<!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 id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #8000ff; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
bottomMargin=7 bgColor=#ffffff leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>I was, but only to a point. Something along those lines
I believe would happen, and if it does, like you said, would need a large engine
to fly it. That is where you made my point. As you said, weightless balsa or in
other words, composites, or in other words money. I too, could have benefited
from a higher weight as my original Patriot came out 11lb 7oz. I was able to
trim it to 10lb 14.5oz. as weighed at the NATS. But I must say, I do not believe
changing the weight limit will help. Look what the engine displacement change
do, only a handful are taking advantage of cheaper, larger 2strokes. But even
they are using more expensive servos and other epuipment than just the engine. I
may not be 100% against a change in weight, but I am 99% against it. I just have
no answer, other than placing more limits of some kind, to lower costs.
Terry</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=BUDDYonRC@aol.com
href="mailto:BUDDYonRC@aol.com">BUDDYonRC@aol.com</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> Friday, February 25, 2005 6:44
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Weight limit
discussion</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT id=role_document face=Arial color=#8000ff size=2>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 2/25/2005 6:39:27 PM Central Standard Time, <A
href="mailto:wgalligan@goodsonacura.com">wgalligan@goodsonacura.com</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>I think he was being facetious Buddy.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>WG</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </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> Friday, February 25, 2005 6:29
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Weight limit
discussion</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#8000ff size=2>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 2/25/2005 6:13:19 PM Central Standard Time, <A
title=mailto:tbrox@cox.net href="mailto:tbrox@cox.net">tbrox@cox.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>One must remember history to help here. Has any
past changes ever brought the cost of pattern down? I believe it has
always made it more expensive such as what happened with engine
displacement.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000> I am
envisioning a new pattern plane for the new weight.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>It will be a monoplane, 78" ws, 78" length,
fuse height 18", fuse width 10", wing root 25", wing tip15", 15degree
sweep at the quarter chord, 12% airfoil making the wing root 3" thick,
stab 28" and nearly 2" thick. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000> I hope it
doesnt look exagerated, but I would be afraid this would be the trend.
Obviously I dont know to what extent the poor flying quality of this
kind of design would be, but who knows what could happen. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000> Classic
case of opening one door into a room full of doors.
</FONT></DIV></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Terry</DIV>
<DIV>You know more about pattern design than that. The engine required to
pull that monster will surely weigh in at four pounds add gear, radio
exhaust system for another four pounds and covering or paint of a half
pound that means the airframe will have to be three and a half pounds. you
better start looking for weightless balsa. Be sure to install giant
control surfaces so you will be able to use it as a fun fly and all your
effort wont be wasted</DIV>
<DIV>Buddy </DIV></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>I know he was</DIV>
<DIV>Buddy</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BODY></HTML>