<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Airplane Weight Limits</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'>I’m still waiting for my rule proposal to Nascar to be approved so I can run my Chrysler Minivan and be competitive. <BR>
<BR>
Sorry...I don’t mean to be a smart a$$. But this thread has become ridiculous. Chip, Quique, Jason, Andrew, Troy, Dave, Sean...and two dozen more (heck, a lot more than 2 dozen but I’m trying to be optimistic!) can kick my butt with glow or electric. Quique and Jason have gone back to glow, others are converting to electric...blah blah blah. One is NOT more competitive than the other at the moment. As Verne stated...he’s flying electric because he LIKES electric. I fly pattern because I LIKE pattern. I’m not asking them to change the rules so I can fly my quickee 500 plane cause it’s cheaper (I can fly it...but I need rule changes to be competitive with it :) ).<BR>
<BR>
I’m ALLLL for cheaper. I’m buying and building Black Magic’s this winter because I have no desire to lay out $3000 for an Oxai. And I’m pretty sure that any of the above listed flyers will beat me in FAI flying MY plane...probably without even a test flight. <BR>
<BR>
Come on Ron...BUY a victory??? At what level? Bob Fortino won Intermediate flying a 60 size boxer amidst a myriad of 2m high tech birds. He out flew them. Is that the norm? Of course not. But it says that money didn’t buy the victory (unless in this case it was money spent on fuel...)<BR>
<BR>
Masters is easier to fly with more power then less. So am I buying a victory to afford a more expensive and more powerful glow engine? Of course...I’m buying a better chance of victory. I’m afraid that’s part of competition and capitalism. Competitors want the best...the best by definition is in demand and therefore costs more. Maybe we need a “stock-plane” class...That could actually be fun! But that’s now what we have.<BR>
<BR>
This would be different if someone was required to fly electric, but this one is simple. Electric is expensive right now period. With or without a weight change. If you’re trying to fly pattern on a budget, you can’t even be part of this discussion in my opinion. All the great budget stuff is glow. Great used planes, great used motors, etc. (BTW I have a great YS 1.40L priced right for a good home!). I’m flying a used Brio, on a used YS, with my radio equipment and I feel pretty competitive at least regionally (Troy may feel otherwise..lol). <BR>
<BR>
It seems disingenuous to me to argue in favor of a rule change that will have all kinds of negative ramifications and claim “cost” as a factor...claiming that we’re trying to save hundreds of dollars on small stuff (extra light axels, or tires, or spinners, etc ...I know this is a reality) when it’s compared to spending THOUSANDS on even the heavy batteries, speed controllers, chargers, transformers, generators, balancers, etc that are required to fly electric at ANY weight and ANY level. “I’m ok spending a LOT more than glow...just not a lot a lot more.” Come on...<BR>
<BR>
Last thought... Directly to Ron and John... Regarding any proposal on this, given that this is clearly a rapidly changing “animal” and likely ANY rule would be outdated quickly, can I suggest that any rule proposal be put forth with a limited duration time frame so that it’s clear it’s intended to solve what is clearly a short term issue?? I.e. For the 2008 season, or 2008-2009. Something like that. That would have at least the virtue of not guaranteeing a complete shift in what and how we currently fly without having to revisit this.<BR>
<BR>
-M <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 6/25/07 6:57 PM, "vicenterc@comcast.net" <vicenterc@comcast.net> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'>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. <BR>
<BR>
--<BR>
Vicente "Vince" Bortone<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'>-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>
From: "Dan" <warrior523@mchsi.com> <BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><BR>
"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." <BR>
<BR>
Ron Van Putte<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><FONT FACE="Arial">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. <BR>
</FONT><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"> <BR>
</FONT><FONT FACE="Arial">Dan Curtis <BR>
</FONT><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"> <BR>
</FONT><FONT FACE="Arial">Dan Curtis<BR>
</FONT></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><FONT FACE="Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><BR>
<HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="3" WIDTH="95%"></FONT></SPAN><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Monaco, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:10.0px'>_______________________________________________<BR>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>
NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>
<a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Monaco, Courier New"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:10.0px'><BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT>
</BODY>
</HTML>