[NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight

[Joe Lachowski]

Not to mention airplane weights can change with humidity.


________________________________
From: NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org> on behalf of Ronald Van Putte via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 2:49 PM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight

What I was alerting pilots to is that they can't count on having a 5045gm airplane deemed acceptable.

 I don't plan on bringing an airplane to the Nats weighing more than 5000gm.  The tolerance is to allow for possible inconsistencies in the measuring equipment.

If the scales at the Nats say an airplane weighs 5055gm, it's too heavy, regardless of what the scales at home said it was.

BTW, another little item to worry about:  An increase in temperature causes the scales that are used at the Nats to measure a higher weight.  That's why John Fuqua and I have calibration weights.  We can adjust the "tare' and can tell what airplanes really weigh as the ambient temperature goes up..

Ron Van Putte

On Jan 27, 2017, at 4:27 PM, Vogel, Peter via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> wrote

The "inconsistencies" are the inconsistencies between the pilots weighing equipment at home and the weighing equipment used at the contest.

So, if you count on your equipment being "dead accurate" and come with a 5050g airplane knowing it's 5050g, and the scales at the venue are off on the slightly heavy side, you will, in fact, be too heavy.  This, in fact, happened to Joseph at the last worlds, he knew he was heavy with that set of batteries, and the scale caught him.

The LIMIT is 5000g, the tolerance is there in case your scales or the venue's scales are a little bit off.  The limit is not 5050g.

Peter+
________________________________
From: NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>> on behalf of Ronald Van Putte via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>>
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 2:02:57 PM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight

> On Jan 27, 2017, at 3:57 PM, Ronald Van Putte via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> wrote:
>
> Something has been nagging me since the 2011 F3A World Championships.  The decision was made, over the objections of the official weighers (John Fuqua and me), that airplanes would be allowed to weigh 1% more than the listed maximum weight of 5000gm, or 50gm.
>
> The argument was that it "allowed for possible inconsistencies in measuring equipment".  We objected because we had purchased calibration weights and had them verified by the Precision Measurement Equipment Laboratory on Eglin AFB (at the cost of a sixpack of beer per set of calibration weights).  That meant we knew exactly what the airplanes weighed.
>
> Now to the current situation.  Currently, AMA classes have a 1% weight tolerance, or 50gm.  Suppose a contestant's model actually weighs 5050gm, but the weighing equipment is in error by 25 grams.  So the scales would measure the contestant's airplane at 5075gm.  Remember that the 15gm allowance is for "possible inconsistencies in measuring equipment".  The contestant's airplane is "too heavy".
>
> Something to think about.
>
> Ron Van Putte
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170128/706a463d/attachment.html>