<!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>G</DIV>
<DIV>Since you indicated that it is OK to let your voice be heard, I would like
to pose a few questions which have aroused my curiosity while listening to all
the very thoughtfully constructed debate on the weight issues.</DIV>
<DIV>1. Since I assume that the positions stated against change are based on FAI
rules being the basis for most top designs being produced today how could a
change in the AMA weight limit effect the basis of design for
FAI, the place where all state of the art designs of today emanate from as they
would be lighter than any AMA increased weight limit should one be
adopted?</DIV>
<DIV>2. Doesn't the same argument that is being used today against a rule
change hold true in reverse should FAI go to a higher weight limit in the
future? If FAI weight rules were changed today wouldn't that make the new
designs based on that change illegal unless the AMA changed it's rules
accordingly?</DIV>
<DIV>That being the case it seems to me that nothing significant will happen in
regard to a mass change in design concept that will effect AMA pattern to any
great extent if the weight rule is changed to allow a small increase
aimed at reducing cost, among other things since most all
top AMA pilots today are using designs based on FAI
rules. </DIV>
<DIV>Seems to me that logic gained from the discussion has indicated that an AMA
weight change is not the issue the real rub comes about if FAI changes their
weight rules, am I the only one or does anyone else see it this way</DIV>
<DIV>Buddy</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>