[NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A

[Atwood, Mark]

IF you take that approach, I would write the proposal in such a way that “AMA will follow FAI’s rulebook guidelines for maximum voltage allowance” or some such wording, so that if adopted, it automatically follows the FAI rule.

-M
MARK ATWOOD
o.  (440) 229-2502
c.  (216) 316-2489
e.  atwoodm at paragon-inc.com<mailto:atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>

Paragon Consulting, Inc.
5900 Landerbrook Drive, Suite 205, Cleveland Ohio, 44124
www.paragon-inc.com<http://www.paragon-inc.com/>

<http://www.paragon-inc.com/>
Powering The Digital Experience

On Nov 10, 2016, at 2:46 PM, John Gayer via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> wrote:

Chuck,
If it's important to you, write up an Rules Change proposal for the AMA rulebook.
No need to wait for the FAI in order for the Contest Board to address this.
John

On 11/10/2016 11:51 AM, cahochhalter via NSRCA-discussion wrote:
Yes, but we need fai to pass it first, then get ama to approve.





Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone


-------- Original message --------
From: Jeff and Claire via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org><mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: 11/10/16 12:38 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: 'Bill Pritchett' <billpritch at yahoo.com><mailto:billpritch at yahoo.com>, 'General pattern discussion' <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org><mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>, 'Andrew Jesky' <andrewjesky at gmail.com><mailto:andrewjesky at gmail.com>, 'Keith Hoard' <klhoard at outlook.com><mailto:klhoard at outlook.com>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A

Looks like there would need to be a rule change to run 12s in an AMA class.  Current rule says "Electrically-powered model aircraft are limited to a maximum of 42.56 volts..."
Jeff Worsham


From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Bill Pritchett via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2016 11:01 AM
To: Andrew Jesky; Keith Hoard; General pattern discussion; General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A

I think a source of universal pride among the pattern community is the positive ripple effect that development of our gear over the years has provided the entire model aviation community.  This discussion is simply about the continued development of a power system...the evolution of electric power.  I don't think this would have any significant real or implied effect on any AMA class.  On the other hand, those that choose to try something new no doubt will - that's how it's always worked.  How many folks in AMA classes fly YS-185s?  That's a choice available to all of us right now.....  Our 10S setup is great and should/will continue to be the standard for a long, long time - yet not a reason to stifle development.
Bill
________________________________
From: Andrew Jesky via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>>
To: Keith Hoard <klhoard at outlook.com<mailto:klhoard at outlook.com>>; General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>>
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2016 12:10 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A

By changing the KV to spin the same prop at the same rpm as the 10 cell setup there isn't much that changes in the feel. I have hundreds of flights on the 12s setup, and the power output is no different as well as the torque. Heck if anyone wants to try the 12 cell setup and has there model setup for a Q80xs let me know. I'd be more than happy to let you see what you think.

Andrew



Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 10, 2016, at 10:03 AM, Keith Hoard via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> wrote:
I think it takes more than 12S to do that, Chuck . . .

-Keith Hoard
-klhoard at outlook.com<mailto:klhoard at outlook.com>

. .. [snip].. . . Kv is easily adjusted by changing the wind.

Chuck


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

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




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

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto: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/20161110/39c04143/attachment.html>