[NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing

Mon Aug 3 18:44:25 AKDT 2009

The $100 that we pay for the entry is small potatoes compared to what we spend on the nats. Think about the time off work, all the practice leading up, the expenses. I estimate that with the time I took off work, and everything else that it cost me about (well I won't say, or I will get crucified on here, lol). Raise my rate to $200 and pay someone to weigh planes. Pay some judges. Pay some zero judges. Pay for a few more days so that everyone gets equal exposure judging. Whatever has to be done to make it fair for all. Why settle for "well, it's sorta ok the way it is, not perfect, but ok" when we can change it? I can't understand why people don't want to make it better. 

Chris          

--- On Mon, 8/3/09, Derek Koopowitz <derekkoopowitz at gmail.com> wrote:

From: Derek Koopowitz <derekkoopowitz at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Monday, August 3, 2009, 7:28 PM

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> wrote:

From: dkrev at shaw.ca <dkrev at shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing

To: "General pattern discussion" <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>

Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 13:35:25 
To: 'General pattern discussion'<nsrca-discussion at 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
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at 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> 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://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

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

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
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/20090804/79260108/attachment.html>