[NSRCA-discussion] Rules change proposals

[Scott McHarg]

Mark,
   Nevermind about "where you found that".  You're on the board HA!

On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Scott McHarg <scmcharg at gmail.com> wrote:

> Mark,
>    Where did you find that?  I only see last cycle results.  If that's
> true, they passed the proposal y'all didn't like and failed the one that
> fell in line with FAI for the electrical circuit break.  They also passed
> through the penalty weight and failed all proposals for increase.  Very
> interesting.
>
> Scott
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Mark Atwood <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>wrote:
>
>> Already complete.   Proposals 2,4,6,7,8 were passed through for the cross
>> proposal stage.
>>
>>
>>  *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
>>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 24, 2012, at 9:15 AM, Dave Burton wrote:
>>
>> When is the CB initial vote?****
>> ** **
>>  *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:
>> nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On Behalf Of *Keith Hoard
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 24, 2012 9:01 AM
>> *To:* General pattern discussion
>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules change proposals****
>> ** **
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Scott A. McHarg*
> Sr. Systems Engineer - Infrastructure
> Bryan Research & Engineering
>
>


-- 
*Scott A. McHarg*
Sr. Systems Engineer - Infrastructure
Bryan Research & Engineering
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20120424/bc75648a/attachment.html>