<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16481" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>the more realistic approach they would take is to
build and fly what is F3A legal in AMA events they choose to enter.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> Del</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=vicenterc@comcast.net
href="mailto:vicenterc@comcast.net">vicenterc@comcast.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA Mailing List</A> ; <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, June 25, 2007 6:57 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane
Weight Limits</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I agree with Dan, leave it alone. I have a
question: What will happen with a Masters pilot that wants to
switch to F3A? Using the current rules he can do it because the
rule is 5 Kg for both AMA and FAI-F3A. If we increase AMA alone he
won't be able to use his equipment to fly F3A. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV class=signature id=signature>--<BR>Vicente "Vince" Bortone</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">--------------
Original message -------------- <BR>From: "Dan" <<A
href="mailto:warrior523@mchsi.com">warrior523@mchsi.com</A>> <BR>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16481" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT><BR></DIV>"After reading all the responses on this issue,
John Fuqua has decided to amend his draft rule change proposal to require
that electric-powered airplanes be weighed with battery, but be given 4 oz
relief from the 5 KG (11 lb) maximum weight . His logic is that,
even the Intermediate/Advanced glow-powered airplanes use about 10 oz of
fuel in a flight and 10 oz of fuel weighs about 8 oz. So, halfway
through the flight, a glow-powered airplane in the Intermediate/Advanced
class, which barely makes the weight limit, is likely to weigh about 11 lb
4 oz. The guys in the Master class would still be at a
disadvantage, but a 4 oz relief is still better than a stick in the eye."
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT><BR
class=khtml-block-placeholder></DIV>
<DIV>Ron Van Putte</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT><BR>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I have really wanted to stay out of this
thread but after reading the above posting, I could no longer bite my
tongue. There is "no" logic in the so called amended draft rule
change. This would be a major rule change, that by concensus, would
have a very good chance of having a huge negative impact on or sport and
this so called logic is based on conjecture and on entry level planes that
might be on the heavy side. Fly electric, fly glow, fly rubber power
but leave the weight and size rules alone. The balance in the cost
and the performance of the planes in our sport is very good but it could
very easily be lost and to do so unnecessarily would be a tragic
mistake. Electric is viiable now and we are told it will get even
more so as time passes, fine. If those among us want to do the work
and spend the dollars to use electrics (when other options are available)
then so be it. They can meet the rules now so ! there i s no valid
reason for change at this time. I wanted to go electric in the worst
way, awhile back, I did the math and it was very apparant, with
the amount of flying that I do, that electric flight was way of of my
league. As the prices come down (not enough) I will continue to
evaluate them. However if the cost was not a factor I am sure I
could meet the requirements of the rules just as many others have done to
date, and it would would never enter my mind ask for a rule
change to be passed if I couldn't do it or just to make it easier for
one power source to be used. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Dan Curtis </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Dan
Curtis</FONT></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>