[NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight Limits

Mon Jun 25 15:28:25 AKDT 2007

Well said George.

-mark

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <glmiller3 at suddenlink.net>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight Limits

> Jon,
>
> I agree wholeheartedly.  I have chosen to go electric and with my limited 
> building skills and standard off the shelf equipment, I've built two 
> electified Focuses that weigh in at less than 11lbs.  That's with nothing 
> exotic at all. Monkote, balsa, CA and epoxy.  One has a Plettenberg and 
> one is an AXI 5330-- the Pletty is much lighter and much more expensive, 
> but I didn't think that it was worth the cost difference for my second 
> attempt. The AXI setup is right at the limit but I could get a new set of 
> batteries and lighten it up if I needed a couple of ounces.  I'm using 2 
> year old battery technology with TP 5300's.   The electric equipment is 
> evolving very rapidly right now and it will be easy to make weight long 
> before a rules change can be effected.  I say leave well enough alone. 
> Everyone knows the rules and can choose accordingly.
>
> my $0.02 worth
>
> George
>
>
> ---- Jon Lowe <jonlowe at aol.com> wrote:
>> I've been watching this with fascination.  We have rules, and electric
> technology is catching up to them.  If I didn't know John, this would
> sound like someone had tried to go in cheap, found out it didn't work,
> and then crying to get the rules changed to fit his "solution".  Right
> now, electrics are still bleeding edge technology, and lots of guys are
> bleeding lots of money.  The ones I see having the problems are the
> ones that don't buy proven combinations, and go thru lots of pain in
> the process.  I saw a situation this past weekend where a
> manufacturer's speed controller didn't work properly with the motor
> they sold with it.  As a result, the owner had to use another brand
> which fortunately did work.  In some cases the buyers are becoming the
> beta testers; not good.  Right now, it appears that in the long run you
> will save money buying proven setups.
>
> Of course, even with glow, some buyers become beta testers, even with
> some high buck solutions.  At dinner Saurday nite at the Nederland
> contest I heard a hilarious discussion about a certain engine that
> starts with an "M" and ends with an "r".  Rather than seeing if you had
> the latest firmware upgrade, you had to ensure you had the latest
> insulator, pump mod, etc.  Just goes to show, what looks and sounds
> good on paper doesn't always translate to reality, be it glow or
> electric.  You need to do your research, talk with lots of people that
> have the exact setup you are thinkg of buying (NOT the importer or
> manufacturer, and NOT the internet!), and go from there.
>
> From what I gather, the first 4 strokes for pattern were not all that
> great, and the technology grew into the rules.  Electric will be the
> same way.  Nobody is forcing anybody to go electric, and there is no
> clear advantage, IMHO.  The current World Champion is still flying
> glow, and he can get anything he wants.  You can bet he would be flying
> electric if he saw a clear advantage.  If you can't afford electric,
> don't go that way.  Its just like buying a 10x or a 14 MZ.  You don't
> HAVE to have one to win.  Other solutions will work.  Don't ask to
> change the rules to give 9Cs or 9303s an advantage just because you
> can't afford top of the line.
>
>
> Jon Lowe
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Lockhart <davel322 at comcast.net>
> To: 'NSRCA Mailing List' <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Fri, 22 Jun 2007 9:54 am
> 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
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free
> from AOL at AOL.com.
> =0
> _______________________________________________
> 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 