[NSRCA-discussion] weight difference

Thu Aug 19 11:38:27 AKDT 2010

Derrek,

Six months ago or more I corresponded with  the AMA and posted a "rant" to this 
list regarding CB members contact means...

On the AMA site, there are names and addresses...this means I have to write and 
mail a letter or show up at the front door of a CB members house....kind of 
ridiculous in the digital age.  Each CB member should have an AMA e-mail 
address, or a link to fill out an online form that forward to the CB member when 
submitted.

You guys say you want feedback, but neither you, nor the AMA provides a channel 
to do so.....

Yea, I know I could hunt around and probalby find an e-mail address and probably 
even a phone number for you guys, but it shouldn't be that way...

Richard

________________________________
From: Derek Koopowitz <derekkoopowitz at gmail.com>
To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Cc: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Wed, August 18, 2010 8:46:36 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] weight difference

Contest board members have been asking for input.  Please provide it to them.

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 18, 2010, at 8:35 PM, Patterndude <lance.vannostrand at gmail.com> wrote:

I have a 10 lb e-symphony, there are low 10 lb Evo's and both these planes are 
super rigid an tough. There are e planes that I'm afraid to touch because of 
fragility and they cost more too. Point is, the consumer has choices and don't 
need to fly a dangerous airframe. They choose to. Remember the glow Impacts that 
lost their tail in a snap but hundreds were sold AFTER this fact was known on 
this list?  
>
>
>As a CB guy I don't like being generalized against. I ask for input all the 
>time. Even call people and tell people where my head is at  all the time without 
>preaching. 
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>On Aug 18, 2010, at 8:11 PM, Tim Taylor <timsautopro at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>We can always ignore it, we've done that for years unless you're in the top 3-5 
>at the Nats.
>>
>>In this day and age of instant communication we no longer need a Contest Board 
>>to decide what we do or not. With all due respect to the CB we don't need you 
>>guys anymore, we can poll the membership directly and set the rules. Far more 
>>representative that way.
>>
>>The only time I ever tried to talk to a CB member about a rules proposal in 
>>person I got the old "I know better than you and I'm going to do what I want so 
>>we don't need to discuss it."  He then refused to even talk about anything at 
>>that point. Left a very bad taste I tell you.
>>
>>
>>Tim
>>--- On Wed, 8/18/10, Dave Burton <burtona at atmc.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>From: Dave Burton <burtona at atmc.net>
>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] weight difference
>>>To: "'General pattern discussion'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>Date: Wednesday, August 18, 2010, 7:53 PM
>>>
>>>
>>>The rules proposal to eliminate the weight limit didn't make the first CB
>>>vote. Too bad IMO!
>>>Dave
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>>[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Ron Hansen
>>>Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 7:35 PM
>>>To: 'General pattern discussion'
>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] weight difference
>>>
>>>I'm concerned that these new electric only planes that are designed to make
>>>weight won't hold up to the normal wear and tear of an average intermediate
>>>or advanced pilot or flying off of a rough grass runway.  Is this a valid
>>>concern?  I think so but maybe I'm over reacting.  That is why I'm in favor
>>>of eliminating the weight limit altogether.  The proposal to slightly raise
>>>the weight limit won't allow someone to fly an electric Focus II for
>>>example.
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>>[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of J N Hiller
>>>Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 2:17 PM
>>>To: General pattern discussion
>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] weight difference
>>>
>>>I've been following this with interest. E-power is looking better all the
>>>time and I probably will make the change. I like to build prefer a wood
>>>airplane. About how much total weight is in a suitable E-power system or
>>>empty airframe ready for radio etc? Any numbers readily available would be
>>>helpful in understanding the distribution of weight.
>>>Thanks
>>>Jim Hiller
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>>[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Dave
>>>Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 9:02 AM
>>>To: 'General pattern discussion'
>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] weight difference
>>>
>>>And to recall.....that is the Spark with custom wings and stabs, which saves
>>>substantial weight?  There are very few unmodified kits available that are
>>>RTF electric at 10.25.  There are some airframe examples for which glow /
>>>electric are similar weight, but that is not the norm - not yet anyway - my
>>>opinion.
>>>
>>>My electric Bravo was 10 lbs even at the 2009 NATs (only 4 oz more than the
>>>Vivat I flew in 2005) and I would be scared of the structure if it were any
>>>lighter.  Of course it could be lighter still IF I went from 5000 to 4350
>>>lipos (~6 oz) and ditched the dual RX batts and Vregs (~2 oz) and used
>>>lighter ESC and wiring (~ 2 oz).
>>>
>>>Point being....even tho 10 lb electrics are possible, and becoming more
>>>common, it is still pretty easy to build electrics at 11+ lbs without
>>>careful planning and attention to detail.  I think it will become a
>>>non-issue soon enough.....even in Europe and Asia electrics are coming on
>>>strong.....so the glow kits will become increasingly scarce.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>Dave
