[NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing

Mon Aug 3 18:28:22 AKDT 2009

Rules are rules and we should enforce them for everyone - not just the
select few that make the finals.  I would bet that the majority of everyone
that attends the Nats is compliant with the rules we have today.

Chris:  I don't have any problems working to process planes - I think the
time would be fun to meet all the attendees and say hi.  I don't normally
get to do that and this will give me an opportunity to meet everyone.  I'm
also not looking to do this in lieu of my judging duties either... I view my
judging assignment as an essential part of attending the Nats and look
forward to it every time.  If someone is going to cheat by replacing servos
or whatever just to make weight then shame on them... perhaps Chad's
solution is the best one to weigh planes after they fly but that just makes
the logistics even harder I think since we don't have the enclosed tents to
do this and also enough scales etc. for each site.

On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 5:29 PM, John Konneker <jlkonn at hotmail.com> wrote:

>  Not the point I was trying to make.
> Please reread the last two sentences of my note below.
> ONLY legal planes would make the finals, semifinals and place if the
> procedure that has been in place were followed.
> Respectfully,
> JLK
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 17:24:22 -0700
> From: derekkoopowitz at gmail.com
>
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing
>
> Then why even bother to have the rules?  How about noise and size?  Should
> we eliminate those rules as well?  No one checks weight, size and noise
> locally... so why should we bother having a rule for it and enforcing it at
> the Nats?
>
> I don't buy it that attendance will diminish.
>
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 5:16 PM, John Konneker <jlkonn at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have to agree with Chris.
> As someone has pointed out there are basically two types that attend the
> Nats.
> Those that go to renew friendships and for the social aspects and those
> that are trying to win.
> I have been told by more than one pilot attending that they aren't
> concerned about their plane
> being overweight since they have no chance of making the finals or placing
> and are there for the fun.
> I think you will see an even further decrease in attendance if everyone
> gets weighed at checkin.
> The way it has been til now would be fine IF it was followed and enforced.
> Otherwise it's just more search for the guilty, punish the innocent.
> JLK
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 19:57:03 -0400
> From: cjm767driver at hotmail.com
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing
>
> I think we are making this more difficult than necessary (not aimed at
> anyone in particular - I just jumped in on Chris's response). We go through
> the process of weighing the potential winners and finalists already - why
> not just mandate that the officials APPLY the rule that already exists. No
> lee way or interpretation necessary. Why weigh and measure if we are going
> to say "oh never mind, that's ok" when they fail inspection.  If they had
> applied the existing rule, this discussion would not be going on.  To
> implement a new procedure (weighing all at check in) is going to need a
> bunch of extra help to do and do we really want to have somebody inventory
> EVERY item on the plane too in order to ensure they don't change props,
> wheels, rx battery, etc after inspection?  Who is going to volunteer to do
> that to 100+ airplanes? The current way has worked just fine and would still
> be fine IF THE RULE AS IT EXISTS WAS APPLIED.  Simple.  Let's not make an
> overly elaborate witch hunt in response to what happened.
>
> Chris (the other one)
>
>
> krishlan fitzsimmons wrote:
>
>   Where do they weigh at a worlds event? Outside in the wind?
>
> Just curious.
>
> Thx!
>
> *Chris *
>
>
>
>
>
> --- On *Mon, 8/3/09, dkrev at shaw.ca <dkrev at shaw.ca> <dkrev at shaw.ca>* wrote:
>
>
> From: dkrev at shaw.ca <dkrev at shaw.ca> <dkrev at shaw.ca>
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing
> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org><nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Date: Monday, August 3, 2009, 12:30 PM
>
> We got weighed after each round at the worlds..... Just saying :-)
> Sent from Dave's Crackberry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Fuqua <johnfuqua at embarqmail.com<http:///mc/compose?to=johnfuqua@embarqmail.com>
> >
>
> Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 13:35:25
> To: 'General pattern discussion'<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<http:///mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
> >
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing
>
>
> Better be prepared to weigh 4 or 5 sets of batteries with each competitor
> as
> well as airplanes.
>
> That's the thing with glow.  Only dry weight counts.  You can load as much
> fuel as you wish to any weight!  Electric stuck at a fixed max T.O. Weight.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org<http:///mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org>
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org<http:///mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org>]
> On Behalf Of Derek
> Koopowitz
> Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 12:37 PM
> To: General pattern discussion
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing
>
> I don't see an issue with this... we will put a sticker on all items
> including all packs that a competitor will use.  If a competitor really
> wants to cheat then they will do it... nothing we can do will stop that.
> I'm also hoping that random inspections will keep people honest and the
> fear
> that if you do fail then you will be disqualified.
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 9:06 AM, Jay Marshall <lightfoot at sc.rr.com<http:///mc/compose?to=lightfoot@sc.rr.com>>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>     I have some concern that the proposals put forward will really work.
> If the plane is inspected at check-in then there is too much opportunity to
> change things. In particular, batteries, which are a normally removable
> item, can be changed to decrease on increase the weight. Do we "sticker"
> the
> battery pack? This means the plane must be disassembled for inspection and
> that only that battery pack can be used. At present fuel tanks can also be
> under/over filled to adjust ballast for windy conditions.
>
>
>
>     If this is a serious problem, perhaps there are other solutions.
>
>
>
>     Planes could be placed in an impound/inspection area immediately
> before a flight and fully fueled. The inspection could happen here and
> shouldn't delay the flow of the contest.
>
>
>
>     Another possibility is to adopt a "standard" weight for a battery
> pack, then weigh electric planes empty. The "standard" could change as
> technology changes.
>
>
>
>     As John Pavlick will tell you, all major race winners undergo a
> teardown and inspection.
>
>     Jay Marshall
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>     NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<http:///mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
>     http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<http:///mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<http:///mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing listNSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.orghttp://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.43/2280 - Release Date: 08/03/09 17:56:00
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20090804/0a7f0242/attachment.html>