[NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A

Tue Nov 15 07:54:29 AKST 2016

I took 450 volts DC once and it smarted pretty good!!!! Small mark where
the current entered, but quite a good sized hole w/ significant burning at
the exit point. I decided not to do that anymore.

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Stuart Chale via NSRCA-discussion <
nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:

> And AC is more dangerous than DC.
>
> On 11/14/2016 7:23 PM, Ed Alt via NSRCA-discussion wrote:
>
> The answer varies all over the place.  Oftentimes, you hear that 50 mA
> through the chest is likely to be fatal.  It doesn't cook you, it disrupts the
> signals from your brain as they try to keep your heart beating.  Depending
> on your medical condition, maybe it takes less, maybe more.
>
>
> How do get 50 mA or more through your chest? It largely depends on how
> much voltage is present and how conductive your skin is.  The dryer the
> skin, the more electrical resistance it has, and the less current will
> flow.  The lighter you grip is on the electrodes (Shades of Dr.
> Frankenstein), the less current flows.  In general, you certainly want to
> avoid licking your fingers on each hand and tightly grasping the positive
> terminal on one hand, and the negative on the other.
>
>
> Ed
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>
> <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org> on behalf of Koenig, Tom via
> NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> *Sent:* Monday, November 14, 2016 5:17 PM
> *To:* 'General pattern discussion'
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A
>
>
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> Interesting discussion about the batteries. I thought the rule was 42 V
> DC.  Are there not serious health implications, i.e.  just how much the
> body can take? I was always under the impression the rule was safety based
> and is why the FAI imposed the 42 V rule all those years ago?
>
>
>
> I am purely going off what is bouncing around in my head…but I doubt, the
> FAI will change a rule if its safety based?
>
>
>
>
>
> Tom
>
>
>
> *From:* NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>] *On Behalf Of *Atwood, Mark
> via NSRCA-discussion
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 15 November 2016 6:09 AM
> *To:* Dave Burton; General pattern discussion
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A
>
>
>
> I’m pretty  sure all we’d get is a rapid movement back to Glow which has
> no bound for displacement and therefore power.  At least in FAI and
> Masters.
>
>
>
>
>
> *MARK **ATWOOD*
>
> o.  (440) 229-2502
>
> c.  (216) 316-2489
>
> e.  atwoodm at paragon-inc.com
>
>
>
> *Paragon Consulting, Inc.*
>
> 5900 Landerbrook Drive, Suite 205, Cleveland Ohio, 44124
>
> www.paragon-inc.com
>
>
>
> *Powering The Digital Experience*
>
>
>
> On Nov 14, 2016, at 1:23 PM, Dave Burton via NSRCA-discussion <
> nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> Let's cut cost and increase participation by reducing to 8S rather than
> 12S. Airplanes will be smaller and cheaper, batteries will be cheaper, and
> we won't have to worry about the weight limit. We won't have to worry about
> the 2M  biplanes that will be bigger (the logic of that argument about the
> weight limit gives me a migraine trying to understand how 2 meters becomes
> bigger).
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> *From:* NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>] *On Behalf Of *Bill Pritchett
> via NSRCA-discussion
> *Sent:* Monday, November 14, 2016 12:08 PM
> *To:* Atwood, Mark; Andrew Jesky; General pattern discussion; General
> pattern discussion
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A
>
>
>
> +1
>
> Adding the option of 12S is about efficiency, being nice to your
> batteries....
>
> Bill
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* "Atwood, Mark via NSRCA-discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.
> org>
> *To:* Andrew Jesky <andrewjesky at gmail.com>; General pattern discussion <
> nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> *Sent:* Friday, November 11, 2016 5:28 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 12S for F3A
>
>
>
> To Andrew’s point, power is already unlimited in our rules.  Glow is not
> constrained, only E-power.  So while normally I’m a staunch opponent to any
> rule change that will alter the designs of our planes and thus obsolete
> everything and increase costs, I don’t think supporting 12S does that.
>
>
>
> Power is not currently limited, so allowing 12s doesn’t change the
> available power.  It merely allows those flying electric to do so more
> efficiently.  And yes… A YS200 will likely  support even larger Bipes if
> they can build them and make weight.
>
>
>
>
>
> *MARK **ATWOOD*
>
> o.  (440) 229-2502
>
> c.  (216) 316-2489
>
> e.  atwoodm at paragon-inc.com
>
>
>
> *Paragon Consulting, Inc.*
>
> 5900 Landerbrook Drive, Suite 205, Cleveland Ohio, 44124
>
> www.paragon-inc.com
>
>
>
> *Powering The Digital Experience*
>
>
>
> On Nov 11, 2016, at 5:11 PM, Andrew Jesky via NSRCA-discussion <
> nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> Then cap the wattage we can reach, But don't worry when YS comes out with
> there 200 that won't allow the pattern planes to grow as long as there
> under 5000 without fuel right? ��
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2016.0.7859 / Virus Database: 4664/13405 - Release Date: 11/13/16
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
> ******************************************************************
> *PLEASE NOTE* This email and any attachments may be confidential. If
> received in error, please delete all copies and advise the sender. The
> reproduction or dissemination of this email or its attachments is
> prohibited without the consent of the sender. WARNING RE VIRUSES: Our
> computer systems sweep outgoing email to guard against viruses, but no
> warranty is given that this email or its attachments are virus free. Before
> opening or using attachments, please check for viruses. Our liability is
> limited to the re-supply of any affected attachments. Any views expressed
> in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender
> expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views of the
> organisation. ******************************************************************
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing listNSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.orghttp://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20161115/1db9984c/attachment.html>