<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: Weight is not the issue!</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
Believe me, a kilo more would not make you happy. A kilo is 2.6 pounds!!<BR>
Ask those who have been there. Bob Pastorello will tell you and if it were possible I have the feeling that someone like Dick Hanson would have solved it by now. <BR>
Just changing the rules will not give you a better flying pattern plane. <BR>
Not to mention the smell of gas around the house :-(<BR>
>From what I am reading, new designs are taking weight down to a target finished weight of 9.5 pounds.<BR>
Rodney<BR>
NSRCA 2906<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
on 18/11/02 6:05 PM, Nik Middleton at middletn@spinmail.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><TT>Valid Points,<BR>
</TT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><TT>However, if I could use a gas engine rather than my YS's, I'd save a bundle on fuel costs, $20 v $1.50, AND only need a 6 oz tank. If one Kilo is all I need extra to fit a gas engine, that sure would make me happy.<BR>
</TT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><TT>That apart, it does look very likely that in the next year or so, the limit will be raised. But..... That's FAI, not AMA.<BR>
</TT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><TT>You're absolutely correct, changing the weight won't save declining pattern numbers, but it'll make life a little easier for the rest of us who have slightly marginal aircraft. Then again, I recall someone flying a Runaround in competition that must have weighed 11 lbs. Still no doubt whether or not the limit is adopted by the AMA, the plane designs will change, more than likely in the wing area to accommodate the extra pounds.<BR>
</TT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><TT>rgds<BR>
</TT></FONT></FONT> <BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Tahoma">-----Original Message-----<BR>
<B>From:</B> discussion-request@nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request@nsrca.org]<B>On Behalf Of </B>George Kennie<BR>
<B>Sent:</B> Monday, November 18, 2002 7:24 PM<BR>
<B>To:</B> discussion@nsrca.org<BR>
<B>Subject:</B> Re: Weight is not the issue!<BR>
<BR>
</FONT></FONT>As I perceive the viewpoint, it appears the weight raisers are saying that if we allow heavier airplanes, then somehow this will save the Sportsman, pattern-entering pilots, from the high expenditure of acquiring an ultra-lite fully competitive 2-meter machine.If the goal is to save wannabe's money, then a case could probably be made for a ruling making an 8 pound maximum allowable weight limit for Sportsman only, as a means of leveling the playing field, both equipment wise and $ wise.In almost all cases, this would assure the entering pilot that he would not be coming up against someone flying his Uncle Quique's borrowed Smarragd. <BR>
Georgie <BR>
P.S. I didn't think about this too long, so it's kinda off the cuff. <BR>
<BR>
Buddy Brammer wrote: <BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE> <BR>
<BR>
Thanks John/ Ron& Ron <BR>
<BR>
Now there are four! <BR>
<BR>
Buddy>From: "John Ferrell" <BR>
>Reply-To: discussion@nsrca.org <BR>
>To: <BR>
>Subject: Re: Weight is not the issue! <BR>
>Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 21:56:38 -0500 <BR>
> <BR>
>I understand your frustration! <BR>
>We put many man hours and suffered through strained personal relations with our friends only to get a 20% return on the survey. Factor in that 5% of the votes came from the committee and it only gets worse. On the other hand, perhaps that if they remaining 80% is not interested, they should not be considered. <BR>
> <BR>
>Would I do it again? Probably, because it is a job to be done and we need to help out where we can. But I should add that a fresh team would be best each cycle... at least that is my opinion at the moment! <BR>
> <BR>
>My position on the weight issue is pretty soft. It would not hurt to give it a try at least in the lower clases at the Nats. But that is not my project... <BR>
> <BR>
>John Ferrell <BR>
>6241 Phillippi Rd <BR>
>Julian NC 27283 <BR>
>Phone: (336)685-9606 <BR>
>Dixie Competition Products <BR>
>NSRCA 479 AMA 4190 W8CCW <BR>
>"My Competition is Not My Enemy" <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>
> From: Buddy Brammer <BR>
> To: discussion@nsrca.org <BR>
> Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2002 8:49 PM <BR>
> Subject: Re: Weight is not the issue! <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> If the intrest is such that we only have 20% of those flying pattern who vote then how in the world are we going to get those outside of pattern to try it? As I said before it is up to those in pattern to use every means possible to maintain the intrest of those already flying pattern. <BR>
> <BR>
> An 80% vote on important issues would indicate to me that pattern is alive and well. First of all I believe that most of the people who did not vote failed to vote for reasons other than lack of intrest. What are they? Every one is trying to figure out why new people are not stepping up to try pattern when it looks to me we need to search out our internal problems and make an effort to solve them. If I dont care and you dont care then who does? <BR>
> <BR>
> Just searching for answers. Is anyone even interested? <BR>
> <BR>
> Buddy <BR>
> <BR>
><BR>
<HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="3" WIDTH="100%"><BR>
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. <http://g.msn.com/8HMKEN/2022> Get 2 months FREE*.<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE> <BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
</BODY>
</HTML>