for electrics?
Larry,
WOW! I did step into the middle of things didn't I? :)
*********yes, you did!!!!
I don't really have a horse in that race, so I have no informed opinion.
I think big bipes might be cool tho!
*********More time, more money, more hassle, fewer competitors – not
cool!!!
2)Is the current weight rule "fair" to electrics?
************Yes, it is fair.
To me it seems more fair and reasonable to have a take-off weight limit
as the standard rather than a dry weight limit.
*********This idea does make a lot of sense, but as the electrics have
developed (and will continue to develop), true performance parity is not
going to be equal if equal takeoff weights are used. Just for example, 5 of
the 8 F3A finalists in 2005 at the US NATs were electric – and all under 11
lbs. Of the 3 glow, I was 10 lbs 10 oz WITH fuel and I think the other 2
glow were about 11.5 lbs WITH fuel. The electric I am building now will be
about 9.5 lbs WITH lipos, and if I did another glow ship today, it would
probably be 10.25 WITH fuel.
Regards,
Dave Lockhart
DaveL322 at comcast.net
----- Original Message -----
From: Troy A. Newman
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2006 12:42 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] weight limits for electrics?
Reality is the Battery is not the fuel. It is the fuel tank. It holds
the fuel.
This is the way FAI has decided to handle the situation, and as a
result the AMA pattern folks have decided to follow suit. Right or wrong it
is the way it is.
<snip>
Remember this is toy airplanes and its for fun. Anybody that throws a
fit about a guy winning with an illegal (overweight) model should have to
answer to the firing squad.
Troy Newman
----- Original Message -----
From: Larry
To: patternrules at earthlink.net ; NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2006 8:30 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] weight limits for electrics?
Hi Steve,
That's pretty much what everyone tells me so far, but it doesn't sit
quite rite. Makes me feel like I will be cheating and getting away with it
because no one checks.
It also seems like there is a double standard here and that the
rules need to be re-evaluated.
A glow plane that weighs 5kg empty will definitely have a take off
weight HIGHER than mine and yet it would be legal and I am not. It might
even have a landing weight higher than mine depending on the size of the
tank and length of the routine.
I wonder if anyone is looking at this as more and more electrics are
getting into all aspects of the hobby.
I just saw in the Apr Kfactor in the D8 column, someone did a
conversion and has similar issues - slightly over the 5KG limit with
batteries installed.
It seems to me that batteries should be considered "fuel" and not
count towards the total weight OR that take off weight should be the
determining factor.
Ofcourse, as I said, I am a 100% newbie here. Haven't even flown in
one contest yet :)
Larry
----- Original Message -----
From: Steven Maxwell
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2006 7:53 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] weight limits for electrics?
I wouldn't worry about the weight. A little story to go along
with that. At the 1984 Tangerine, one of the 3 top rated contest in the
conutry then (Nat's and Rough River) my last conest as a sportsman thats
when we had novice,I was winning by a slight margin, the last round on
Sunday I got beat out of first by .07 point, so I got second, the 3rd place
guy said that the winner had an illegal airplane, slightly over weight, and
wanted me to protest, I told him that the guy beat me flying not because he
had an overweight plane, and that if he wanted to protest do it his self, he
didn't and the ending was finaI. I had already talked to the guy and he said
his self that it probably was over weight, real nice about it (EU1A) not the
first one of those that didn't make weight.
So the story goes I don't remember either of the persons names, I
do remember it as a fond memory, but I bet nobody can give me either persons
names, 22 years later. My first journey to a big contest with no one along
for the ride or to fly, just me it was a ball.
So don't worry about unless you plane on placing at Nats then you
need to make weight.
Steven Maxwell
----- Original Message -----
From: Larry
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Sent: 5/13/2006 10:34:53 PM
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] weight limits for electrics?
Hi all,
I am brand new to NSRCA and pattern flying in general. I am
planning to attend my first ever event later this month.
I noticed in the rules that the weight limit is 5Kg without
fuel.
How does this apply as far as electric powered planes are
concerned? Are the batteries considered the fuel?
I am asking because my plane is a Quest 90 G2 converted to
electric power and it weighs 4.04 Kg "dry" (no batteries) but it weighs 5.33
Kg fully "fueled" with batteries installed.
I have asked about this on RC Groups and been told not to worry,
no one weighs planes except at the NATS.
Has there been any official word on this? I don't want to feel
like I'm cheating in a contest or "getting away" with something.
Thanks!
Larry
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.6/339 - Release Date: 5/14/06
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20060515/d23afd30/attachment-0001.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list