[NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight Limits
Mark Atwood
atwoodm at paragon-inc.com
Fri Jun 22 06:46:23 AKDT 2007
I hate to say it, but many...if not ALL at my club would argue that the
³average² guy can¹t afford to build a glow powered 2 meter airplane that¹s
competitive.
I¹m going to bow out of the conversation as Ron suggests because I haven¹t
³walked the mile². My general stance though is that there no requirement
that says we need to make Electric a viable option...any more than we need
to make Gas a viable option. If it is, some will choose it. If it¹s
really hard...but adds value, a few of the elite can/will choose it. If
it¹s easy and cheap, everyone will use it. The rules are the rules and
they¹re the same for everyone. The argument stems solely around ³endorsing²
and promoting a particular technology. I don¹t think in this instance
there¹s a good argument for doing that.
I¹m out :)
-Mark
On 6/22/07 10:26 AM, "Ron Van Putte" <vanputte at cox.net> wrote:
> It is said that you can't understand a person's problems until you've walked a
> mile in their shoes. John and I didn't understand what the problems were
> regarding making weight with electric-powered airplanes until he decided to
> compete with one. I am still competing with a glow-powered Focus.
>
> John's airplane is under 5 Kg, but not by much. Due to an extensive
> weight-saving building job on his Black Magic by Mike Hester and John's
> careful selection and installation of radio, batteries, ESC, prop, motor,
> spinner, et al, his airplane is OK with weight, even in the kind of winds we
> often see at the Nats. He's thinking about the guys who can't afford as much
> $$$ as he has invested in his setup. The average guy probably can't build an
> electric-powered 2 meter airplane that makes weight and is competitive with
> the kind of budget required for a glow-powered version of the same airplane.
>
> Ron Van Putte
>
> The learning curve is very steep.
> On Jun 21, 2007, at 11:54 PM, Keith Black wrote:
>
>>
>> I fly electric but still would be against this proposal.
>>
>>
>>
>> John F. makes some good points in his justification, however, I simply think
>> that Dave's counter points out "weigh" John's points.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I think if you read Dave's post with an open mind and not a pre-conceived
>> "position" you feel you have to protect you'll find his logic very
>> compelling.
>>
>>
>>
>> BTW, I find this change of heart by you and John quite amusing. This is
>> probably unfair but it almost sounds as if one of you can't get your new
>> e-plane to make weight with the current rules. I'm sure that's not true, but
>> from the outside it certainly appears that way.
>>
>>
>>
>> I hope the real reason for "floating" this idea was to get people opinions.
>> If so I'm beginning to see a trend.
>>
>>
>>
>> Keith Black
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>>>
>>> From: Ron Van Putte <mailto:vanputte at cox.net>
>>>
>>> To: NSRCA Mailing List <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 7:38 PM
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight Limits
>>>
>>>
>>> I was also not aware that glow-powered airplanes needed the handicap they
>>> already have. I agree that, with innovative design and $$$,
>>> electric-powered airplanes can compete with glow-powered airplanes. The
>>> ones who suffer from the weight inequity are those who can't afford the
>>> $$$ to overcome the weight inequity.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ron Van Putte
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 21, 2007, at 6:59 PM, John Ferrell wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I did not realize that the Electrics were in need of a handicap. They
>>>> seem to be doing just fine against the recips under current rules.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you really think they need a little help by all means give them a
>>>> rule book boost!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> John Ferrell W8CCW
>>>> "Life is easier if you learn to plow
>>>> around the stumps"
>>>> http://DixieNC.US
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Ron Van Putte <mailto:vanputte at cox.net>
>>>>>
>>>>> To: NSRCA Mailing List <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 2:44 PM
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20070622/874917cb/attachment-0001.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list