[NSRCA-discussion] Rules change proposals

Tue Apr 24 05:14:28 AKDT 2012

That sir, depends on whether you are trying to increase your arm or your
disarm capacity.  You would know that had you been paying attention in
class.
On Apr 24, 2012 8:00 AM, "Keith Hoard" <khoard at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yup, you gotta store those in separate airtight containers.
>
> Another question for Scott McHarg . . .
>
> If I install both an Arming Plug and a Disarming Plug, are they wired in
> series or parallel?
>
> Keith Hoard
> Collierville, TN
> khoard at gmail.com
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 7:33 AM, Bob Richards <bob at toprudder.com> wrote:
>
>> I bought a box of dihedral recently. I had a box of anhedral left over
>> from the 70s (used for stabs back then) and I made the mistake of storing
>> them next to each other. Apparently they cancelled each other out and all I
>> have left now is some crumbled up cardboard.
>>
>> Bob R.
>>
>>
>> --- On *Mon, 4/23/12, Keith Hoard <khoard at gmail.com>* wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: Keith Hoard <khoard at gmail.com>
>>
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules change proposals
>> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Date: Monday, April 23, 2012, 6:06 PM
>>
>>
>>  The reason I was asking is because I had bought a box of down thrust
>> from Shalimar Hobbies a couple years ago and still have some left over.
>>
>> If it's now illegal, I need to return what's left for a partial refund.
>>
>> The box of right thrust is still shrink wrapped, but I can't find the
>> receipt.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Apr 23, 2012, at 16:44, Ronald Van Putte <vanputte at cox.net<http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=vanputte@cox.net>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  I've just added an arming plug assembly to my Vanquish.  It has the
>> added feature of having the ability to minimize the coriolis acceleration
>> due to precession of the earth and it self adjusts for latitude.
>>
>> Ron
>>
>>  On Apr 23, 2012, at 4:33 PM, Scott McHarg wrote:
>>
>>  Only if you use a disarming plug and/or bore another hole in the side
>> of your fuse.  I heard something along the lines of the "Hoarder Policy"
>> being written as we speak but only after a survey has been presented.
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Keith Hoard <khoard at gmail.com<http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=khoard@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>>
>>  I just added some down thrust to my plane, is that illegal?
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Apr 23, 2012, at 15:54, James Oddino <joddino at socal.rr.com<http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=joddino@socal.rr.com>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  Scott, I don't want to beat this to death but you must be very careful.
>>  I could interpret this to disallow Contra Drive prop set ups that
>> automatically cancel the effects of spiral slipstream, torque, gyroscopic
>> precession and P-Factor.  What about adding aerodynamic appendages that
>> improve stability and damping?  It is not clear why the aerodynamicist
>> should should be given an advantage over the power management guy or the
>> electronics guy.  I'll never understand why the variable thrust alignment
>> system was disallowed.
>>
>> I don't really care what is decided, but if the rule is not well defined
>> it will cause turmoil and new guys thinking about getting into pattern
>> won't like it.
>>
>> Jim
>>
>>  On Apr 23, 2012, at 10:05 AM, Scott McHarg wrote:
>>
>>  Good Afternoon,
>>    First, let's agree that "Engine managment" was not a correct term that
>> we derived from the "old days" and we will fix that (per John Fuqua)
>> assuming it passes the initial vote.  Second, let's not lose sight that we
>> are speaking about telemetry and we are speaking of automated functions
>> here, not those that require direct and manual input.  The wording is such
>> that engine management systems that COORDINATE (through telemetry and read:
>> automatically adjust) power output (to maintain a speed or anything that
>> may relate to) with model performance, position, or attitude.  Honestly,
>> this is no different than a gyro correcting attitude and we certainly don't
>> want to allow that.  We simply are trying to allow telemetry that is
>> important for safety and continue to dis-allow anything that automates
>> flying the aircraft.  In my very humble opinion and to answer your
>> question; Yes, I think we do want to outlaw something that makes our models
>> fly better IF it is automated and not pilot-induced.
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:10 AM, James Oddino <joddino at socal.rr.com<http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=joddino@socal.rr.com>
>> > wrote:
>>
>>  What does it mean?  Electric motors change the power as a function of
>> the load applied.  For a given throttle setting the motor will draw more
>> current as the model is pulled vertical for instance.  Is the rule trying
>> to prevent that or prevent an improvement in its ability to do that?  Is it
>> trying to outlaw braking or variable pitch props?
>>
>> The question we should ask is; do we really want to outlaw anything that
>> might make our models fly better?
>>
>>
>>       9. Engine management systems that coordinate power output with
>> model performance, position, or ****
>>  attitude.”
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Scott A. McHarg*
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Scott A. McHarg*
>> Sr. Systems Engineer - Infrastructure
>> Bryan Research & Engineering
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>>
>> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<http://us.mc1616.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@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/20120424/39397293/attachment.html>