[NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing

[J Shu]

In Argentina they actually counted the plugs going into the Rx's and followed the leads. Granted there are probably some planes 
where you can't see where the leads go, but if you had more plugs than servos (or controller) then you were probably asked to 
explain. I would imagine the FI guys needed to explain the extra plugs.

Regards,
Jason
www.shulmanaviation.com
www.composite-arf.com

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ron Van Putte" <vanputte at cox.net>
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 2:14 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing


>I am getting a bit impatient with this discussion about size and  weight measurement for everyone's airplanes before competition 
>and  the conducting of random spot checks.  OK.  Let's do that, but how  about if we enforce EVERY rule in the rule book.  What 
>about the  rules against gyros and autopilots?  Shouldn't we also check every  airplane for them before flying commences?  How 
>about random spot  checks after flights to make sure no gyros and autopilots were added  after the original verification?
>
> There are other rules already in the rule book that we don't verify  for compliance..  Do we want to go down that road?  How about 
> considering competitors as honorable as a start and only check the  size and weight measurement for the finalists.  Otherwise, we 
> need to  check everyone's airplanes for complying with all the rules.
>
> Ron VP
>
> On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:33 AM, rcmaster199 at aol.com wrote:
>
>> If someone wants/needs to "cheat" with an overweight plane, I have  no problem letting them.
>>
>> If someone wants/needs to "cheat" with preprogrammed sequencing or  a larger airframe than 2 X 2 m, a different story
>>
>> MattK
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Bob Kane <getterflash at yahoo.com>
>> To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Tue, Aug 4, 2009 9:50 am
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing
>>
>> #AOLMsgPart_3_9ae5f3a0-a5b0-4046-b74a-8c614ebbcf50 DIV {margin:0px;}
>> I agree, trying to compare ourselves to any other AMA NATS event is  a slippery slope. Let's clean our own house and not worry 
>> about  anybody else.
>>
>> Since I fall squarely in the "social" NATS category I would  certainly volunteer to tech inspect aircraft prior to any official 
>> flying. I'm not going to gain much by getting a few last practice  fllights in.
>>
>> As for the possibility of cheating, well, we can only do so much.   A quick check to insure the batteries installed at 
>> measurement time  are capable of a full flight for whatever class the pilot has  entered.  I can't imagine saving much weight 
>> with a smaller tank  for nitro planes, but same thing goes.
>>
>>
>> Bob Kane
>> getterflash at yahoo.com
>>
>>
>> From: Bill's Email <wemodels at cox.net>
>> To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2009 9:32:09 AM
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing
>>
>> Joe Lachowski wrote:
>>>
>>> #AOLMsgPart_3_9ae5f3a0-a5b0-4046-b74a-8c614ebbcf50 .hmmessage P {margin:0px;padding:0px;}#AOLMsgPart_3_9ae5f3a0-a5b0-4046- 
>>> b74a-8c614ebbcf50 body.hmmessage{font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;}
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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