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>>[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Atwood, Mark
>>>Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 10:06 AM
>>>To: General pattern discussion
>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] weight difference
>>>
>>>I would argue that you can't "disregard" the airframe given that an all
>>>electric airframe is much lighter.
>>>
>>>My answer to the question?  There is almost no difference.   I'm flying a
>>>full 2M plane that weighs 10lbs 4oz with light batteries, 10lbs, 8oz with
>>>very heavy batteries.   My two Black Magics with glow weighed 10lbs 6oz and
>>>10lbs 8oz RTF minus CDI (add approx 4oz for that).
>>>
>>>I believe we're just now seeing full electric designs that are optimized for
>>>weight and are coming in light.   Prior to that, many of the designs still
>>>had unnecessary structure as a legacy from Glow.  I'm pretty sure that
>>>evolution is not complete yet either.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Mark Atwood
>>>Paragon Consulting, Inc.  |  President
>>>5885 Landerbrook Drive Suite 130, Cleveland Ohio, 44124
>>>Phone: 440.684.3101 x102  |  Fax: 440.684.3102
>>>mark.atwood at paragon-inc.com  |  www.paragon-inc.com
>>>
>>>
>>>-----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: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 9:58 AM
>>>To: General pattern discussion
>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] weight difference
>>>
>>>Tough question.  Will you insist on using 30C lipos, when 20C lipos
>>>are much lighter?  Do you plan on using a particular motor?  Motor
>>>weights vary substantially.  Some ESCs are a lot heavier than others.
>>>
>>>My guess would be that the weight difference between a complete
>>>electric-power system and a complete glow-power system, disregarding
>>>the airplane, would be 10-16 ounces.
>>>
>>>Ron
>>>
>>>On Aug 17, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Dr Mike wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ok so I am going to ask the question again... in your estimation
>>>> what is the
>>>> difference in weight between the complete electric power system and
>>>> the
>>>> complete glow system-disregarding the airplane?
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>> -----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: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 8:30 AM
>>>> To: General pattern discussion
>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] weight difference
>>>>
>>>> Dave WAS trying to show the difference between glow and electric.
>>>>
>>>> Generally, airplanes that started out as glow-powered are heavier
>>>> than one for electric power, because of the vibration.  The
>>>> difference between the two packages gets complicated.  For glow, you
>>>> include spinner, prop, engine, motor mount, ignition system, fuel
>>>> tubing (and fittings), fuel tank and anything else which is
>>>> exclusively for glow.  For electric, you include spinner, prop,
>>>> motor, motor mount, ESC, wiring, lipo batteries and anything else
>>>> which is exclusively for electric.  When you add it up, the weight
>>>> differences can be pretty dramatic.  If you don't carefully select
>>>> all the components, you can easily add an unneeded 4 ounces to an
>>>> electric-powered airplane.
>>>>
>>>> Ron
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 17, 2010, at 7:49 AM, Dr Mike wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Dave, I am referring only to the power packages,not the
>>>>> planes. Those are what I am looking for, the difference between
>>>>> glow and electric.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-
>>>>> discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Dave
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 7:41 AM
>>>>> To: 'General pattern discussion'
>>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] weight difference
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 12 oz +/-4 oz.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Exact number depends on a bunch of things -
>>>>>
>>>>> - on the electric side, which motor, motor mounting, ESC, lipo, RX
>>>>> power system?
>>>>>
>>>>> - was the plane originally built lighter for electric, or with more
>>>>> beef for glow?
>>>>>
>>>>> - CDI / non CDI, type of mount, and what type of ignition and RX
>>>>> power?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I can tell you that a number of Prestige planes have been built
>>>>> with various glow and electric power plants.  For the most part,
>>>>> the glow airframes are +4 oz to start with (the added beef for glow
>>>>> vibration).  Most of the glow setups ended up at 9.5 lbs, +/- 4
>>>>> oz.  Most of the electrics ended up at 10.25 lbs, +/- 4 oz.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Dave
>>>>>
>>>>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-
>>>>> discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Dr Mike
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 8:33 AM
>>>>> To: 'General pattern discussion'
>>>>> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] weight difference
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Could someone tell me the difference in weight between say a YS 1.7
>>>>> with muffler/tank,etc vs electric?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>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
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>
>>>__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
>>>database 5374 (20100817) __________
>>>
>>>The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>>>
>>>http://www.eset.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
>>>Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3079 - Release Date: 08/18/10
>>>14:35:00
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20100819/720ec8d8/attachment.html>