[NSRCA-discussion] NATS 2012

Mon Dec 12 16:57:21 AKST 2011

Nope.  J  We agree higher cost is a bad thing.

Higher cost has followed every rule change that encouraged larger planes, and would do so again.

I do agree with you that turnaround increased costs (because it required new equipment).  And of course the noise limit increased costs (it also required new equipment)….but the combination of the two saved pattern in many parts of the country by reducing the noise footprint…..and both had pretty much stabilized long before the rules ushering in bigger planes (and more cost) came into play.

Regards,

Dave L

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Dave Burton
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 8:48 PM
To: 'General pattern discussion'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NATS 2012

Yeah, I see you have come around to my way of thinking. It wasn’t the engine size rule or 2M rule that drove up the cost, it was TA requirements!

Now you need to take the next step and agree that a weight change won’t result in higher cost but in fact would lower cost! J

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Dave Lockhart
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 8:21 PM
To: 'General pattern discussion'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NATS 2012

Mike,

Thanks for the congrats.

As to the other bits…..I know we agree on many things, and can agree to disagree on weight.   At least I know Dave B and I agree about costs J

Regards,

Dave L

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Michael S. Harrison
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 5:25 PM
To: 'General pattern discussion'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NATS 2012

Cost is not an issue.  Changes do not increase costs, the buyers choice of product increases costs.  In this instance the difficulty of making weight causes very significant increases in cost.  Not allowing the batteries to be considered “fuel” thus adding to the difficulty of making weight has added very significantly to costs.  Everything about staying with this 50+ year old very obsolete rule increases costs exceptionally.  I am not interested in changing the rules so much as to fix an absurdly obsolete rule.  Back in the 80’s a Hanno special 60 cost $400 plus.  You could buy props that were $30 each.    I don’t buy the argument.  Even if this rule change did increase costs, which it wouldn’t, it would be a price well worth paying. 

By the way congrats on winning the nats.  Very happy for you.

Mike 

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Dave Lockhart
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 3:51 PM
To: 'General pattern discussion'; astafford at md.metrocast.net
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NATS 2012

Ok…..so I have 1 question.

Is increased cost a detriment to the event?

I can think of numerous rule changes that allowed larger, heavier, and more powerful aircraft, and in every instance the end result was increased cost of the aircraft and resources (time, transportation, storage, etc).  Maybe FAI has finally figured this out, and is no longer willing to continue the path of escalation they were on for the past 20 years.

Regards,

Dave

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Michael S. Harrison
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 4:19 PM
To: astafford at md.metrocast.net; 'General pattern discussion'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NATS 2012

I suppose you have all heard my objections to  and the pointless nature of the existing weight limit.  In the interest of promoting the sport and the nationals I would encourage a tolerance level of 8 ounces and weigh the planes at the beginning of the contest and forget about it until finals day.  On that day weigh the finalists and do the contest.  This unfortunately has turned into a weight contest-not a flying contest.  I have heard all the arguments about how easy it is to make weight and it is easy to build light aircraft…blah, blah blah.,  well, I disagree and the weight rule is pointless.  It does not affect anything to have a little heavier aircraft, and in most instances is much safer to have aircraft that are a little heavier but much stronger ,thus much safer.  

As event director, you can implement mods to the rules for the above reasons-promote the sport, safety and whatever else.  

I very much support FAI, but they pretty much  have blown us off as far as input but they sure don’t blow off our serious financial support.  I disagree with them on this point and I have discussed the issue with a few of them including the head of CIAM and they gave me absolutely no compelling argument for the restrictive weight rule.

I would encourage you minimize your manpower usage in that area.  I would never want that job.

M2c

Mike 

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Archie Stafford
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 1:39 PM
To: General pattern discussion; General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NATS 2012

