[NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposals

[Randy Forbus]

Im not sure I agree with a penalty, because why do you have to punish a person who has a 2 meter plane.

________________________________
From: NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org> on behalf of ronlock--- via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 1:32 PM
To: Anthony Romano; General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposals


I support these ideas.   It could be the specific numbers would need adjustment as we get experience with them..

Our noise rule specifies a percent handicap and works well.

Ron Lockhart

On February 24, 2017 at 7:09 AM Anthony Romano via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:


  After all of the perpetual comments on the list about the weight limit and other technical rules why not change these to a score penalty instead of disqualification? This way if comes to an event with an overweight or oversize or loud airplane they get a 2% score penalty and aren't told to go home.

The other big complaint is the perceived intimidation factor of flying smaller airplanes. In an effort to reduce that anxiety I am thinking about proposing a bonus to raw scores for Sportsman and Intermediate based on wing span. Planes with a span under 55" would receive a 4% bonus and under span 65" would receive a 2% bonus. It should be possible to input this during registration to automate the process.

The numbers I have picked are somewhat arbitrary but the idea is people can show up with a variety of aircraft and either be rewarded for trying in the entry classes or compete without the expense and effort of complying to the comply to the current standards.


Anthony





_______________________________________________
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/20170224/3233964a/attachment.html>