[NSRCA-discussion] Rules Proposals

[mjfrederick at cox.net]

I second what Stuart is saying here. I've kept my mouth shut just observing throughout all this discussion mainly because I'm not a member of the NSRCA. Why am I not a member? I can't remember the last time the NSRCA represented my interests. To propose a weight rule change is a huge mistake. Hopefully the contest board has better sense (and experience) than the NSRCA leadership. Being the AMA-recognized special interest group for Pattern is a huge responsibility. Changes to what we do should not be taken lightly, nor should they be left up to a 50% + 1 vote on a website. Sometimes leadership and experience need to step in and stand up to those who are barking the loudest about not being able to make weight. In this instance, the squeaky wheel doesn't necessarily deserve the grease. Well, whetever. It's not like I would just stop flying pattern if a weight increase was passed, but I think it would tarnish the image of pattern. Perhaps irrevocably. Once a change like this happens, it cannot ever be taken back. Let's say 2 - 3 years from now as battery technology continues to improve (because let's face it, the only people who want weight limit increases are electric guys), and the batteries get lighter and lighter, you may have now given electric planes an advantage. Rules are already in place to allow anyone to try pattern without needing to make weight. Rules were recently passed to allow the lower classes a variance so that they get a little leeway as they move up. Leave things alone, and the technology will catch up to the rules, as it always has in the past (2-stroke to 4-stroke migration).

Matt

---- Stuart Chale <schale1 at verizon.net> wrote: 
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion