RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

Thanks Scott,

I know serving as an NSRCA rep is a thankless job. I applaud those that do.

I hope your's and Don's post will allow more non-Nsrca members understand how they can vote in this poll.

I wonder how the poll result would differ if one was placed here on RCU vs the one on NSRCA.

I think most of the proposals will be fine, they're not what I wanted but they're close enough.

These rules are only going to affect one contest a year anyway that most pattern fliers will never attend.

I still believe that FAI-F3A shouldn't even be mentioned in the rule book as we have zero control over it yet we let it control us nearly 100%.

Why we allow the FAI to dicate what we do in our pattern world is beyond me.

Oh that's right, one contest for 3 guys every other year somewhere in the world.


Tim

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

Hmmmm, no proposal requiring an external fuselage mounted kill device on IC motors?;)

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

Scott, thanks for the clarification. I now have the ability to log-in to the NSRCA site but so far the system will not allow me to take the survey. Any suggestions? Everette

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

From the initial post announcing the survey the paragraph below is copied.

"The NSRCA BoD encourages your support in responding to the survey as the changes are believed to be appropriate for the continued growth and sustainment of AMA pattern."

This says that the board believes the changes are appropriate for..... Is this truely how the NSRCA borad of directors feels? They are actually in favor of these unnecessary and in one case ridiculous ideas? As a past board memeber I find that very difficult to believe.

Dan

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

Scott,

OK, now that I read your response about the failsafe, gotta agree on that one. I didn't think about the receiver continuing to give a valid signal to the ESC. In fact, I need to check my plane as well and change the failsafe signal to the throttle.
.
I think I have a better way to confirm that a plane is not "hot" than requiring an arming plug. Virtually all (I'd hazard to say 100%) electric planes have their canopy on the top of the airplane. How about making a rule to require electic planes to leave their canopy off while in the pits and the ESC plug exposed for visual inspection? If you take two 1/4" balsa sticks and a rubber band, you can clamp the ESC plug wires between them and hold the plug up and out of the fuselage so that anyone within 50 feet can see that the plane is "safe". Then only allow guys to put batteries in the plane when inside the ready box or in the pits (for maintenance) while the plane is under positive control. After landing, the caller must immediately remove the canopy and disconnect the batteries when clear of the runway. Once the plane is returned to the pits, all motor batteries are removed and the ESC plug displayed. If anyone has gone to a public shooting range, this is the same concept as using a chamber flag.
.
As for the name calling. . . . Here ya go, Scott!!! . . .

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

.
I did a quick mock-up in my garage. Of course, the production versions won't be balsa but something more "pattern specific", like Carbon Fiber or Platinum plated Titanium. . .
.

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

"Motor batteries shall not be connected until your told by the line director you're ready to fly and on the clock."

This puts you on the same clock as the IC guys in the 3 minute rule.

Any rule we come up with will never be 100% idiot proof. There will be accidents no matter what system we use.

I've used the kill switch to disarm my for years now, even on my IC engines. Works well for me.

Maybe adopt the rule used at Joe Nall, with engine running turn the transmitter off and the engine/motor must stop instantly. If it fails to do this you don't get to fly.

So many ways to skin this cat.

Tim

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

Every time we make something idiot proof, nature makes a better idiot.


Rob

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

Maybe bring a restrain device to the Nats and restrain the plane next on the queue. Then the helper will take the plane to the start line and I do not see a difference between e-powered and IC-powered planes from this point on.

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

Can anyone show me in any other rules regarding electric models where an external arming plug is required? Because off the top of my head I don't know of a single one. It seems to me that this is a rule in search of a problem that doesn't really exist. Have there been some instances where electrics have had runaways? Sure, but it is far from a rampant problem. Also, this rule should only be tied together with the weight increase. If you're going to make another requirement for equipment in an electric model that does not exist in any other form of propulsion then you need to give it the leeway in weight. Without a weight increase there are probably models that will be obsoleted by this rule. And I'll just throw this one out there. When do you install the arming plug? In D-7 a lot of guys wait to install it until after the model is carried out, set on the runway and lined up. Then they put the plug in. Makes for a lengthy time when the model and the helper are occupying the runway, creating a hazard.

I can tell you with my equipment I currently have an external arming switch. It's called the radio on/off switch. If it's off, the motor can't come on. When I turn it on, the airplane is armed. At the end of a flight, I turn that switch off and the motor can't come on, disarming the model. I personally feel removing the switch to make weight is far more dangerous then not having an external arming plug.

BTW, Joe's comment of an external kill device for an IC is not without examples. At the practice field for the Nats in 2009 I saw an IC plane that was being carried out have a battery failure right after the pilot gave it full power to check the needle. The model stayed at full power and it was a real problem to shut it off, what with how it was cowled in.

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

But but but but Tony, it's required by FAI. :D

Tim

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

Where in the FAI sporting code did you see that?

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

Oh, yea, I forgot!

I would like to ask what is inherently more dangerous about a pattern contest or a pattern flight line then a regular club field? Because the proposal requiring an external arming plug goes above and beyond what the AMA General Regulations and the AMA Safety Code require. Why does the NSRCA BOD feel that the RC Aerobatics event must require a safety device that the AMA itself does not feel the need to mandate in it's Safety Code?

