RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available Gallery slideshow

slideshow

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Search This Thread

Printable Version

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> Pattern Universe - RC Pattern Flying >> RC Pattern Flying >> RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/12/2012 5:44 PM

TonyF

Posts: 1869
Score: 108
Joined: 12/9/2001
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: Rosamond, CA, USA
Status: offline

Scott, you really have to be kidding about the rope, right? If I have to tie my model down at a pattern contest in the pits then I'm just going to move on to something a little less ridiculous.

Please reconsider what you guys are doing. Just as in your example of the highway, what will be next? Are we going to bring breathalyzers out to the pattern contest? Are we going to require a flying license? Are we going to hold safety inspections of every model flown?

_____________________________

TonyF - Team Horizon, Team BJ Craft, Team Contra Drive, Neu Motors
2010,2009 US Masters Champion,2011 Masters Also-Ran

Hide Signatures

(in reply to smcharg)

Post #: 101

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/12/2012 6:10 PM

TonyF

Posts: 1869
Score: 108
Joined: 12/9/2001
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: Rosamond, CA, USA
Status: offline

And Scott, you are not even quoting the proposed rule correctly. It says this,

6.9(a) – Except when airborne, physically restrained or on the runway, all models shall have any batteries which drive the propeller disconnected from the Electronic Speed Controller and/or motor. This disconnected state must result in a break in the wiring and indication of the disconnected state must be visible at all times to observers.

If it was "disarmed", then I could say having the R/C power off disarms my system. But that is not what the proposal, that you wrote and submitted, says.

_____________________________

TonyF - Team Horizon, Team BJ Craft, Team Contra Drive, Neu Motors
2010,2009 US Masters Champion,2011 Masters Also-Ran

Hide Signatures

(in reply to TonyF)

Post #: 102

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/12/2012 6:16 PM

pattratt

Posts: 553
Score: 100
Joined: 7/13/2007
Last Login: 5/23/2013
From: Humble, TX, USA
Status: offline

Scott

All you had to do is say "Yes" to my post.

It is my guess that I am not the only one that did not understand the actual implications of the rule as written. I know you guys mean well and a statement/rule written as Tony stated is a much better solution. If this rule get's passed by AMA all "HELL" will break out when it's tried to be enforced either at the Nat's or a local event. It is my opinion this will hurt NSRCA.

As for the accident that destroyed an aircraft I have two thoughts:

1. I doubt we have all the facts and full story as to what actually happened.
2. This is a case of "Personal Responsibility" and the resolution to this incident is unknown but I suspect the offending person paid an agreed amount for his mistake and that's how it should be handled. If I trip in the pitts and fall on someone's aircraft and destroy it, are you going to make a rule that states "no person may walk unattended in the pitts. This is exactly the same situtation! "S__T HAPPENS" and no rule is going to stop it! I have seen more mid-airs resulting in uncontrolled aircraft crashing into the pits than I have ever seen ellectric aircraft all of a sudden arm and hit something. Should we make a rule that in AMA Pattern you can have only one aircraft in the air at a time?

I will fight this rule with all available avenues to me and would hope others that feel this way will express themselves and do the same!

Please understand this does not mean I will not come and drink all your beer at a contest!

Dick

Hide Signatures

(in reply to smcharg)

Post #: 103

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 1:50 AM

Mastertech

Posts: 1404
Score: 108
Joined: 11/8/2004
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: Dalzell, SC, USA
Status: online

I want to know just who is going to walk through the pits and enforce this rule?

What is the penalty if we don't meet this silly rule?

As written the only thing we'd need to do is tie the tail down while the model is sitting in the pits.

Again a silly idea.

I truly hope this idiocy gets voted down, at first I agreed is was a good idea, but after reading others opinion I believe this is a completely unnecessary rule.

Maybe something like, "Pilot must demonstrate the eng/motor will instantly come to a zero RPM condition when the transmitter is turned off."

