[NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight Limits

[Gray E Fowler]

Ron 

Since you are the intermediary, tell John that "The Point" is a problem. 
His point is really many points that will be affected by this single point 
rule change.
Many things about the rules will never be perfect and I think the point 
about the responses being received are that his proposed change does not 
come without baggage of its own creating new problems, not to mention 
being premature.

People are flying and winning with electric power with the current rules 
in place. Where is the problem? A few cannot build under the 5Kg limit? 
Which is FAI, out of our control, and where the majority of the electrics 
are anyway. So if we increase the weight limit in AMA specifically for 
electric, FAI'ers can't use that.
So my Point is, this proposal fixes nothing and creates more problems. As 
far as John's point, let him know that "I dig baby" but does not compute.

Sorry to be so pointed......



Gray Fowler
Senior Principal Chemical Engineer
Radomes and Specialty Apetures
Technical Staff Composites Engineering
Raytheon



Ron Van Putte <vanputte at cox.net> 
Sent by: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
06/21/2007 01:44 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
[NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight Limits






I just got this response from John Fuqua.

Ron Van Putte

The guys are missing the point.  It is not about what can be achieved on 
weight.  It is what is permitted by the rules.  They are not arguing the 
logic of what the rules allow (in most cases) but examples of what has 
been achieved.   Please make that point. 
 
John


From: Ron Van Putte [mailto:vanputte at cox.net] 
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 1:18 PM
To: Fuqua John D Mr CTR USAF 697 ARSF/EN
Subject: Fwd: [NSRCA-discussion] Fwd: Electric Weight Proposal Logic and 
Rationale




Begin forwarded message:
From: Joe Lachowski <jlachow at hotmail.com>
Date: June 21, 2007 12:56:28 PM CDT
To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Fwd: Electric Weight Proposal Logic and 
Rationale
Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>

I personally do not want any change. Technology development will 
eventually even things out.
 
But if I were to have an increase it would only be two ounces tops. The 
majority of those planes on the heavy side are structurally designed for 
glow and are typically from what I have seen very close to the weight 
limit or are within a couple ounces of making weight. A couple of ounces 
may give you enough breathing room and at the same time deter even bigger 
and more expensive airframes from cropping up. Kind of a middle of the 
road compromise. A half pound is just way too much to give.
 
Hmmm, my Brio is 10-1/4 lbs. Fueled for a competition flight somewhere 
between 11 and 11-1/4 lbs at takeoff. Now my Astral XX is around 10-3/4 
lbs and I can feel the disadvantages of its 8 ozs. heavier weight. I also 
have a 10lb-13oz electric but it is too early to tell since it only has 4 
flights on it <G>. 

_______________________________________________
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/20070621/a8bfa646/attachment.html