[NSRCA-discussion] Weight limit in AMA classes

[Dave Burton]

Arch, you may be right on this, but I wonder how many pattern flyers would
do this. Seems to me that cheaper 2 M mono planes could be available without
the carbon fiber/Kevlar/titanium/aluminum expensive stuff we use today to
get under 11 lbs. How big can you make a 2 meter plane within the 2 meter
box. So what if gas engines could be used. Probably would be cheaper than
the YS 170 CDI in use today. I could certainly use the under $200.00 AXI
5330  FAI rather than the $500+ Pletty. 

I don't know if the rules proposal has much merit or not, but I wanted to
get it on the table for consideration.

Dave Burton

 

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Archie
Stafford
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 5:30 PM
To: 'General pattern discussion'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Weight limit in AMA classes

 

Very simple statement.  Open your checkbook if this passes.  Big 2 meter
bipes will be the norm.  YS will come out with a 50CC size engine that blows
away other gas or Nitro setups, and much bigger, more powerful electric
setups to remain competitive.  People thing this would reduce the cost, it
will do exactly the opposite.  You are right Dave, there is no competitive
advantage to a plane of the size we are flying now being 11 1/2lbs, but be
able to build a 13lb bipe with unlimited power and watch what happens.

 

Arch

 

 

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Bill Glaze
Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 5:16 PM
To: jpavlick at idseng.com; General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Weight limit in AMA classes

 

Yep!  I've got a G-62 laying around here that I have no use for--until now.

Bill

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

From: John Pavlick <mailto:jpavlick at idseng.com>  

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

Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 4:47 PM

Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Weight limit in AMA classes

 


Excellent! Looks like I can finally build a gas-powered biplane. LOL

 

John Pavlick

--- On Fri, 12/11/09, Dave Burton <burtona at atmc.net> wrote:


From: Dave Burton <burtona at atmc.net>
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Weight limit in AMA classes
To: "'General pattern discussion'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Friday, December 11, 2009, 4:38 PM

I have submitted a rules proposal to completely eliminate the 11 lb. Weight
limit in AMA pattern classes. (proposal 11-11).
I'd like to see some discussion on the pros and cons of this proposal on the
NSRCA e-mail list and the Pattern forum.

My reasons for submitting the proposal include the following points:

1. There is no competitive advantage to a heavier plane with the 2 meter
size constraint (in fact I'd argue a heavier plane is usually at a
disadvantage and perhaps a minimum weight makes more sense than a maximum)
2. The 2 meter size constraint is sufficient keep the weight of pattern
planes to reasonable limits.
3. The fact that AMA class planes are weighed only at the US Nationals gives
proof that the rule is not now enforced and not needed.
4. The 11 lb. Weight limit drives up the cost of pattern planes through the
necessary use of more expensive high tech materials. (If you don't believe
"light weight" cost a lot of money ask the people who race sail boats)
5. Removing the weight limit will reduce the manpower and cost associated
with running the Nationals And also perhaps increase participation.

OK, guys, what do you think?
What other "pro" and "con" points?
Dave Burton




_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<http://us.mc805.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.o
rg> 
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/20091211/f4318124/attachment.html>