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

.
The restraining device is called "Your Caller" . .
.

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

I don't believe it is...only that you must have your radio on before you power up your motor, and only after given the start signal.

If it is required, I am unable to find any reference of it in the sporting code that was just released.

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

During the time window in which your previous pilot lands and you ready the plane ( including connect the batteries to ESC), the caller normally does not hold your plane. With the arming switch in off position, the plane is power less. But if there is no arming switch and the batteries are connected to esc, I am proposing to use a restrain device to hold the plane in place, instead of the required arming switch.

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

Arming switch- although I do not agree on having an external arming device ( looks pretty ugly) I do agree on demonstrating the fail safe feature on a model. I believe this should be a required safety feature at a contest or even the flying field. Why do I say this ? Just the fact that after being a modeler for most of my life, a couple weeks ago I turned off my transmitter without reaizing that my electric 2 meter plane was still on and the batteries connected. It went to full power, rolled fwd 5 feet and hit a model stand, destroying itself in the proccess... It never occured to me to TEST the failsafe. Lost a beautiful plane and thank God that no one was hurt as I always point the nose away from the pits after every flight.

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

Oh Snap!!!!!!!!!!!!

I was going off a conversation at the last Nats that said that was a coming rule.

"The propulsion device must fully shut off or idle at the moment the RC signal failure occurs."

FAI 5.1.2

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

I agree that the fail safe on a radio, if available, should be set properly. Seems the prudent thing to do. I just don't feel that the NSRCA needs to propose safety rules above and beyond what the AMA feels are necessary.

Along with some other offices, I am the current Safety Officer for my local club. If I proposed a regulation every time I saw somebody do something stupid, by accident, we would soon have a 400 page set of Field Regulations. Are we headed in that direction for RC Aerobatics?

Just so everyone knows, I can't count to ten using both my hands. I lost the little finger on my left hand back in 1992 from a starting accident with a YS 1.20. So I am not insensitive to the damage our toy planes can do. But I am really opposed to saddling unnecessary regulations on to our event.

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

Hi Tony, Based on your last sentence in post #44 above, would you consider running for the soon to be vacated office of U.S. Congressman in your District? As you know from the past, I've always felt you had the ability to "give lessons"! Perhaps this is another golden opportunity for the conservative agenda. Like you, I really don't know how many more rules and regulations the
pattern community can stand! Your "caller" (Barkley) could be your Chief of Staff and unlike others, I'm sure we could find you an honest campaign chairman. Wish you the best, Everette

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

Steve,
The only reference that the FAISporting codesays about connecting your battery is found here:

5.1.11. Oraganization for Radio Controlled Aerobatics (page 16)
"For electric power models, the electric power circuit(s) must not be physically connected, before the starting time is begun, and must be phyiscally disconnected immediately after landing."

That's all that I found and this is how it was done that last years NATS in 2011.

Matt Kimbro

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

Seems to me the NSRCA is mandating a solution to meet the FAI requirement. As I read the FAI rule, a set-up like Keith showed is fully FAI compliant.


Rob

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

Hi Matt
That's how I read it as well. That's also how it was done at the WC. The only guy I saw with an external arming plug was Meyer. That's probably because he needed every second available to meet the time limit.

They have a statement that says that when motor/engine must turn off or idle when the signal from the transmitter is lost. That pretty well accomplishes the task.

I like the idea of requiring people to verify their failsafe is correct, that makes sense no matter what powerplant you use. The only times I've seen incidents they were due to inadvertent throttle stick movement (bump, drop, etc) after the TX was on and the plane was armed. To prevent this kind of thing I use a double safety system on my TX. I use the left slider on the TX to drop the throttle down below the arming point and I use the throttle cut function to render the throttle stick useless. I verify everything is in the off position, turn on the TX, turn on the plane, plug in the batts, flip my throttle cut off then advance the slider to arm the system. I flip the kill switch back on when the guy walks my plane out and also after I land. I only have the kill switch off when I am ready to fly.

If guys want to use an external arming plug then that's great. It totally makes sense if you don't have an easy way to get to the batteries. I used it when I had a screw-on canopy. If you only have belly pan access to the batts then it really makes sense as well. Other wise, its just as easy to pop off the canopy. If AMA wants to impose it then that's fine, but don't overlay a rule on top of FAI. I initially supported the idea of an external arming plug because there are a lot of guys that are still learning electric and it can help speed things up in contests and keep things safe. But after thinking about it I think there are better ways to achieve the results and also improve the overall safety (like doing what I described).

Steve

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

I tried this theory out the other day and my motor went to full throttle. I have what I think is the correct settings in my FAILSAFE menu. I was thinking since the throttle setting has to be reversed (Castle ESC) maybe I need to set it to 100% ??? anyone have any ideas ? It's a Futaba 8FG Tx.

RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
 

Hi Randy

Castle is backwards on the throttle for Futaba. So, try reversing it on your failsafe setting. Do what is required in order to get it to shut off when you turn off the TX.