<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #8000ff; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
face=Arial color=#8000ff size=2>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 2/24/2005 9:45:04 PM Central Standard Time,
jivey61@bellsouth.net writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Bob<BR>I
assume you want to disregard the 11 lb limit. You will have advantage over the
9.5 lb plane. The 12.5 lb plane will be much more stable in the wind than the
9.5 lb plane. The engines of today will handle the heavier plane just as well
as the 9.5 lb plane. The difference is you're more stable because
of your weight. Now if you throw in the weight limit 11 lbs that makes you not
legal.<BR>I have a 6.25lb Daddy Rabbit that I had to add 1 lb lead to the CG
to calm the plane down so I could fly it smoothly . <BR>Same thing.
<BR>Don't know if this is a rational reason to be legal or not,but there is an
advantage to a heavier plane.<BR><BR>Jim Ivey<BR>> <BR>> From: "Bob
Pastorello" <rcaerobob@cox.net><BR>> Date: 2005/02/24 Thu PM 10:19:36
EST<BR>> To: <discussion@nsrca.org><BR>> Subject: Re: Weight rules
discussion ( my opinion)<BR>> <BR>> Let's say I decide, for my own
reasons, that I want to fly a 12.5lb (dry) 2M pattern airplane against 9.5 lb
(dry) 2M pattern airplanes in Masters class.<BR>> <BR>> Somebody,
anybody, give me a rational reason why I should NOT be "legal" to fly at a
sanctioned event?<BR>> <BR>> Bob Pastorello<BR>> NSRCA 199 AMA
46373<BR>> rcaerobob@cox.net<BR>> www.rcaerobats.net<BR>> <BR>>
<BR>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> From:
David Lockhart <BR>> To: discussion@nsrca.org
<BR>> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 9:09
PM<BR>> Subject: Re: Weight rules discussion ( my
opinion)<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Buddy,<BR>>
<BR>> Do the rules of aerodynamics include things like wing
loading and power loading? Both of those will be dramatically effected
by a change in the weight limit (up or down). With unlimited
displacement and 2x2m maximum dimensions available, weight is very much a
design factor.<BR>> <BR>> Dave<BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
<BR>> "Lance <BR>> In my evaluation the rules
need to apply to Pattern as a whole. With the two meter size limit builders
will utilize the rules of aerodynamics to achieve the optimum design and
weight becomes a moot issue for all classes.<BR>> Buddy
"<BR>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>>
From: BUDDYonRC@aol.com <BR>> To:
discussion@nsrca.org <BR>> Sent: Thursday, February 24,
2005 8:56 PM<BR>> Subject: Re: Weight rules discussion (
my opinion)<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> In a message dated
2/24/2005 7:25:59 PM Central Standard Time, patterndude@comcast.net
writes:<BR>> Buddy,<BR>>
One good idea that I didn't see in your list was the onelwhere
the weight limit for the Advanced-thru-FAI classes remains the same but the
limit for Sportsmand/Intermediate is raised. This really makes sense to
me. We are all comfortable with advancing difficulty in sequences. Well,
building light is also a learned skill and sometimes requires more $$
comittment. Pilots grow in flying, building, trimming skills. Why
subject sportsman to FAI building rules?<BR>>
--Lance<BR>> <BR>> ----- Original
Message ----- <BR>> From:
BUDDYonRC@aol.com <BR>> To:
discussion@nsrca.org <BR>> Sent: Thursday,
February 24, 2005 1:33 PM<BR>> Subject:
Weight rules discussion ( my opinion)<BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
Since the whole message was to large to post following is
my opinion.<BR>> <BR>> After a thorough
weighted comparison of the items listed in my previous post I have arrived at
the following conclusions.<BR>> <BR>>
It is most important that we strive to make pattern an inclusive sport, which
I feel is necessary to increase participation in the future. In order to do
that one of the first item that should be addressed is that of eliminating the
illegitimate double standard in the weight rule. There are two possible
solutions; the first would be to enforce all rules, which many agree in this
case would not be in patterns best interest. That leaves us with only one
solution and that is to change the rule. <BR>>
<BR>> In doing that we must consider the
overall impact of such a change to insure that it serves to protect all the
other aspects concerned as much as possible. After careful review and
acknowledging that maintaining the two-meter rule is in fact the limiting
design criteria for pattern I suggest that a change in the rule upward to
twelve pounds or in light of current FAI considerations, to 5.5K would be an
appropriate solution.<BR>> <BR>> This
change could possibly effect other aspects of pattern design in the future but
given the known requirements some of which are listed in my previous post that
are necessary and practiced extensively today I have little fear that this
change will result in any major design changes that would present a problem or
afford anyone an unfair advantage in the near future.<BR>> <BR>>
If you study the items in my previous post it will
also become apparent that there are many listed that offer the potential to
increase our participation and make pattern more inclusive. <BR>>
<BR>> Should anyone have any other items
to offer that I should include which may require further evaluation concerning
my conclusions and suggested weight change please forward them to me.<BR>>
<BR>> Buddy Brammer<BR>> <BR>>
<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
Lance<BR>> In my evaluation the rules need
to apply to Pattern as a whole. With the two meter size limit builders will
utilize the rules of aerodynamics to achieve the optimum design and weight
becomes a moot issue for all classes.<BR>> Buddy<BR>>
<BR><BR><BR>=================================================<BR>To access the
email archives for this list, go
to<BR>http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/<BR>To be removed from
this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm<BR>and follow the
instructions.<BR><BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Jim</DIV>
<DIV>Why are most all top pilots flying airplanes that they claim weigh in
the neighborhood of nine and a half pounds. This is the first time I have
heard that heavy fly's better, at least in respect to pattern performance,
explain to me how this can be true.</DIV>
<DIV>Buddy </DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>