[NSRCA-discussion] Weight

[verne at twmi.rr.com]

The only logic I can see in the decision would be that electric motors are inherently lighter than glow motors so the batteries were thrown in as a means to balance things out. I doubt that anyone at the time was aware that less robust airframes would also be an added benefit to electric vs glow. Having said all that, I believe the formula is deficient. To me, the most logical approach is to take the batteries out of the equation and require a "dry" weight for electrics that takes into account the fact that an electric motor is inherently lighter than a glow motor. The arguments that a fuel tank isn't required doesn't wash because the counter argument is that an electric requires a speed control that is much heavier than a throttle servo. All of those arguments are just that, arguments. A "dry" weight of 8.75 pounds fixes everything in my opinion.

Verne


---- Richard Strickland <pamrich47 at hotmail.com> wrote: 
> 
> As Ron pointed out--the decision to weigh "with batteries" was probably someone's very strict interpretation.  Do we have any idea who that is/was--and could it just be re-interpreted?  This is just flat not logical.
> RS 
> > From: mjfrederick at cox.net
> > To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> > Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 10:04:52 -0500
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Weight
> > 
> > It's not so much that the designs are obsolete, people just feel 
> > embarrassed showing up with an old airplane. A friend of mine who 
> > designs airplanes has designed 3 airplanes in the last 3 years. The 
> > main reason for the new designs is changes in F3A schedules. His older 
> > designs going back to the mid to late 90's are still highly 
> > competitive. His new designs are not for AMA pattern, they're for f3a. 
> > If you choose to buy a design that is more than you need, that's your 
> > choice but don't look for a rules change to fix AMA pattern when 
> > there's nothing broke. Keeping up with the Joneses in f3a is not a 
> > valid reason for a rule change.
> > 
> > Sent from my iPhone
> > 
> > On Jun 4, 2009, at 7:45 AM, mike mueller <mups1953 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > > "designs are obsolete in 2-3 years"
> > > Amen to that Ron. Pattern is like F1 racing we're competitive and 
> > > always looking for better and different. Truth be known I look 
> > > forward to a new plane in the Spring that I planned and prepared for 
> > > a year or so. It's part of what appeals me to pattern and I do this 
> > > on a lower budget than many would deam possible. Trust me on this. 
> > > It's all about will and determination and innovation to get what I 
> > > want with as little as I have to work with. Money and building 
> > > talents lacking I still put down a competitive piece each year. No 
> > > sponsors either. Now that's actually pretty funny sorry.....
> > > Not saying a 5 year old design can't be competitive and that the 
> > > pilot doesn't determine the outcome most of the time. I'm saying 
> > > that I think designs for the truly competitive have a rather short 
> > > lifespan and that's not going to change anytime soon.
> > > Also Ron there are a lot of planes on the market that work well with 
> > > IC. What about the Passport? Osmose? Integral? It's only been a year 
> > > or so that the newer generation of planes have been introduced that 
> > > are dedicated for E. use like the E Motion, Spark, Beryl E. 
> > > Addiction E. and the Sickle. Before that all the designs were meant 
> > > for IC and we adapted them to fit E.
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > --- On Thu, 6/4/09, Ron Hansen <rcpilot at wowway.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> From: Ron Hansen <rcpilot at wowway.com>
> > >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Weight
> > >> To: "'General pattern discussion'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> > >> Date: Thursday, June 4, 2009, 7:10 AM
> > >> 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
> > _______________________________________________
> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> > NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Lauren found her dream laptop. Find the PC that’s right for you.
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/choosepc/?ocid=ftp_val_wl_290