[NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A

Fri Nov 11 04:34:29 AKST 2016

We need to have an "FAIxit" vote . . . 

-Keith Hoard

-klhoard at outlook.com

From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of Patternpilot One via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2016 06:58
To: Ron Hansen <rcpilot at wowway.com>; General pattern discussion
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A

Just keep make it harder for people to get into pattern! Human nature is if
xyx pilot is flying a 12s plane then we must fly it also to be competitive.
Why not focus on recruiting people and not push them away.. WHY does
everything have to follow the FAI planes, patterns etc?

Leave the AMA classes alone get the pattern SIG to fix the problem and not
keep adding to it.

Scott

Nsrca 529

Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE smartphone

-------- Original message --------
From: Ron Hansen via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> > 
Date: 11/11/16 7:46 AM (GMT-05:00) 
To: 'cahochhalter' <cahochhalter at yahoo.com <mailto:cahochhalter at yahoo.com>
>, 'General pattern discussion' <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> >, 'Jeff and Claire'
<jeffclaire at cableone.net <mailto:jeffclaire at cableone.net> > 
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A 

I don't understand how this rule change won't affect the AMA classes.  Most
planes are designed to satisfy FAI not masters.  So all future planes
designed would be around 12S rather than 10S making the plane selection for
AMA even smaller.  This could also result in longer more complicated
sequences.  Bad idea unless we are going to make the same change for AMA
classes.  

Ron

From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of cahochhalter via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2016 1:51 PM
To: Jeff and Claire; General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A

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

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 14421 (20161110) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 14422 (20161110) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 14422 (20161110) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

http://www.eset.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20161111/f129269a/attachment.html>