Tim

_____________________________

Be a kid forever, fly models.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to pattratt)

Post #: 104

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 1:54 AM

Tom Miller

Posts: 33
Score: 100
Joined: 6/17/2003
Last Login: 3/16/2013
From: Cornelius, NC, USA
Status: offline

Demonstration that turning off the TX will cause the ESC to go to low rpm or off is only half the battle. The RX needs to be turned off as well as the second part of the demonstration or test.. As we know, many failures happen inside the airplane... rx battery goes dead, for example. My ESC shuts down both ways.

This is a bad proposal.

Tom

Hide Signatures

(in reply to TonyF)

Post #: 105

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 2:36 AM

Mastertech

Posts: 1404
Score: 108
Joined: 11/8/2004
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: Dalzell, SC, USA
Status: online

Hi Tom,

In the second half, as you pointed out, if the esc goes to "cut off" if the on-board battery goes dead this in itself is much safer than an IC powered plane. In the IC example the engine is taking the airplane directly to the crash site at possibly WOT.

I'm of the mind to just leave it alone.

I personally have mine set to go to cut off if either happens along with using the "Throttle Hold" switch to kill the power.

Tim

_____________________________

Be a kid forever, fly models.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Tom Miller)

Post #: 106

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 3:30 AM

nonstoprc

Posts: 2337
Score: 110
Joined: 9/9/2003
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: Central, TX, USA
Status: offline

On the topic of weight limit increase, there are two proposals listed on AMA site: one is for 5200g total weight and the other is for 5500g.

What is going on?

_____________________________

Where facts are few, experts are many.
Perfection is God''''s business.

Hide Signatures

(in reply to Mastertech)

Post #: 107

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 3:46 AM 1 votes

1 votes

grcourtney

Posts: 850
Score: 115
Joined: 4/3/2005
Last Login: 5/22/2013
From: huntsville, AL, USA
Status: offline

Looks like we really don't know what we want and we want anything to make it look like we are doing something........

Gary

Hide Signatures

(in reply to nonstoprc)

Post #: 108

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 4:40 AM

cmoulder

Posts: 2746
Score: 106
Joined: 7/31/2006
Last Login: 5/23/2013
From: Ossining, NY, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: grcourtney

Looks like we really don't know what we want and we want anything to make it look like we are doing something........

Gary

Reminds me of the Monty Python Olympics event... "100-Meter Dash for People with No Sense of Direction"

_____________________________

Bob

Hide Signatures

(in reply to grcourtney)

Post #: 109

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 1:55 PM

J Lachowski

Posts: 818
Score: 100
Joined: 9/2/2003
Last Login: 5/19/2013
From: Bridgewater, NJ, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: nonstoprc

On the topic of weight limit increase, there are two proposals listed on AMA site: one is for 5200g total weight and the other is for 5500g.

What is going on?

Here's the deal. I submitted my proposal long before the NSRCA did theirs. Only reason I submitted it then was because there seemed to be a great deal of discussion pushing no weight limit at all. I felt that that was not the way to go and submitted a compromise that a thought was reasonable. I still think it is better than the NSRCA 5.5kg. I would rather take smaller steps than one big one.

_____________________________

Joe Lachowski
NSRCA 330

Hide Signatures

(in reply to nonstoprc)

Post #: 110

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 4:34 PM

smcharg

Posts: 318
Score: 110
Joined: 8/21/2010
Last Login: 5/23/2013
From: College Station, TX, USA
Status: offline

Any AMA member may submit a rules proposal. They are simply not limited to the proposals that the NSRCA makes. You have until the 15th of March to get in your proposal.

_____________________________

Scott McHarg

Hide Signatures

(in reply to J Lachowski)

Post #: 111

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 5:40 PM

mdjohnson

Posts: 121
Score: 100
Joined: 12/14/2009
Last Login: 12/13/2012
From: Willow Point, BC, CANADA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pattratt

I will fight this rule with all available avenues to me and would hope others that feel this way will express themselves and do the same!

