[NSRCA-discussion] Weight

Matthew Frederick mjfrederick at cox.net
Wed Jun 3 10:05:10 AKDT 2009 

Someone who is going to "try" electric pattern is probably not going  
to attend the nats and therefore will never be weighed and therefore  
it won't matter if they're a half pound overweight because they bought  
cheap batteries... When they decide to get serious they can buy  
serious batteries.

Matt

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 3, 2009, at 12:53 PM, <verne at twmi.rr.com> wrote:

> Derek,
> We've discussed raising the weight before and it's always been voted  
> down. I believe for good reason. Dave Lockhart has steadfastly  
> argued that raising the weight limit will inevitably increase the  
> size of our planes, obsoleting anything that preceded it. I agree  
> with him.
>
> What I'm trying to do is make it more feasible for someone wanting  
> to try electric to be able to do so without having to buy the most  
> expensive equipment available. For example, at a contest last  
> weekend, a friend and fellow pattern pilot had a set of Zippy packs  
> that weighed roughly 5.5 ounces more than my FlightPower packs.  
> Pretty much the same difference when compared to Andrew's TP packs.  
> The Zippy's as we all know, were less than half the cost. I know for  
> sure that my friend would have made weight with my FP's or Andrew's  
> TP's, but he couldn't afford that after all the other "electric"  
> purchases.
>
> What I'm going to propose once I have it all worked out, is that  
> electric airplanes weigh LESS than glow planes and be weighed  
> without their "fuel", just like glow. The Rx battery will have to be  
> in the plane, just like glow. Yes, I realize that there are UBEC's  
> out there but I don't know of anyone who trusts them with the kind  
> of current we're running. In any event, my preliminary research  
> indicates that roughly 8.7 pounds should be just about right, but I  
> want to make sure before I submit the proposal.
>
> Verne
>
>
> ---- Derek Koopowitz <derekkoopowitz at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Verne,
>>
>> When I was at the CIAM meeting in March one of the proposals which  
>> was
>> passed by the helicopter guys (F3C) was to modify the weight limit  
>> for their
>> helicopters effective 1/1/2010.  Here is the new wording:
>>
>> a) WEIGHT: The weight of the model aircraft (*with *fuel *or  
>> *batteries)
>> must not exceed *6.5 *kg.
>>
>> Unanimously approved by the Plenary Meeting. Effective 01/01/10.
>>
>> I'm going to feel out the rest of the F3A sub-committee members to  
>> see if
>> there is interest in raising the F3A weight limit to 5.5kg.  What  
>> does
>> everyone think about this?
>>
>> -Derek
>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 7:51 AM, <verne at twmi.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Bill,
>>> I've been working up an AMA rules proposal to address that very  
>>> issue.
>>> Unfortunately, it won't be up for vote by the contest board  
>>> anytime soon. In
>>> the meantime, there's one area you didn't mention in the glow to  
>>> electric
>>> comparison and that's that an electric plane doesn't need as much  
>>> internal
>>> reinforcement because there's virtually no vibrational effects to  
>>> contend
>>> with that you do with glow. That equates to lighter airframes being
>>> acceptable as well as small, light, lipo packs to power the Rx and  
>>> servos.
>>> An 8 minute e-flight typically uses about 50 mah. The same flight  
>>> in glow is
>>> typically 200+ mah. All that aside, most electric pilots will tell  
>>> you that
>>> making weight in electric is generally a pretty expensive  
>>> proposition with a
>>> limited number of 2 meter planes available that are usually vacuum- 
>>> bagged
>>> composite affairs. In addition, your best chances for making  
>>> weight will
>>> also necessitate the lightest and generally most expensive motors  
>>> and
>>> batteries. There are exceptio
>>> ns, and I'm sure we're about to hear about most of them, but I'll  
>>> be able
>>> to point to just as many examples of guys that fly overweight at  
>>> local
>>> contests where they know they won't be weighed and the only thing  
>>> they're
>>> really guilty of is not spending the extra money that the lightest  
>>> batteries
>>> and motors cost. In every other way, the planes they're flying are  
>>> the same
>>> as the ones they're competing against. The proposal I'm working on  
>>> is not
>>> self-serving because my planes make weight, but getting there is  
>>> both too
>>> expensive and unreasonable, in my opinion. My proposal won't be to  
>>> allow
>>> electric planes to weigh more, it'll require that they weigh less,  
>>> but
>>> without the "fuel". The proposal will take into account that  
>>> electric motors
>>> are inherently lighter than their glow counterparts as well as the  
>>> reduced
>>> structural requirements. It will limit the mah of permissible  
>>> packs to
>>> control that end of the equation and there's already a voltage  
>>> limit on the
>>> books which is fine as it
>>> stands. I'm currently doing survey work at the contests I go to to  
>>> see
>>> where everybody is at weight-wise and will post my proposal on  
>>> this list
>>> soon. After that, it's up to all concerned to voice their opinions  
>>> to their
>>> respective Contest Board reps.
>>>
>>> Verne Koester
>>> AMA District 7
>>> Contest Board
>>> ---- Bill's Email <wemodels at cox.net> wrote:
>>>> I am certain this has been beaten to death while I was off doing  
>>>> other
>>>> things, but can anyone explain this:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rule 4.3: Weight and Size. No model may weigh more than five (5)
>>>> kilograms (11 pounds) gross, but excluding fuel, ready for takeoff.
>>>> Electric models are weighed with batteries.
>>>>
>>>> Why can't an electric "deduct" the equivalent of 16 ounces of  
>>>> fuel??  Is
>>>> a plane without fuel rally "ready for takeoff"??
>>>>
>>>> I know it is likely a direct copy of the FAI rule, but it makes no
>>>> logical sense. IC powered planes are weighed without fuel and can  
>>>> weigh
>>>> right at 11 pounds. Add fuel and it could add another 10 to 12  
>>>> ounces of
>>>> weight. That's OK. But if an electric with batteries weight
>>>> 11.0000000000000001 pounds it is overweight by the rules.
>>>>
>>>> Put another way, what does a YS and full fuel weigh compared to a
>>>> motor+ESC+batteries?
>>>>
>>>> Hacker C50 14XL = 18.2 ounces
>>>> Hacker Spin 99 ESC = 3.7 ounces
>>>> 10S packs = +/- 43 to 46 ounces
>>>>
>>>> Weight w/o batteries = 21.9
>>>> AUW w/batteries = 66.9 ounces
>>>>
>>>> YS 1.70 = 33.6 ounces (955 grams)
>>>> AUW with tank and fuel = 45 ounces +/-
>>>>
>>>> So I can see an argument that the electrics have a weight advantage
>>>> when it comes to just the motor and ESC. But with "fuel" electric  
>>>> is at
>>>> a 20 ounce disadvantage.
>>>>
>>>> So if I build a plane for electric I need to build it 20 plus  
>>>> ounces
>>>> lighter than if I was going to put a nitro motor in it. How does  
>>>> that
>>>> make sense. I know I am missing something important here, so  
>>>> educate me.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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

More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list