<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=230273201-24022005>Guys,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=230273201-24022005> Has anyone looked at any Pylon racing forums?
They have a MINIMUM weight requirement. Everyone works DOWN to achieve the goal.
Guess what they're arguing about? The same thing that we are - they want to
raise the weight limit to allow more planes to be competitive. The reasoning is
that some of the ARFs are heavier than MINIMUM weight (sound familiar?). They
figure that by adding weight to light airplanes to make them "legal", while
leaving the heavy ones alone, everyone will be even again. The points and
counterpoints are exactly the same ones we have. </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=230273201-24022005> The problem we're having is because everyone
knows the RIGHT thing to do (I think), but it's too late. If the rules were
worded differently from the beginning, we wouldn't be discussing this now. It
would not be a good idea to make someone's airplane illegal overnight (make the
glow fuel weight include fuel) even though it's technically the correct thing to
do. Keep in mind the new rules don't go into effect immediately. In retrospect,
I think as long as the size is limited, the weight will stay in line because
we're all trying to build lighter airplanes, aren't we? The down side of
limiting just the si</SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=230273201-24022005><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial>ze and not the weight of
course has one loophole: biplanes. Think about it. Speak now or deal with it
later...</FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=230273201-24022005> Now would probably be a good time to look at your
plane and see if you can lighten it up SAFELY. The worst thing that will happen
is it might fly a little better. If 99% of us could make weight with a full
tank, it might put an end to this for a while. Maybe this isn't even possible
today, but by the time the rules go into effect, it probably will
be.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN class=230273201-24022005>
<P><FONT size=2>John Pavlick<BR><A href="http://www.idseng.com/"
target=_blank>http://www.idseng.com</A><BR> </FONT>
</P></SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=230273201-24022005></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=230273201-24022005></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=230273201-24022005> </SPAN>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
discussion-request@nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request@nsrca.org]<B>On Behalf
Of </B>Ed Miller<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, February 23, 2005 6:43
PM<BR><B>To:</B> discussion@nsrca.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: FAI Weight
Thread<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"></FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>5.5Kg or by my calculations 12 pounds 1+ ounce is
fine for glow with fuel and electric with batteries. If that levels the
playing field, if it needs leveling, those are numbers I can live with. In
fact at 12 pounds, a conventional glass/foam/balsa/ply large 2 meter plane (
like the EMC ) can be built with electric power and make weight. But I wonder
do we really need to mess with the weight issue ?? There was a time I was all
for raising the 5Kg limit, not so anymore. Although the prospect of building
an E power EMC is enticing. The real issue is do we ( USA AMA ) continue
to follow FAI should they adopt an absurd rule that obsoletes all our
toys overnight ??? I hope not. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Ed M.</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>