[NSRCA-discussion] Weight limit in AMA classes

[Bob Kane]

Mike Mueller prompted me to get off my thumbs and add my opinion to the mix . . .

I believe a weight limit is a good thing. We can argue about cost, but if you want it you will find a way. I thought the hobby was cost prohibitive at first, but flew within my means and worked up to more advanced technology as my budget allowed. The Black Magic is a great example of you can still "build it if you want to" technology. The cost of travel to contests is the biggest part of my hobby budget now, not the plane.

There are also great bargains in the "gently used" category of planes. Those that do have the latest and greatest stuff are also usually good caretakers and offer planes/equip for a fraction of the new cost. My first "real" pattern plane was used.

We currently have limits on two dimensions, weight and size. I was in the game when the engine displacement limit was dropped. I can imagine what the arguments would be now if the limit was still in place for glow and we complained about the "unfair" advantage of electrics. We need at least two mecahnical limits. I am in accord with those who say removing the limit will have unforseen consequences.

And lastly, you have to fly your way to the winner's circle, you can't buy your way there. 


Bob Kane
getterflash at yahoo.com


--- 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:
> 
<snip>