[NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing

Mon Aug 3 19:00:04 AKDT 2009

Why don't we eliminate the weight limit and keep the size and noise
limits.  I haven't heard a good argument as to why keeping the weight
limit is a good idea.  If you want to fly a 2 meter lead weight then go
for it.  Why will removing the weight limit negatively effect future
technology development.  It won't it will just redirect future
technology development.  Maybe we will learn that lighter planes don't
necessarily fly better.  Maybe it will spur future development of
gasoline engines for the pattern community.  This of coarse couldn't
apply to FAI.  Maybe the FAI thing is the real issue but I believe there
is ample room for pattern planes designed to meet the AMA rule and those
designed to meet the FAI rules.  After all there are far more AMA
pattern flyers than FAI flyers.  Some are already floating ideas about
changing the weight interpretations.  Lets take it all the way and
remove the weight limit altogether.

My 2 cents.

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of krishlan
fitzsimmons
Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 10:44 PM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing

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.
<http://mail.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/30.gif> 
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
<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 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 <http://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/20090804/68b3b684/attachment.html>