We are debating a safety issue here. If all we do is save the use of one hand or maybe someone's ability to continue his livelyhood in the next twenty years it will be worth it. I have personally seen electric airplanes do things they were not intended to do in regards to throttle movement. You guys are a pretty smart group. There are definately ways to make it work. I use 4mm bullet connectors. I intend to use a blank plastic housing (no connectors) that goes on the ESC side as soon as I disconnect the battery and tie a 5lb fishline to it and hang a flag outside the airplane with "remove before flight" written on it. Canopy will still go on and the CD and all around can see at an instant that the airplane is inert. Easy, cheap and quick. There are many more ways.

While others continue to say this is a silly rule IMHO it is even greater silliness to debate a safety issue. All fine and dandy to say this is a solution waiting for an issue but when someone is severly injured in a future mishap (the old law.....if it can happen it will happen) the guys standing around will mutter......well, maybe it would have been a good idea. Much better to be proactive than reactive.

Like it or not, we are some of the leaders and trend setters at our local fields. Trickle down effect always comes from the people who are looked up to. Because of this rule, and if it is used diligently at the local flying field level, maybe, just maybe a few sport fliers will follow suit and start making sure their electrics are inert and preventing some of the near mishaps that I have witnessed and I'm sure a few of you guys have seen as well.

This is my 2 bits worth on the subject.

Murray Johnson

_____________________________

Never left one up there yet.......

Hide Signatures

(in reply to pattratt)

Post #: 112

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 7:10 PM

TonyF

Posts: 1869
Score: 108
Joined: 12/9/2001
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: Rosamond, CA, USA
Status: offline

It is always easy to wave the safety flag over these issues. I prefer to wave the personal responsibility flag. As I said earlier, if we made a "safety" rule every time we saw somebody do something stupid that causes a hazard, when will it stop? As Dick said earlier, we have all seen the dangers that a mid-air can cause. Yet we continue to send two airplanes up in to the same air space at every single contest, even the Nats.

_____________________________

TonyF - Team Horizon, Team BJ Craft, Team Contra Drive, Neu Motors
2010,2009 US Masters Champion,2011 Masters Also-Ran

Hide Signatures

(in reply to mdjohnson)

Post #: 113

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 7:50 PM

mdjohnson

Posts: 121
Score: 100
Joined: 12/14/2009
Last Login: 12/13/2012
From: Willow Point, BC, CANADA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TonyF

It is always easy to wave the safety flag over these issues. I prefer to wave the personal responsibility flag. As I said earlier, if we made a "safety" rule every time we saw somebody do something stupid that causes a hazard, when will it stop? As Dick said earlier, we have all seen the dangers that a mid-air can cause. Yet we continue to send two airplanes up in to the same air space at every single contest, even the Nats.

I can see your point Tony. You are right, if we made a rule for everything, just like in full scale aviation, no one would ever leave the ground!! This one is an important one though IMHO. I hate new rules as much as the next guy but when I am potentially the victim, it makes me sit up and think! I think of myself as a a personally responsible individual but I must admit I have left transmitters on, airplanes plugged in and a plethora of other "stupid" mistakes. The older I get, the worse it has become. How may personally responsible individuals have done the same? If they were honest with themselves, probably a lot. We are all human and as so are fallible. As I said before, better to be proactive with this and mitigate the human error factor.

My point is that I would much rather prefer via a flag, canopy off or whatever mechanical method is used to confirm that someone is personally responsible enough to disarm his airplane than to assume it. Big difference between a midair at 150 meters and a potential 12 lb, 3 1/2 HP buzzsaw going wild uncontrolled in the pits. All it takes is a small bump ot the throttle stick. It doesn't even take a full throttle application. If the buzzsaw meets flesh, flesh will lose every time. Do you recall a certain Intermediate pilot at the Arvin contest in 2010 who had a machine in the pits go out of control and hit the snow fence? Just by the grace of (insert your favorite deity here) it was pointed away from the pits. I have seen other near disasters of the same makeup.

I hope that others can see the logic of this proposed rule.

