[NSRCA-discussion] Weight limit in AMA classes

[Atwood, Mark]

I tried flying squirrels but after numerous labor conflicts over who gets to do the flying I was forced to make an executive decision and make a change.  

Unfortunately the pecan/stick method, while providing adequate power, was unsustainable for long sequences. Moreover, only the steroid squirrels were able to endure the back to back practice flights without shorting their overall life cycle. 

Anyone wanna try a Turbine?
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld


----- Original Message -----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>
To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Fri Jan 01 21:45:19 2010
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Weight limit in AMA classes

You need to use pecans not steroids. Squirrels will do anything for 
pecans and the only additional weight penalty is one pecan on a stick. 
Of course you do need to reward the squirrel with extras after the 
flight which does not count against your weight limit. Also a switch to 
flying squirrels would be a plus. Then you actually get some lift from 
from your propulsion unit.

Atwood, Mark wrote:
> I think we ought to make a weight change to encourage squirril power.  Its "green" with biodegradable emissions, but right now I can only get adequate power with the heavier bulky steriod enhanced grey squirrils which make me overweight ... 
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------
> Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>
> To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Fri Jan 01 20:47:46 2010
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Weight limit in AMA classes
>
> Making weight with an SAP-180 is easier than with a YS 170 CDI.  The power doesn’t compare, but from a weight perspective, it's no real issue.
>  
> Ed
>
> From: Daniel McLalin <mailto:dmclalin at gmail.com>  
> Sent: Friday, January 01, 2010 8:35 PM
> To: General pattern discussion <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>  
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Weight limit in AMA classes
>
>
> 		John,
> 	
>  
> I just happened to read the discussion on RCU about the SAP 140 and it occurred to me that maybe this is why raising the weight limit should be considered.  This does not mean I agree, but just for thought.
>
> 		, electrics want a weight break because their fuel tanks are heavy but their fuel is light; because two strokes aren't competitive any more we ought to have a high minimum weight for 4-strokes and electrics to level the playing field; and I want a weight break because I added 4 oz when I put ignition on my YS's.
> 	
> 	Pandora's box is no problem compared to changing pattern rules.
> 	
>
> 	Jon Lowe
>
>
> 	-----Original Message-----
> 	From: Daniel McLalin <dmclalin at gmail.com>
> 	To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> 	Sent: Fri, Jan 1, 2010 5:41 pm
> 	Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Weight limit in AMA classes
> 	
> 	
> 	Maybe if the weight limit was raised gas engines would become viable for pattern?
> 	-- 
> 	Regards,
> 	Daniel McLalin
> 	____________________
> 	Of all the things I ever lost....................................... I miss my mind the most! 
> 	
> 	www.firehow.com <http://www.firehow.com/> 
> 	www.premierbowlers.com <http://www.premierbowlers.com/> 
> 	
> 	_______________________________________________
> 	
> 	
> 	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