[NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight Limits

[R. LIPRIE]

Wonder how this conflict would be if I said this.    If you put a 20oz tank of water in an electric airplane and had it leak out during the whole flight, as if it were burning fuel.  And the Esc go out about every 15 to 20 flights to resemble a deadstick landing.  It would make it equal between electric and glow.

--Matt

______________________
Taking off is optional, but landing is mandatory.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Dr. Mike Harrison 
  To: NSRCA Mailing List 
  Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2007 8:06 PM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight Limits


  Its not about money,  many kits can make the weight limit with careful building.  I have seen them and they cost no more than any other pattern plane.  I don't think the weight limit should be changed because of electrics.,


  Mike
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Ron Van Putte 
    To: NSRCA Mailing List 
    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 
        To: NSRCA Mailing List 
        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


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


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.9.6/865 - Release Date: 6/24/2007 8:33 AM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20070625/20abeb98/attachment.html