Respectfully

Murray Johnson

_____________________________

Never left one up there yet.......

Hide Signatures

(in reply to TonyF)

Post #: 114

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 8:28 PM

TonyF

Posts: 1869
Score: 108
Joined: 12/9/2001
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: Rosamond, CA, USA
Status: offline

Murray, in my opinion the rule proposal as it has been submitted to the AMA is a poor one. I have suggested what I would do regarding this issue. I feel that what you as a member of the NSRCA BOD decided that every contestant at an AMA Pattern event must do is overly burdensome both to comply with and enforce. I feel there are better, simpler ways to address the issue. In my opinion, the NSRCA BOD has rushed these proposals in a last minute attempt to just do something. And in this case it is not a good solution.

We have all talked about incidents we have seen. Why not take the time to try to actually document these incidents, properly analyze the actual causes and then come up with a trial solution? Take the time to present something to the community for a proper evaluation rather then this rather poor survey and modification process that has been executed.

I'm sorry, I just don't think that a good enough job has been done on this particular proposal to put it in to our rules.

_____________________________

TonyF - Team Horizon, Team BJ Craft, Team Contra Drive, Neu Motors
2010,2009 US Masters Champion,2011 Masters Also-Ran

Hide Signatures

(in reply to mdjohnson)

Post #: 115

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 8:43 PM

rileyf3a

Posts: 7
Score: 100
Joined: 3/13/2012
Last Login: 3/22/2012
From: HIghland, CA, USA
Status: offline

Mr. Tony - Why don't you just submit your own proposal then? Seems you have a lot to say, why don't you put it in writing and submit something to the contrary. Actions speak much louder than words.

Riley

Hide Signatures

(in reply to TonyF)

Post #: 116

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 8:59 PM

TonyF

Posts: 1869
Score: 108
Joined: 12/9/2001
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: Rosamond, CA, USA
Status: offline

Riley, I submitted numerous proposals for the last rules cycle. Some passed, others did not. This cycle the NSRCA decided that it would submit proposals that carry the weight of their backing in to the Contest Board. I agree with the majority of what the NSRCA has sent to the Contest Board. I do not agree with this particular part of one of their proposals. I have called my D7 rep and discussed this at length. I am responding here in this forum to the news posted by the NSRCA Secretary on what the results of the survey were and what the NSRCA BOD has decided to do.

I'm sorry if you feel I have not done enough. I thought this was an appropriate place to discuss this issue.

_____________________________

TonyF - Team Horizon, Team BJ Craft, Team Contra Drive, Neu Motors
2010,2009 US Masters Champion,2011 Masters Also-Ran

Hide Signatures

(in reply to rileyf3a)

Post #: 117

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 9:04 PM

shannah

Posts: 845
Score: 105
Joined: 9/6/2004
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: placentia, CA, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mdjohnson

quote:

ORIGINAL: TonyF

It is always easy to wave the safety flag over these issues. I prefer to wave the personal responsibility flag. As I said earlier, if we made a ''safety'' rule every time we saw somebody do something stupid that causes a hazard, when will it stop? As Dick said earlier, we have all seen the dangers that a mid-air can cause. Yet we continue to send two airplanes up in to the same air space at every single contest, even the Nats.

I can see your point Tony. You are right, if we made a rule for everything, just like in full scale aviation, no one would ever leave the ground!! This one is an important one though IMHO. I hate new rules as much as the next guy but when I am potentially the victim, it makes me sit up and think! I think of myself as a a personally responsible individual but I must admit I have left transmitters on, airplanes plugged in and a plethora of other ''stupid'' mistakes. The older I get, the worse it has become. How may personally responsible individuals have done the same? If they were honest with themselves, probably a lot. We are all human and as so are fallible. As I said before, better to be proactive with this and mitigate the human error factor.

