[NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A

Tue Nov 15 05:49:26 AKST 2016

I suppose they operate on the honor system?
World championships don't work that way.

On 11/15/2016 4:51 AM, Patternpilot One wrote:
> Senior Pattern Association has a watts limit, no problems.
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE smartphone
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: John Gayer via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Date: 11/14/16 11:21 PM (GMT-05:00)
> To: cahochhalter <cahochhalter at yahoo.com>, General pattern discussion 
> <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A
>
> Watts checking at competitions would be a PITA compared to a voltage 
> check.
> Perhaps the CIAM should address(and reduce) the power requirements of 
> new F and unknown sequences for F3A.
>
> The rest of us tend to have max power dialed back a bit.
>
> John
>
> On 11/14/2016 7:05 PM, cahochhalter via NSRCA-discussion wrote:
>> Maybe if we promise.
>>
>> What if we limit watts? But 12s.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
>>
>>
>> -------- Original message --------
>> From: Dave Lockhart via NSRCA-discussion 
>> <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Date: 11/14/16 7:20 PM (GMT-06:00)
>> To: 'General pattern discussion' <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A
>>
>> Below is a partial snip of a thread earlier this year on the F3A 
>> discussion list.
>>
>> The long and the short of it is that going from 10S to 12S might help 
>> in the short term, but, will be yet another round of escalation in 
>> the long term.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> *From:*F3A-Discussion [mailto:f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us] 
>> *On Behalf Of *Dave Lockhart via F3A-Discussion
>> *Sent:* Thursday, September 01, 2016 8:20 PM
>> *To:* 'Atwood, Mark' <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com 
>> <mailto:atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>>; f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us 
>> <mailto:f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us>
>> *Subject:* Re: [F3A-Discussion] Rule proposals
>>
>> I’ve been flying pattern since the early 1980s….and have come to be 
>> fond of a couple answers to one question –
>>
>> Q – How much power is enough?
>>
>> A – Way too much.
>>
>> A – More.
>>
>> A – I’ll let you know when I find it.
>>
>> In the last 30 years of pattern history, the power used has always 
>> been the most available.  Zero exceptions.
>>
>> The history of power limits as it were –
>>
>> Max engine size – 60 cubic in – everyone ran 60s with pipes (and many 
>> pushed high nitro low oil fuels for more power).
>>
>> Max engines size – 60 2C or 120 4C.  This was to allow more 
>> diversity, lower noise, “friendlier” power, etc.  Didn’t happen – 
>> everyone ended up running more expensive 120 4Cs (and many pushed 
>> high nitro for more power).
>>
>> Unlimited engine size - Again, to allow more diversity, lower 
>> stressed powerplants, cheaper cost, etc.  Didn’t happen (again)  – 
>> everyone ran a limited number of purpose built more expensive 2C and 
>> engines (and many pushed high nitro for more power).
>>
>> Specific YS evolution – 120, 120AC, 120SC, 140, 140L, 140DZ, 160, 
>> 175, 185…….and running 30% nitro the entire history.
>>
>> Specific Electric evolution – (really the batteries) – ThunderPower 
>> 10s4p8000 4-6C, TP10s4p5300 10-12C, TP10s2p5400 18-20C, then several 
>> generations of 25C up to the current ProLite X (and similar offerings 
>> from other brands).  The promise of every successive generation was 
>> more power, lower operating temps, and longer lifecycles.  In just 
>> about every instance, more power was realized (and used)….and 
>> operating temps and lifecycles were not dramatically changed (since 
>> about generation 4 of about 8 generations).
>>
>> Any time the opportunity to escalate power (and costs) was available, 
>> it happened.
>>
>> All of Mark’s points are valid IF the power level remains CONSTANT.  
>> IF the power level INCREASES (and it will), the advantages Mark notes 
>> will not be realized…..but the detriments will be – increased cost to 
>> change motors, chargers, and lipos, and a reduced secondary market to 
>> which the 10S setups can be “recycled”.
>>
>> The nature of competition is to push the envelope and exploit any 
>> possible competitive advantage.  12S will be a competitive advantage, 
>> and the power level will go up.  I see no reason why the historical 
>> trend of pattern and/or competitive nature will change.  Given a 
>> suitable transition period, the power systems will all be 12S, and 
>> just as stressed as they are now with 10S.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> *From:*Atwood, Mark [mailto:atwoodm at paragon-inc.com]
>> *Sent:* Thursday, September 01, 2016 2:44 PM
>> *To:* DaveL322 <DaveL322 at comcast.net <mailto:DaveL322 at comcast.net>>; 
>> f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us <mailto:f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us>
>> *Cc:* Derek Koopowitz <derekkoopowitz at gmail.com 
>> <mailto:derekkoopowitz at gmail.com>>; Ramsey Don <donramsey at gmail.com 
>> <mailto:donramsey at gmail.com>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [F3A-Discussion] Rule proposals
>>
>> So to chime in here…
>>
>> Yes, Amps kill… but the body has natural impedance that requires 
>> sufficient voltage to push through it.  Right now if you accidentally 
>> short a 10S pack, (and I’m guessing many of us have) we don’t feel 
>> the jolt even though over 200amps have likely passed, but rather we 
>> typically just get burned on the skin (and melt a connector).  This 
>> is because the resistance in your skin prevents the amperage from 
>> traveling through you.  50V won’t meaningfully impact that.  Yes, 
>> it’s an increase, but not a dangerous one.   It’s pretty universally 
>> accepted that 50v DC is safe at any amperage (from it being lethal) 
>> up to and including putting electrodes under the skin.  Not something 
>> I’d advise trying.
>>
>> There are a number of strong upsides to this. We currently run our 
>> equipment very hard, and very hot.  Up-ing the voltage by 20% would 
>> significantly reduce both and significantly increase the efficiency 
>> and tolerance of the systems in play.   Weight would not be impacted 
>> as you would run lower capacity, higher voltage cells that would 
>> weigh roughly the same, but run cooler, last longer, and provide 
>> equal or longer flight times.
>>
>> The clear downside as mentioned would be a bit of retooling for those 
>> that want to change. Motor’s have to be wound differently, so a 12S 
>> Pletty is different from a 10S Pletty, though it’s the same motor 
>> casing and such, so it would be plug n play in the airframes.
>>
>> Batteries we buy pretty steadily just like we did fuel… so I would 
>> imagine most would simply replace motors when they put together new 
>> airplanes and phase in new batteries as a result.  Charges would 
>> indeed be a brand new expense if you don’t currently have a charger 
>> that can handle 12S (many do as F3C and many others already run 12S.)
>>
>> Overall I would be interested in this simply due to the current 
>> excessive wear on our equipment from the high amperage loads and 
>> heat.  Running 55amps vs 70amps reduces the strain on everything all 
>> the way down to the gauge of wire we run.
>>
>> *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/>
>>
>> *Powering The Digital Experience*
>>
>> *From:*DaveL322 [mailto:DaveL322 at comcast.net]
>> *Sent:* Friday, November 11, 2016 1:25 PM
>> *To:* S. McNickle <nelson_jett at comcast.net>; General pattern 
>> discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>; Larry Diamond 
>> <ldiamond at diamondrc.com>
>> *Cc:* Hansen, Ron <rcpilot at wowway.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A
>>
>> 100% correct.
>>
>> I previously made a lengthy post to the F3A mailing list and will 
>> repost to this list when I am home after the weekend (f3p contest).
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note5.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> 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/20161115/54b89aa5/attachment.html>