<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns:o = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"><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 9:11:03 PM Central Standard Time,
DaveL322@comcast.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>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>Buddy,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>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.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>Dave</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>"Lance
<DIV>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.</DIV>
<DIV>Buddy "</DIV></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=mailto:BUDDYonRC@aol.com
href="mailto:BUDDYonRC@aol.com">BUDDYonRC@aol.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=mailto:discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, February 24, 2005 8:56
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Weight rules discussion (
my opinion)</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#8000ff size=2>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 2/24/2005 7:25:59 PM Central Standard Time, <A
title=mailto:patterndude@comcast.net
href="mailto:patterndude@comcast.net">patterndude@comcast.net</A>
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>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>Buddy,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>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?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>--Lance</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></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=mailto:BUDDYonRC@aol.com
href="mailto:BUDDYonRC@aol.com">BUDDYonRC@aol.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=mailto:discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, February 24, 2005
1:33 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Weight rules discussion (
my opinion)</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#8000ff size=2>
<DIV>Since the whole message was to large to post following is my
opinion.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT
face="Times New Roman" color=#000000 size=3>After a thorough weighted
comparison of the items listed in my previous post I have arrived at the
following conclusions.</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT size=3><FONT
color=#000000><FONT face="Times New Roman"><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>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.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT size=3><FONT
color=#000000><FONT face="Times New Roman"><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>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.</FONT></FONT></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT
face="Times New Roman" color=#000000 size=3>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.</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT size=3><FONT
color=#000000><FONT face="Times New Roman"><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>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. </FONT></FONT></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT
face="Times New Roman" color=#000000 size=3>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.</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT
face="Times New Roman" color=#000000 size=3>Buddy Brammer</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT size=3><FONT
color=#000000><FONT
face="Times New Roman"> <o:p></o:p></FONT></FONT></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT size=3><FONT
color=#000000><FONT
face="Times New Roman"></FONT></FONT></FONT> </P></DIV></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Lance</DIV>
<DIV>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.</DIV>
<DIV>Buddy </DIV></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Dave</DIV>
<DIV>I agree considering optimum design within the two meter limit, performance
will be determined by the design. Optimum weight is included in the
equation. If weight is increased the design must change to obtain optimum
performance. Today design weight is in the neighborhood of one pound
per one hundred square inches of wing area. In the past patterns dictated an
eleven hundred square inch wing area. Optimum design is now at about nine
hundred and eighty square inches due to requirements brought about by
the current patterns we fly, and in reality that is the driving force in the
current design equation required to obtain optimum performance and always will
be.</DIV>
<DIV>Considering a twelve pound weight limit, a two meter maximum size limit and
the fact that power requirements increase exponentially as size, drag and weight
increase, I don't see how a designer would attempt to purposely consider such a
challenge and expect optimum performance with the possible exception of a
biplane design and that option has always been out there, tried a few times and
excluding Chip's effort has never been accepted. </DIV>
<DIV>In fact look at IMAC where anything is possible and the swing is back
toward monoplanes and away from biplanes, I wonder why?</DIV>
<DIV>Considering all the possibilities I still think a weight change is the way
to go. </DIV>
<DIV> Buddy</DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>