<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1595" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=546533918-21062007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>For
most guys, myself included, just want to use the existing airframes and not have
to sweat being super-light and it costing up the wazoo to get there. Plus
the very light airframes don't stand up to much abuse to where one little prang
puts you over the limit. You certainly have a good point about the
unintended consequences of a change--but how many guys would go for it?--you
don't see that many bipes out there now primarily because they are a pain in the
ass to deal with when in heavy practice mode for a guy after
work...</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=546533918-21062007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=546533918-21062007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Richard</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org]<B>On Behalf Of
</B>Davel322@comcast.net<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, June 21, 2007 12:36
PM<BR><B>To:</B> NSRCA Mailing List<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Fwd: Electric Weight Proposal Logic andRationale<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>Richard,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I think in many respects trying to compare electric / glow is like
comparing apples and oranges.....so having a blanket set of rules that is
absolutely equal (and fair) for both is not going to happen.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The "most fair" methods are going to be too complex - ie, calculate
average power loading and wingloading for average electric and glow models
over the course of an average flight...and then structure the rules to ensure
equality of the averages for glow and electric. And as technology and
equipment changes....the rules would have to continually change to maintain
parity.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>My electric Prestige is 7.5 lbs without batteries.....for another 2.5 lbs
of airframe, .5 lb of motor, and .5 lb of radio gear, I could easily build a
bigger (but still 2M) plane with performance that would absolutely obsolete
any of the current day 2M stuff (and probably double the pricetag as
well).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dave</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">--------------
Original message -------------- <BR>From: "Richard Strickland"
<richard.s@allied-callaway.com> <BR>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1595" name=GENERATOR>
<DIV><SPAN class=109080917-21062007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I
know I sound like a broken record, but: The IC airplanes are weighed without
fuel--the electrics should be weighed with out their fuel. Give or
take a little for the tank and not splitting hairs--but it simply is not
fair the way it is set up now. I'd still like to know how that
decision was made--so they could just un-make it...seemed pretty arbitrary
to me...no rule change involved--it appears someone just said this is
<EM>so</EM>. Somebody straighten me out,
<EM>please</EM>.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=109080917-21062007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=109080917-21062007><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2>Richard Strickland</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Ron
Van Putte<BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, June 21, 2007 11:09 AM<BR><B>To:</B>
NSRCA Mailing List<BR><B>Subject:</B> [NSRCA-discussion] Fwd: Electric
Weight Proposal Logic and Rationale<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>I got the
following from John Fuqua. He is going to submit a proposal to
increase the weight limit for electric-powered airplanes to 11.5
lbs. I suggested to him that he "float" his rationale by the NSRCA
Discussion List, to get some feedback. Here is his response.
<DIV><BR class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>Ron Van Putte<BR>
<DIV><BR>
<DIV>Begin forwarded message:</DIV><BR class=Apple-interchange-newline>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px"><FONT
style="FONT: 12px Helvetica; COLOR: #000000" face=Helvetica
color=#000000 size=3><B>Date: </B></FONT><FONT
style="FONT: 12px Helvetica" face=Helvetica size=3>June 21, 2007
10:40:36 AM CDT</FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px"><FONT
style="FONT: 12px Helvetica; COLOR: #000000" face=Helvetica
color=#000000 size=3><B>To: </B></FONT><FONT
style="FONT: 12px Helvetica" face=Helvetica size=3>"Ron Van Putte"
<<A
href="mailto:vanputte@cox.net">vanputte@cox.net</A>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="MARGIN: 0px"><FONT
style="FONT: 12px Helvetica; COLOR: #000000" face=Helvetica
color=#000000 size=3><B>Subject: </B></FONT><FONT
style="FONT: 12px Helvetica" face=Helvetica size=3><B>Electric Weight
Proposal Logic and Rationale</B></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="MIN-HEIGHT: 14px; MARGIN: 0px"><BR></DIV>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>Now that I am flying electrics I have come to
realize the penalty that electric planes have when being built that gas
planes to not have. That building penalty is significant under the
current rules. Electrics must be built lighter, to include
paranoid attention to everything used - wood, paint, fittings, etc., -
all to make weight. Much more of a concern than gas planes.
Also I remember many instances at the NATs when we were weighing
airplanes, when the contestant was doing all he could do to meet weight
with a gas plane to include cleaning the fuel residue inside and
out. A lot of gas planes were weighing in at 10lb 11oz, 10lb
11.9 oz, even one that was only a few grams under 5 kilos.
Then they get to add a minimum of 16 to 20 ozs of weight by fueling up
(and there is no limit to fuel capacity). Takeoff weights are 12
lbs or more. This situation seems bizarre and illogical when
yo! u put s ome thought into it. Electrics have a finite weight
and gas planes are open ended at Takeoff. Even though the
2005 NSRCA survey did not support an electric weight increase it
occurred to me that the survey did not offer any logic or rationale as
to why some increase would be justified or not. I have attempted
below to come up with a reasonable compromise on electric weight
allowance. I believe the rationale supports an increase but it
would be nice to have NSRCA membership look at it to find the fatal flaw
in the rationale before it gets submitted. The two paras below are
taken from the proposed change. Lets put it out and see what
the discussion list comes up with.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>John</FONT> </P>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>Change paragraph 4.3 Weight and Size page
RCA-2 to read: No model may weigh more than 5 kilograms (11
pounds) gross, but excluding fuel, ready for takeoff. Electric
models are weighed with batteries<B><I> and are allowed an additional 8
ounces for a total of 11.5 pounds ready for takeoff.</I></B><I></I>
No model may have a wingspan or total length longer than two (2)
meters (78.74 inches).</FONT></P><BR>
<P><B><FONT face=Arial size=2>Logic behind proposed change, including
alleged shortcomings of the present rules. State intent for future
reference.</FONT></B> </P>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>Today's 2 meter RC Aerobatics fuel powered
aircraft typically use fuel tanks with a 20 fluid ounce capacity.
A 20 fluid ounce Crank Tank containing 25% Cool Power Pro Pattern fuel
was tested. The fuel weighed 17.3 ounces. Allowing for
variation in tank sizes and fuel type a conservative weight of 16 ounces
of fuel on average seems appropriate. This means that an allowable
takeoff weight for fuel powered aircraft is at least 12
pounds. Assuming that all fuel is consumed during the
flight, the average weight for the aircraft is 11.5 pounds. By
restricting electric powered aircraft to the takeoff weight of unfueled
aircraft an unfair weight penalty is being arbitrarily imposed against
the electric model. By allowing electric aircraft an AVERAGE
flying weight of the fuel powered aircraft, flying weight equity is
restored.</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>