[NSRCA-dist7] Rules proposals

[Steve Hannah]

I agree with Tony



On Sep 3, 2012, at 18:33, Anthony Frackowiak <frackowiak at sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Fine with 13-2.
> 
> Fine with 13-4.
> 
> Against 13-6. They should have passed the weight rule by McHarg. They didn't even let that pass the Initial vote.  
> 
> Against 13-7. They should have used the wording in the current F3A regulations. Requiring a break to be visible is too much of a bother to enforce. I won't install an arming plug to make this visible and I won't keep my canopy off my model.
> 
> Fine with 13-8.
> 
> Tony Frackowiak
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Derek Koopowitz <derekkoopowitz at comcast.net>
> To: "CA, AZ, HI, NV,UT" <nsrca-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Sat, September 1, 2012 11:30:41 PM
> Subject: [NSRCA-dist7] Rules proposals
> 
> Everyone,
>  
> The final vote on the rules proposals is coming up in less than 2 weeks.  The proposals being voted on are listed here:
>  
> http://www.modelaircraft.org/events/ruleproposals/rcaerobatics.aspx
>  
>  
> Please give me your thoughts and feedback on these proposals…
>  
> Thanks!
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-dist7 mailing list
> NSRCA-dist7 at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-dist7
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-dist7/attachments/20120904/45954180/attachment.html>