[NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing

[rcmaster199 at aol.com]

 Isn't this Racing??? It's Formula 1



 






-----Original Message-----

From: Dave <DaveL322 at comcast.net>

To: 'General pattern discussion' <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>

Sent: Tue, Aug 4, 2009 8:41 pm

Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing



  
    Fuel injection.......my guess    Dave    -----Original Message-----  From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org  [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Ron Van Putte  Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 7:57 PM  To: General pattern discussion  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Inspection & Weighing    Uhhhh.  What's an "FI" guy?  Front Induction,  Free Ignition, Federal    Institution, Full Independence, Final Inspection or something else?    Ron VP      On Aug 4, 2009, at 6:46 PM, J Shu wrote:    > 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    >> abo


ut 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 & W
 eighing  >>>  >>> #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@


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  >  > _______________________________________________  > 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    
   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20090805/1609fe60/attachment.html>