[NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing

Joe Lachowski jlachow at hotmail.com
Tue Aug 4 04:13:25 AKDT 2009 

F3B/F3H alternate years with F3J. That is why there are no entries in F3B and F3H. They have already reduced their event timeframe, as well. I think they have eliminated scale soaring in recent years.
 A lot of the soaring guys fly multiple events. I know there was talk of eliminating two meter some years ago too. Some of the sailplane events require 2 days and they cram a bunch of rounds in each day with a lot more planes in the air at one time than we have. Just think unlimited had around 100 people flying to complete an event in a two day period.

 

On the other end of the spectrum,  you also need to look at some of the control line events where there are only a handful of entrants.

 

 
> From: vanputte at cox.net
> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 22:50:59 -0500
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing
> 
> Hmmm. R/C Soaring had six events and 146 total entrants. We had 
> four events with about 100 entrants. They got nine days and we got 
> four. Maybe someone can explain the logic.
> 
> Ron VP
> 
> On Aug 3, 2009, at 10:39 PM, krishlan fitzsimmons wrote:
> 
> > 09SO - RC Soaring Total Registrants - 146
> > Event #NameOpenSeniorJunior
> > 441HL Thermal Soaring3811
> > 442Thermal Soaring Two Meter4611
> > 444Thermal Soaring Unlimited10433
> > 445F3B Thermal Soaring000
> > 446F3H Cross Country Soaring000
> > 456F3J4520
> > 460RES Function (RES)7113
> > 461Nostalgia (NOS)2100
> >
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- On Mon, 8/3/09, Ron Van Putte <vanputte at cox.net> wrote:
> >
> > From: Ron Van Putte <vanputte at cox.net>
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing
> > To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> > Date: Monday, August 3, 2009, 8:32 PM
> >
> > Maybe Tony Stillman can tell us. I didn't see the number of 
> > entrants posted for Soaring. Waiting for thermals is a personal 
> > problem; we don't get to wait for less wind.
> >
> > Ron VP
> >
> > On Aug 3, 2009, at 10:05 PM, rcmaster199 at aol.com wrote:
> >
> > > I don't know much about the Soaring event. If I were to hazard a 
> > guess, it would be 1- more pilots and 2- waiting for thermals is 
> > less predictable
> > >
> > > MattK
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Ron Van Putte <vanputte at cox.net>
> > > To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> > > Sent: Mon, Aug 3, 2009 10:55 pm
> > > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing
> > >
> > > Not too long ago, R/C Aerobatics had five days; the fifth day was 
> > a "rain day", just in case. When AMA decided to shorten the Nats, 
> > they took away our rain day. I was OK with that, BUT I don't see 
> > that the Nats are any shorter and, in looking over the Nats News, I 
> > noticed that R/C Soaring has NINE days. What's with that?
> > >
> > > Ron VP
> > >
> > > On Aug 3, 2009, at 9:44 PM, krishlan fitzsimmons wrote:
> > >
> > > > 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 > EXIS TS 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
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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

_________________________________________________________________
Get free photo software from Windows Live
http://www.windowslive.com/online/photos?ocid=PID23393::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:SI_PH_software:082009
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20090804/06d1fb8b/attachment.html>

More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list