[NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight Limits
Ed Miller
edbon85 at charter.net
Mon Jun 25 12:08:44 AKDT 2007
I guess I've missed the point or lost the point of this whole thread. Seems
to me WE ALL have at least 3 viable choices, glow, gas and electric.
Electric being the most expensive and still being developed, gas has limited
development but with some of the newer, lighter engines may be a viable
"cheap" alternative ( $3/gallon fuel versus $15/gallon ) and of course the
old standby glow, developed to the hilt and readily available in proven
packages that work. So where's the beef ?? Want to spend $$ and push the
envelope go for electric. Want proven, reliable, readily available
technology, go with glow. Want to possibly cut fuel costs, go gas. It
appears the mentality of some is that to be competitive today you need
electric but since it is more costly it is out of reach for average Joe
Pattern. I just don't see it. Watch how many folks are flying glow in
Masters and FAI this year at the Nats, I bet it will be more than last year
with some E power folks from '06 going back to glow. Nothing beats stick
time, those at the top learned that long ago and put in the time to hone
their skills. They can and do beat the rest of us flying any of the 3
available power choices. The rest of us need to accept that and practice
more or invent new excuses as the dollar one is worn out. I bought a 14mz
because I wanted one, not because it would make me an instant winner. I
hope to go electric because I want to, not because I expect it to raise my
scores.
Ed M.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Del K. Rykert" <drykert2 at rochester.rr.com>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight Limits
But they truly don't seem to care if they even do listen. As long as the
elite can play then all is golden.
Del
----- Original Message -----
From: Tommy Scarmardo
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 4:08 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight Limits
If we are going to change the rules because our airplanes have gotten too
expensive
man...have I got a list of things we can change.
DwayneNancy <dwaynenancy at suddenlink.net> wrote:
Just think, 30 years ago the average modeler could afford to fly Class
III. Of course if he wanted to he could fly Class I or II. Everyone
thought retracts would cost too much but the average modeler found a way to
have them too. It was a lot of fun with your "every day" plane, one that
did not need to be pampered from lack of use but flown all the time.
Remember back then, you only had one radio and one airplane. The second
airplane was on the bench being built or being "research" so it could be
built for next year. Vintage Pattern or the Senior Pattern Association is
trying to get the average modeler back to pattern but today he has too many
choices, too many roads to be traveled and only so much time. Do you
remember the times when all pattern contests had 50 to 70 entrants? I do.
But I can't live in the past, too many roads are now open and I've got to
have a radio for each pathway. The average modeler wants to try all the
different venues. Again, remember 30 years ago all that was available was
Class I, II, III or Scale. The average modeler just flew his sport planes
be they pattern type or scale. How many of you have seen a Galloping Ghost
airplane fly? But, I digress. Sorry. Dwayne
-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Dave Lockhart
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 9:54 AM
To: 'NSRCA Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight Limits
Ron / John,
Point taken. And no offense, but so what? As a kid, I was never the
biggest guy on the playing fields..but I loved to play anyway and never
asked for a head start, an extra kick, or an extra swing. I'm still not the
"biggest kid", and some of the most fun I've had was whooping up on the
"superior" equipment back when I couldn't afford the latest greatest Skippy
Propnut TurboZoot 9000 XL MkVII Touring edition limited SE with the add-ons.
The average guy can't afford many things...like the Naruke edition
Astral flown by McMurtry at the 2006 NATs? Or even the Oxai version...or
even the Xtreme version.
Your argument could be extended to many things...2C vs 4C (as if you
could get a consensus on which is "better").....analog vs digital
servos.....guys flying electrics w/ NIcd or Nimh because they can't afford
lipos...and on an on.
Pattern competition is a competitive event with some broad limits
(weight, size, noise). You have your choices, you pick what is most
competitive for your available budget, you practice, you compete. You win,
or you lose.
If you / John don't think electric is competitive under the current
rules, fly glow.
Others think electric is competitive and are flying electric.
Again, electric is in its infancy..make a rule now that favors electrics
and you will ensure unquestionable electric dominance in the very near
future. Just remember the 120 4C..it was to allow parity between a piped 60
2C and allow a quieter powerplant. Very shortsighted rule as the 120 4C
became dominant rapidly. Clearly the gap (if there is one) between electric
and glow today is nothing like the 2C / 4C gap was in ~1988 (when 2C 60s
dominated 120 4Cs) or now (when a 120 4C dominates 60 2Cs).
By definition, the average guy will never be able to afford the highest
level setup. And that has never prevented something like a humble wooden
Focus from winning the NATs...at any level.
Regards,
Dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Ron Van Putte
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2007 10:27 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight Limits
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
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
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You snooze, you lose. Get messages ASAP with AutoCheck
in the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list