<!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 6.00.2900.2604" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Bob,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Take off that flame suit so I can give you a
hug. That is exactly how I feel about this. This sport is already
prohibatively expensive to compete at the top levels.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
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=rcaerobob@cox.net href="mailto:rcaerobob@cox.net">Bob Pastorello</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, February 08, 2005 7:28
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: *SPAM* Re: Rules
Survey</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Rules of our event can either be made to be
"inclusive" or "exclusive", and can be written to guarantee costs of operation
that Joe Average GOOD Aerobatic pilot (the guy that we DESPERATELY want in the
game) simply will not afford, given his two job, two kids, two mortgage, two
car lifestyle demands.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>We either face the perception (notice my choice
of words, gentlemen, please!!!!) of being "exclusive" (read "prohibitively
costly") or "inclusive" (read the Joe Average Aerobat can afford to
play).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Unfortunately, it is OUR choice, and that means a
choice from within the game, and that means it probably will not change,
because we are corporately POSITIVELY, ABSOLUTELY *BLIND* to the perceptions
that are out there.</FONT></DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>
<DIV><BR>I expect practically none of you to agree. But perhaps you will
ponder to possible factuality of my statements.</DIV>
<DIV></FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2> Thanks for
reading. Flame suit on.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR>Bob Pastorello<BR>NSRCA 199 AMA 46373<BR><A
href="mailto:rcaerobob@cox.net">rcaerobob@cox.net</A><BR><A
href="http://www.rcaerobats.net">www.rcaerobats.net</A></DIV>
<DIV> </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=natpenton@centurytel.net href="mailto:natpenton@centurytel.net">Nat
Penton</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, February 08, 2005 6:06
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: *SPAM* Re: Rules
Survey</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Gray, you're making me cry.</FONT></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=gfowler@raytheon.com href="mailto:gfowler@raytheon.com">Gray E
Fowler</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, February 08, 2005 3:25
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: *SPAM* Re: Rules
Survey</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>Here comes the dreaded
weight debate again....</FONT> <BR><BR><FONT face=sans-serif
size=2>Consider this-Anyone in the upper level classes would not be too
smart to have a plane heavier than it needs to be. But, lets pretend
there is a hot new Sportsman named uh lets see..... Chuck. Chuck tears up
401 after 3 contests, and he is flying his best airplane that most FAI
guys would consider a toy (and I do not mean the "foamie toys" pictured in
last months Model Aviation being held by a guy named "Chuck")
and so moving up to Intermediate halfway thru his first season, last
3 contests were quite a challenge, BUT he places in 402 anyway!</FONT>
<BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>In the off season, he saves his pennies,
keeps his wife happy and gets a used REAL pattern plane, built by someone
who has a slight heavy hand, and alas it weighs 11.5 lbs. Now this here
Chuck is good and pumped up and I would place money that this theoretical
person could place at the NATS, but his plane is over weight!!!!! one more
!</FONT> <BR><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>Sorry Chuck, even though you
are flying at a disadvantage, we will not let you play at the
NATS........Oh unless you can spend $2k more on another plane.
</FONT><BR><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>The story you have just read
is about to be true, once we do not let Chuck fly at this years NATS. But
at least the French FAI rule makers are happy.</FONT> <BR><BR><FONT
face=sans-serif size=2>Consider a weight change. It does not need to be
across the board and for the life of me I cannot imagine why it needs to
align with FAI. Chuck will have a 5Kg plane <B>BY THE TIME HE
REACHES FAI-</B>and the French can be happy
then<B>.</B><BR><BR><BR><BR>Gray Fowler<BR>Principal Chemical
Engineer<BR>Composites Engineering</FONT> <BR><BR><BR>
<TABLE width="100%">
<TBODY>
<TR vAlign=top>
<TD>
<TD><FONT face=sans-serif size=1><B>"Atwood, Mark"
<atwoodm@paragon-inc.com></B></FONT> <BR><FONT face=sans-serif
size=1>Sent by: discussion-request@nsrca.org</FONT>
<P><FONT face=sans-serif size=1>02/08/2005 01:47 PM</FONT> <BR><FONT
face=sans-serif size=1>Please respond to discussion</FONT> <BR></P>
<TD><FONT face=Arial size=1>
</FONT><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=1>
To: <discussion@nsrca.org></FONT>
<BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=1> cc:
</FONT> <BR><FONT face=sans-serif
size=1> Subject:
RE: *SPAM* Re: Rules
Survey</FONT></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><BR><BR><BR><FONT face=Arial
size=2>I have to agree 100% with Dave on this one. I'd also like to
add that in addition to raising the cost...it doesn't acheive the
objective. Any and all sports that have limitations of this type
(Sailing comes to mind with complex formulas that define the class of
boat) ALWAYS have one critical limiting factor. For us it USE to be
the engine. We had a weight restriction...but it was meaningless
because you couldn't approach it with the power options that we had.
</FONT><BR><FONT size=3> </FONT> <BR><FONT face=Arial size=2>Now,
with unlimited engine size...weight, and in some cases size, has become
the constraining factor.</FONT> <BR><FONT size=3> </FONT> <BR><FONT
face=Arial size=2>In all cases...there are always those with the talent
and money to take the rules to the limit. We will always be chasing
them, and trying to acheive what they acheive. It's great to say
that raising the weight limit will allow more "stock" models to compete...