Ron,

I certainly understand there are challenges, and I'm also almost certain that these challenges can be worked through, especially if we maybe only end up weighing once per day or something.  We are working on the logistics now and will have a better plan after the first of the year.  The rules will be followed though and after calibrating the scales there will not be allowances above the rules. If an airplane is weighed and comes in heavy, we will recalibrate the scales and verify they were correct.  My gut feeling is that not many planes will have a problem and constant recalibration will not be necessary.   We may find this is not necessarily the case, but I would be surprised if it is as I have played with the scales I have and after many weights of differing amounts the calibration seems to hold true.  My plan is after a flight the pilot brings the plane back to a tent area, much like the worlds and the plane will be weighed there.  If the plane is under weight, nothing else happens and his scores will be submitted to the score keeper.  If the plane is over weight the site director will come inside the tent area and verify the over weight plane.  Obviously in this case the scales would be recalibrated.  If the plane is still overweight the pilot will receive a zero score for that round, but will be allowed to fly his next round.  A pilot could if he wanted fail every weight check, and just get no scores for those rounds.  I have no doubt there will be growing pains involved, but my hope is that if pilots know 8 months in advance that they will be weighed that they will take the steps necessary to ensure the aircraft is under weight prior to arriving in Muncie.  I understand logistically this may pose some problems, but we do have quite a bit of man power available with intermediate pilots now being part of the judging pool.  Granted, they would not be able to do this during the time they are flying, but then we would only need 3 additional people per day, which we can take from the other classes.  Having spoken to many people involved, we don't see that there is any reason why we should not be able to do this with adequate planning.  I have verified that we have access to the tents that were used at the worlds and one will be setup at each location on Sunday before the pilots meeting to allow pilots to verify the weight of their aircraft.   If a pilot chooses not to take advantage of this opportunity it is on them.  

Arch

On Mon 12/12/11 1:52 PM , Ronald Van Putte <vanputte at cox.net> wrote:

All I can say about weighing every airplane at processing and maybe after every flight is:  good luck. 

John Fuqua and I did all the weighing at the at the F3A WC last year.  There were 82 contestants and many had two airplanes.  We weighed every one of them at processing.  That's a lot of weighing.  Then, we weighed every electric-powered airplane after every flight.  In addition, we weighed the glow-powered airplanes whose owners were unlucky to pull the "wrong" ball after each flight.  We worked from the prelims through the finals and neither of us want to do it again. 

We were particularly unhappy that a weight tolerance was given, even though we provided accurate scales and calibration weights with certification papers.  What was done appeared to be counter to F3A rules.  I understand why a weight tolerance will be given to Intermediate pilots, but hope the the 5000 gram limit will apply to all the rest of the competitors.

Ron Van Putte

On Dec 12, 2011, at 12:30 PM, Archie Stafford wrote:

Hello everyone. I trust that everyone is anxiously awaiting a shiny new  <http://www.rcuniverse.com/buynow/keywordclick.cfm?bid_id=7016> pattern plane or gizmo arriving at Christmas this year. I realize we are a ways away from the NATS 2012, but its never too early to start communicating. The official entry forms are now online at the following link.  <http://www.modelaircraft.org/events/nats/entryforms.aspx> http://www.modelaircraft.org/events/nats/entryforms.aspx Entry forms will still be mailed to those who attended last year, but for anyone wishing to get a jump on things and get registered now you can download the entry form and send them in. I  <http://www.rcuniverse.com/buynow/keywordclick.cfm?bid_id=5582> plan to start putting out monthly status updates after the first of the year so that everyone knows where things stand. I have a great group of people who have volunteered to help and everything is coming together very nicely. 

A few things worth mentionings are that the banquet will be held the  <http://www.rcuniverse.com/buynow/keywordclick.cfm?bid_id=6133> night before the finals this year. It will be held on site at the banquet area at the museum and will be catered. Final catering details have not been finalized yet. At this banquet, the Masters and FAI finalists will be announced and flight orders drawn. This is possible this year due to the rule change that there will no longer be an unknowns meeting per the new FAI rules. The unknowns will be created by the Event Director and handed out to the finalists at the banquet. This will also allow the Intermediate and Advanced winners to be announced in front of the entire group. 

Another item to be aware of is that EVERY airplane will be weighed this year. We are still finalizing plans on the most efficient way to do this, but be aware that every airplane will be weighed this year and it will be after a flight. Ideally they will be weighed after every flight, but at least once a day is my goal. We learned a lot from how it was done at the worlds last year and this should not be difficult to do as we have intermediate pilots who no longer work transmitter impound that we can use as well as some other people involved. As I said, the plans are not finalized, but we are working very hard on them and after the first of the year I will let everyone know what we have come up with as a final plan. My goal is to stay in contact with everyone so that no one can say they didn't know. 

One other important piece of information are the cut off deadlines. They will be strictly enforced. They have been moved slightly closer to the actual start of the NATS, but no entries after the final deadline will be accepted. No exceptions. One change though is that up until the final cut off we will be able to issue refunds. We will not be able to issue the refund from the AMA part of the entry fee, but the NSRCA part of the fee will be refunded. 

Looking forward to seeing everyone in Muncie in July. 

Please limit discussions to useful information regarding this thread. Also, if you have a complaint on how things have been done, I am more than open to listen, but please have ideas on how to correct these issues. 

Archie Stafford 
2012 Pattern NATS ED 

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <javascript:top.opencompose('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/20111213/4c5abd71/attachment.html>