[NSRCA-discussion] Safety Proposal amended

Thu Mar 15 12:37:26 AKDT 2012

Scott

Derek & I've swapped notes on this and I expect he'll seek clarification. 

I also understand that your original note is regarding the AMA rule proposal. The FAI reference just could stand some clearing up. 

It could be worse, OSHA would require a locking enclosure over the battery connection with personal padlocks & tags from everyone associated with the thing.

Earl

----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Scott McHarg 
  To: General pattern discussion 
  Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 3:30 PM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Safety Proposal amended

  Earl,
     I agree with you 100% and the conversation was as such with him.  I gave examples of the Anderson Poll Maxx Products disarming plug which actually does physically break the circuit and was told no.  I do understand how the Emcotec would not work.  That does not physically break the connection and, more importantly, fails closed.  I've been actually talking a little bit to Maxx Prod guys about getting Emcotec to develop and fail open device.  I'd like to have one if for no other reason than it looks cool!  Sorry, I had to say it.

  Most important is to note that we are working on AMA proposals and not FAI.  I was just trying to make sure people understood that phraseology was not being structured into the proposal.

  On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 3:21 PM, ehaury <ejhaury at comcast.net> wrote:

    Scott 

    There may be some terminology issues here. A disarming "SWITCH" was determined to not meet the disconnect requirements, as a switch makes / breaks a circuit internally making it impossible for an official to quickly determine which position is on or off. OTOH, an external disarming "PLUG" or "KEY" or "CONNECTOR"  doesn't have that problem. 

    Derek may have had further discussions with the F3A committee regarding this since the WC - I can only speak to what the official interpretation was at the Worlds.

    Earl
      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Scott McHarg 
      To: General pattern discussion 
      Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 3:13 PM
      Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Safety Proposal amended

      I'd like to see it as well Earl.  This was verbatim from Derek Koopowitz.  I had to rely on him because what I originally wanted to say in public, I ran passed Derek and he said that was not the case.  He said you may use a disarm plug but that did not satisfy the FAI requirement to display disconnected batteries.

      On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 3:09 PM, ehaury <ejhaury at comcast.net> wrote:

        Scott

        Where do you find this interpretation?

         "A disarm plug is NOT allowed to demonstrate a disconnect - there has to be a physical disconnect of the wiring and must be seen by an official." 

        This was not the case for the 2011 WC. I participated in the TM meeting where it was initially stated that both battery leads would need to be disconnected. After some discussion the jury, ED & TD (me) determined that one lead was sufficient and it didn't matter if it was internal or external. Most of the E competitors made the connect / disconnect internally, often with the person doing it exposed to the prop arc. Models were also removed from the runway, so as not to impede the next competitor, before making the EoF disconnect (before returning to the pits). I was one of the officials watching for this.

        If the quoted interpretation is official, then so be it - but I'd like to see the publication.

        Earl

          ----- Original Message ----- 
          From: Scott McHarg 
          To: General pattern discussion 
          Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 12:27 PM
          Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Safety Proposal amended

          With a passing vote of the NSRCA BoD, we respectfully submit to you the new Safety Proposal.  Essentially, the Safety Proposal that is currently with the AMA is being retracted and two new proposals put in its place.  The first one is simply the Fail-safe proposal that was part of the submitted Safety Proposal.  Then, the second new proposal will replace 6.9(a) as 6.9.1 and directly quoted and out of the current FAI Sporting Code.  The referred section is on page 16 in 5.1.11 of the FAI Sporting Code for 2012.  Please note that in FAI, in order to follow the rule, the disconnect must happen right after landing before the helper picks up the plane.  A disarm plug is NOT allowed to demonstrate a disconnect - there has to be a physical disconnect of the wiring and must be seen by an official.  Interesting huh! 

          Before anyone says it, I disagree that the arming plug does not constitute a physical break in the wiring.  Through some consideration and advice from people that have run the Worlds, the plug is external and does not constitute proof that the physical connection internally has happened.  That's the FAI rule.  As submitted, that part is not written into the proposal.  It is simply the direct quote from the FAI Sporting Code.  Here is the exact verbiage of the new proposals as submitted to the AMA.  I don't know when AMA will get the physical proposals up on their site.

          New Proposal for 6.9

          6.9 – Propeller safety - All contestants using radio equipment with a failsafe function shall be able to demonstrate that propeller rotation will either stop or reduce to an idle RPM when the transmitter is powered down while the aircraft receiver system is powered on.  Idle RPM for this purpose is defined as an RPM during which the model will remain stationary when already motionless.

          New Proposal for 6.9.1

          6.9.1 – For electric powered models, the electric power circuit(s) must not be physically connected, before the starting time is begun and must be physically disconnected immediately after landing. 

          -- 
          Scott A. McHarg

----------------------------------------------------------------------

          _______________________________________________
          NSRCA-discussion mailing list
          NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
          http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

          No virus found in this message.
          Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
          Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4872 - Release Date: 03/15/12

        _______________________________________________
        NSRCA-discussion mailing list
        NSRCA-discussion at 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://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

      No virus found in this message.
      Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
      Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4872 - Release Date: 03/15/12

    _______________________________________________
    NSRCA-discussion mailing list
    NSRCA-discussion at 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://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  No virus found in this message.
  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
  Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4872 - Release Date: 03/15/12
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20120315/e0da8846/attachment.html>