[NSRCA-discussion] Weight

[Ron Hansen]

I agree with Paul.  Remove the weight limit and keep the 2 meter size
limit.  If someone wants to fly a 15 lb biplane powered with a DA-50
more power too them.  Sure our current planes may be obsolete but all
designs are obsolete in 2-3 years.

I'm an intermediate pilot and my biggest concern is the selection of
designs available.  Right now other than the Focus II or the Black Magic
all other designs are geared more toward electrics.  I'm concerned that
the newer designs are skimping on durability in order to reduce weight.
As an intermediate pilot I don't want to buy a 2- $3000 airplane that
isn't going to standup to the occasional rough landing.

I bet if you made the top 10 FAI pilots from last years NATs fly a Focus
and let the next 10 FAI pilots fly any design they want the results
would not change that much.  Success is in the fingers not so much in
the design.

Ron

-----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: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 11:19 PM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Weight

As one of the guys who is often called on to weigh airplanes at the  
Nats, I agree that routine weighing of airplanes is impractical.  We  
have to build a plywood barricade around the weighing area at the  
Site 1 pavilion or do the weighing in an enclosed area like the  
garage by the AMA farmhouse or inside the big trailer out at Site 4.   
That's doable for the top five or six in the classes, but not for the  
entire group.

What's a furnace?  <VBG>

Ron

On Jun 3, 2009, at 10:11 PM, Verne Koester wrote:

> Paul,
>
> Weighing a plane right before flight at the Nats is impractical at  
> best. The slightest breeze will wreak havoc on the scales. I  
> actually have to wait for my furnace blower to kick off when I'm  
> trying to weigh my wings in the shop and that breeze is  
> significantly less than anything we typically see at the Nats.
>
>
>
> Verne
>
>
>
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca- 
> discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Paul LaChance
> Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 10:24 PM
> To: General pattern discussion
> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Weight
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> I do not think we should look at it as a glow versus E discussion,  
> but a way to make it fair for both.  I agree neither really has an  
> advantage everything else being equal.  I can see the argument from  
> both sides.  The weight issue will never be a truly EQUAL thing.   
> The glow gets to weigh without fuel , but the plane becomes lighter  
> throughout the flight.  This can create a disadvantage or  
> advantage.  The E has to make weight WITH batteries in place, but  
> the weight stays the same the entire flight. This can also create a  
> disadvantage or advantage.
>
>
>
> Maybe the answer is keep the size and sound restrictions as they  
> are and remove the weight limit.  There is only so much the planes  
> can weight before glow or E will both start to lose massive  
> performance.
>
>
>
> Just a thought but seems it is the only way things can become fair  
> either direction.
>
>
>
> As someone else mentioned (I think Chris)  the planes should be  
> weighed BEFORE the flights in the finals.  It kind of defeats the  
> purpose of making weight if the planes are weighed AFTER the flight  
> and they remove items to make weight.  The advantage was still  
> there to assist with the wind if the plane was overweight during  
> the flight.
>
>
>
> Like I said, these are just thoughts.
>
>
>
> Paul
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
signature database 4130 (20090604) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com