But my bet is that someone creative and talented will make use of
that rule in a way that others can't easily follow...and will again have
competitive advantage. And as Dave so aptly pointed out...it
will cost the rest of us more money.</FONT> <BR><FONT size=3> </FONT>
<BR><FONT face=Arial size=2>Steve Maxwell has made the best suggestion to
date. I for one have NEVER seen a sportsman pilot denied admission
to an event based on the weight of their plane. Size, yes (we turned
away a few 30% planes for safety reasons) but never just on weight.
In fact...I've never seen ANYONE weight a plane at any event other
than the Nat's finals. So I think we could EASILY acheive the
objective with a simple statement that alters the current "intent" from
one where the CD CAN change the rule...to one that implies the CD USUALLY
changes the rule. </FONT> <BR><FONT size=3> </FONT> <BR><FONT
face=Arial size=2>I dont recall Steve's language, but it was simple and to
the point so I'll paraphrase... " CD's often/usually alter (or wave) the
weight restriction for the sportsman class...please contact them for
details". </FONT> <BR><FONT size=3> </FONT> <BR><FONT
face=Arial size=2>-Mark</FONT> <BR><FONT face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original
Message-----<B><BR>From:</B> discussion-request@nsrca.org
[mailto:discussion-request@nsrca.org]<B>On Behalf Of
</B>DaveL322@comcast.net<B><BR>Sent:</B> Tuesday, February 08, 2005 1:01
PM<B><BR>To:</B> discussion@nsrca.org<B><BR>Subject:</B> *SPAM* Re: Rules
Survey<BR></FONT><BR><FONT size=3>Buddy,</FONT> <BR><FONT
size=3> </FONT> <BR><FONT size=3>Deliberately segregating FAI and AMA
is counterproductive. We need all the pattern fliers we can get, and
we need a common target for the limited number of manufacturers and
suppliers we have. I would never suggest AMA pattern rules blindly
follow FAI, but there would have to be a huge benefit to US pattern before
I would advocate moving away from the FAI in the US.</FONT> <BR><FONT
size=3> </FONT> <BR><FONT size=3>FAI pilots in the US have made many
contributions to AMA pattern in the US and I think most pattern pilots in
the US would agree that the FAI pilots are a resource to all of pattern in
the US. Cutting FAI pilots out of AMA pattern issues is losing a
resource. And I think you'd have a hard time doing it in practice -
many pilots bounce back and forth between FAI and Masters - there is no
rule against it as they are different systems with common elements.</FONT>
<BR><FONT size=3> </FONT> <BR><FONT size=3>If there is no valid
reason to oppose an increase in the weight limit, it seems strange to me
that the majority has repeatedly voted to keep the weight limit as is.
Anyone who chooses to look at the history of the "limiting" rules
for pattern (weight, size, displacement) can pretty easily see what the
net result has been anytime the limits have been increased. For
those not familiar with the rules history of pattern, the most basic of
points I am alluding to is cost - any increase in the limits results in an
increase in the cost of the average pattern plane - not something that is
productive for our event.</FONT> <BR><FONT size=3> </FONT> <BR><FONT
size=3>This list and numerous other publications have contained many
ideas, rationales, and discussions opposed to increasing the weight limit
for close to 20 years (that I know of). Perhaps you could share your
thoughts as to why those ideas, rationales, and discussions are not
valid?</FONT> <BR><FONT size=3> </FONT> <BR><FONT
size=3>Regards,</FONT> <BR><FONT size=3><BR>Dave Lockhart</FONT> <BR><A
href="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net"><FONT color=blue
size=3><U>DaveL322@comcast.net</U></FONT></A> <BR><FONT
size=3> </FONT> <BR><FONT size=3>-------------- Original message
-------------- </FONT><BR><FONT face=Arial color=#8000ff size=2>In a
message dated 2/8/2005 8:02:54 AM Central Standard Time,
donramsey@cox-internet.com writes:</FONT> <BR><FONT face=Arial size=2>Ok
everyone, here's your chance. What would you like to see changed in
the regulations for precision aerobatics? Up the weight limit,
change the box, score takeoff and landings, etc?</FONT> <BR><FONT
face=Arial size=2> </FONT> <BR><FONT face=Arial size=2>Email me
offline at </FONT><A href="mailto:donramsey@cox-internet.com"><FONT
face=Arial color=blue
size=2><U>donramsey@cox-internet.com</U></FONT></A><FONT face=Arial
size=2> with your ideas.</FONT> <BR><FONT face=Arial size=2> </FONT>
<BR><FONT face=Arial size=2>Don</FONT> <BR><FONT face=Arial
size=2> </FONT> <BR><FONT face=Arial color=#8000ff
size=2> </FONT> <BR><FONT face=Arial color=#8000ff size=2>Don</FONT>
<BR><FONT face=Arial color=#8000ff size=2>As an after thought it would be
interesting for those who oppose a weight change to state their reasons
for opposing it so the benefits to pattern can be evaluated for each case.
I cannot come up with a valid reason <B>not </B>To change the rule.
It would also be interesting to know if opposition comes from a specific
group. Since this change does not apply to FAI it is my opinion that votes
from those in that group should not be used to sway the vote in Any NSRCA
survey that would effect the submission of an AMA rules change proposal
since these do not apply to FAI rules changes. </FONT><BR><FONT face=Arial
color=#8000ff size=2>Buddy </FONT> <BR><FONT face=Arial
color=#8000ff size=2> </FONT> <BR><BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.<BR>Checked by AVG
Anti-Virus.<BR>Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.0 - Release Date:
1/17/2005<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.<BR>Checked by AVG
Anti-Virus.<BR>Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.7.0 - Release Date:
1/17/2005<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>