My point is that I would much rather prefer via a flag, canopy off or whatever mechanical method is used to confirm that someone is personally responsible enough to disarm his airplane than to assume it. Big difference between a midair at 150 meters and a potential 12 lb, 3 1/2 HP buzzsaw going wild uncontrolled in the pits. All it takes is a small bump ot the throttle stick. It doesn't even take a full throttle application. If the buzzsaw meets flesh, flesh will lose every time. Do you recall a certain Intermediate pilot at the Arvin contest in 2010 who had a machine in the pits go out of control and hit the snow fence? Just by the grace of (insert your favorite deity here) it was pointed away from the pits. I have seen other near disasters of the same makeup.

I hope that others can see the logic of this proposed rule.

Respectfully

Murray Johnson

Hi Murray,

I think the overall intent of the new rule is to increase the safety margin as you state. However, if they just make the rule state that the motor batteries can't be plugged into the ESC in the pits then the goal will have been achieved. The incident you mentioned (I was also there) had nothing to do with an arming plug/switch/connector. A plane was being readied to fly in the pits. It is a case that I also referred to when I stated earlier that all of the "runaway" incidents I have witnessed would have happened with or without an arming plug. So, if you just make the rule state that the motor batteries can't be plugged into the ESC in the pit area then you will have achieved the result. It doesn't matter how you do it. Even with that safeguard, you can still have "runaway" events due to inadvertent throttle stick bumps etc on the runway. We could make it a rule to include a manual electronic arming control on the transmitter along with throttle cut function. That, to me, would do a lot more to enhance the safety of the operation than just focusing on batteries plugged into the ESC in the pit area. That is what I do and I don't feel safe unless I have the two step override on my transmitter (along with a fail safe setting that disarms my ESC). As a rule, I don't plug my batteries into the ESC in the pit area at a contest. I also don't arm my ESC with my transmitter and I don't disable my throttle cut until the plane is on the runway. I've seen many-a glow pattern plane and IMAC plane go errant while sitting on the runway/taxiway after landing at contests. Mandating a transmitter manually activated motor kill function of some type would have eliminated most of those events.

I agree with Tony on this rule proposal, it seems to be rather hastily put together and it isn't really addressing the issue. I'm one of those that clicked Yes on the proposal before I actually thought about it. I had no way to go in and update my vote and, after all, it was a survey not a formal ballot. Once again, after thinking about this, it doesn't do much to address any overall safety issue. The real issue is that you need to have proper handling procedures at contests and you need to make certain that guys have the necessary failsafe and overrides on their systems. Sticking a plug on your plane doesn't do that.

_____________________________

Team BJCraft

Hide Signatures

(in reply to mdjohnson)

Post #: 118

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 10:09 PM

rileyf3a

Posts: 7
Score: 100
Joined: 3/13/2012
Last Login: 3/22/2012
From: HIghland, CA, USA
Status: offline

Steve and Mr. Tony - I realize I'm fairly new to all this here in America and I, just like a lot of the world, know who you are and I have the utmost respect for both of you. I have looked over this proposal and I really see no difference between what you propose and what has been submitted to the AMA aside from it must be visible to observers. The NSRCA appears to have taken a requirement out of what was in the survey. To me, being from Egypt, I see little difference and my spoken english is not so good. I also see a lot of discussion but no action and I see the same few people upset with this. No one has submitted anything to the contrary to AMA. Please for me to understand, could you explain for me?

Riley

Hide Signatures

(in reply to shannah)

Post #: 119

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 10:19 PM

shannah

Posts: 845
Score: 105
Joined: 9/6/2004
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: placentia, CA, USA
Status: offline

Yes, a big difference is the part about making the connection visible.

I don't see a need to submit a proposal because I think things are fine the way they are.

A proposal can be withdrawn or amended.

_____________________________

Team BJCraft

Hide Signatures

(in reply to rileyf3a)

Post #: 120

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 10:25 PM

rileyf3a

Posts: 7
Score: 100
Joined: 3/13/2012
Last Login: 3/22/2012
From: HIghland, CA, USA
Status: offline

Mr. Steve - Thank you but I am not understanding. Would it not be sufficient then in order to meet this proposal for an observer to walk by and request removal of your canopy to prove your batteries are disconnected? Forgive me, Americans have a different view of things. My view is that if I am asked to show my batteries are disconnected, I simply show them. It is of no consequence or hassle as you say. This rule seems more of a police by self more than a problem that will have to be solved by officials maybe a guideline as it were. I see how this would also protect the AMA from potential insurance claims as well.

