<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Forte;
panose-1:3 6 9 2 4 5 2 7 2 3;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p.MsoEnvelopeReturn, li.MsoEnvelopeReturn, div.MsoEnvelopeReturn
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Forte;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue style='word-wrap: break-word;-khtml-nbsp-mode: space;
-khtml-line-break: after-white-space'>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Increasing the weight limit for electrics
has always made some sense especially now that most people do not see a
perceived advantage to them. Initially when many saw electric as an
unfair advantage it seemed appropriate to place some limits on the
aircraft. Even with the current limits, builders and airframe producers
have found ways to keep the plane under the 5 kilo limit. The cost is
lighter more expensive batteries (more expensive, especially if they are less
likely to last as many cycles as a more robust cell, which may or may not be fact),
lighter airframe structures and often more expensive construction materials and
components to meet that weight.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>The only question I would ask is if un-limiting
the weight to 11.5 pounds might provide a change to allow electrics to have the
distinct advantage. Remember most of the prior changes have caused an
evolution in airplane design. Many rule changes were simply made to level
the field but they ended up changing what we fly. For instance, the
allowal of 4 cycle engines up to 1.2 cubic inch. The first 1.2 four
cycles were barely able to keep up with a 60 2 cycle. That changed and so
did our aircraft.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Stuart Chale<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font size=2
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org]
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>Ron Van Putte<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Thursday, June 21, 2007
12:09 PM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> NSRCA Mailing List<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> [NSRCA-discussion] Fwd:
Electric Weight Proposal Logic and Rationale</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>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.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Ron Van Putte<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Begin forwarded message:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=1 color=black face=Helvetica><span
style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;color:black;font-weight:bold'>Date:
</span></font></b><font size=1 face=Helvetica><span style='font-size:9.0pt;
font-family:Helvetica'>June 21, 2007 10:40:36 AM CDT</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=1 color=black face=Helvetica><span
style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;color:black;font-weight:bold'>To: </span></font></b><font
size=1 face=Helvetica><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica'>"Ron
Van Putte" <<a href="mailto:vanputte@cox.net">vanputte@cox.net</a>></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=1 color=black face=Helvetica><span
style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:Helvetica;color:black;font-weight:bold'>Subject:
</span></font></b><b><font size=1 face=Helvetica><span style='font-size:9.0pt;
font-family:Helvetica;font-weight:bold'>Electric Weight Proposal Logic and
Rationale</span></font></b><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div style='min-height: 14px'>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>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 you put some 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.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>John</span></font>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>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><span
style='font-weight:bold;font-style:italic'> and are allowed an additional 8
ounces for a total of 11.5 pounds ready for takeoff.</span></i></b> No
model may have a wingspan or total length longer than two (2) meters (78.74
inches).</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p><b><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;
font-weight:bold'>Logic behind proposed change, including alleged shortcomings
of the present rules. State intent for future reference.</span></font></b>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>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.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>