Riley

Hide Signatures

(in reply to shannah)

Post #: 121

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 10:26 PM

shannah

Posts: 845
Score: 105
Joined: 9/6/2004
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: placentia, CA, USA
Status: offline

I should also add that there are many things that are done at a contest that are unwritten rules and are stated by the CD. Simple reminders can be given to everyone that they shouldn't arm their packs in the pits, if so desired by the CD. Your peers at the event will help to remind you if you go astray. We don't need to over complicate this or, worse yet, garner a false sense of security from mandates that don't solve the root cause of the perceived problem.

_____________________________

Team BJCraft

Hide Signatures

(in reply to shannah)

Post #: 122

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 10:46 PM

rileyf3a

Posts: 7
Score: 100
Joined: 3/13/2012
Last Login: 3/22/2012
From: HIghland, CA, USA
Status: offline

Mr. Everette - I am new to America but not to pattern. I am offended after offering my respect to Mr. Steve and Mr. Tony you would say such things. I see many posts where you, who are just like me, take people to task. I am trying to understand this and I will speak what I have to say regardless of what you feel about me. Mr. Steve has been kind enough to open up dialogue with me and is helping me to get understanding.

As far as opposition, I believe I know exactly how much opposition there is based on the survey which appears to be identical to those who support it. This was also prior to the submitted proposal which removed requirements. If you will recall, the complaint originally was about the requirement of an arming plug. Now, it is not, it is something different. I see very little difference in what was submitted compared to Mr. Tony and Mr. Steve's ideas. If I can help find some peace, then it is my prerogative to do so. I show my respect when that respect is given which doesn't seem to be known by you as evident in many other posts. Mr. Steve and Mr. Tony have begun to explain their side and I am asking for more information so that I may form a valued opinion of my own without a bully such as yourself.

Riley

Hide Signatures

(in reply to wattsup)

Post #: 123

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/13/2012 11:00 PM

rileyf3a

Posts: 7
Score: 100
Joined: 3/13/2012
Last Login: 3/22/2012
From: HIghland, CA, USA
Status: offline

I begin to see why there is so much rift here. Is that guy a real person?? Mr. Steve and Mr. Tony, if we could continue please and with all due respect. My intention is not to task you but to understand.

Riley

Hide Signatures

(in reply to wattsup)

Post #: 124

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available - 3/14/2012 12:07 AM

CGRetired

Posts: 8939
Score: 221
Joined: 9/14/2004
Last Login: 5/24/2013
From: Galloway, NJ, USA
Status: offline

Enough. Closing it down.

CGr.

_____________________________

Skylark 70 - OS .75 AX; Excelleron 90 - OS 1.20 AX; Venus II - OS 1.20 AX; And, I still fly my trainer, Hanger 9 Alpha - OS .46 FX! Some electrics. Airtronics RD8000 - Spektrum DX7 - DX6i. AMA 705964.
Semper Paratus!

Hide Signatures

(in reply to wattsup)

Post #: 125

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 next > >>

All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> Pattern Universe - RC Pattern Flying >> RC Pattern Flying >> RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 next > >>

Jump to:

Google

Search | Marketplace | Event Calendar | Local Clubs | Magazine | Product Ratings | New Products | Discussion Forums

Photo Gallery | Instructor Search | Field|Track|Marina Search

Advertisers | Hobby Vendor Resources | Rate Manufacturers | Sign In/Sign Up

SITE MAP! : : FORUM RULES

RC Universe is a service of Internet Brands, Inc. Copyright © 2001-2013.

Charities we support that also need your help
Yorkie Rescue | Humane Society | ASPCA | Crohn's-Colitis America

2.658RCU1