Obviously, with anything over 0.0499 cid being class A we are already not limiting this forum to 1/8A and 1/2A. And while an airplane powered with a 0.46 cid engine is out of place here, should we have a definite limit? This is not to rule out illustrations of larger planes to expand or clarify a point, but rather an unofficial limit on engine size for the main part of the thread.

If you don't like any of the choices I've given let's have your proposal in a post, and please, reasons. The 0.20 2c and 0.30 4c seem to be where we generally are.

The "Official" limit for class "A" is 0.15 2c and 0.25 4c.

And we'll always allow the electric players to come see what real fliers are doing. Haw.

Bill.

I think .25 and below sounds fair.
It might help to put the engine size in the forum title because many new people don't have any idea what 1/2 A means.

I agree with the limit at .25 cid. Although a lot of modelers here are indeed guilty of taking .10 size planes and putting .25s on them and wonder why they fly like a brick and end up a 'balsa fountain' (borrowed phrase) on the field or in the woods.

There is indeed a shortage of good kits below .20cid. that don't cost you your first born.
I think the builders (kit, plan and scratch) exchanging ideas, plans, etc. and tips here is what it is all about.
My nickel; My opinion..
Off the soapbox, now...

Littlefly

I think we have to consider the spirit of this form, it's more about small model then it is about 1/2A, so let's go with the "SMALL" movement's thinking and limit it to 25, with 30 for four strokers and if the "E" guys want to join in, allow up to 400. After all, I took that silent pledge years ago! Speaking about "SMALL", what's happened to that site, it was most enjoyable.

These forms have allowed us to all belong to one big club world wide. So, same as a club, talk to the guys with other interests by checking out their forms as well. Lots can be learned from them that apply to our little models.

fly SMALL, have a BALL

I agree with the idea of .049 to .25 with "justifiable" exceptions. It's been great to glean ideas form folks with special interest and expertice in small aircraft.

I agree with gold guy about the small idea. How about having a small forum with a 1/2A sub forum. Just a thought.

As the forum name implies, 1/2A means .050 and smaller. If some people don't know what 1/2A means, as Lynn S points out, why confuse them further? If anything larger than .050 is permitted, then Legend4 has the best idea. Jim

Greetings all, I also like the idea of .25 and below being good to go on this forum. I would not like to see the "1/2a" taken out of the forum name though. I think it is how people find us, and it sets us as a distinct entity. This is the only board on the web (to my knowledge) that is titled as 1/2a. Lets not lose that.


Randy (Digger) Birt

Digger- 1/2 A could still be included in the title also.

I would think if you had a forum limited to just 1/2 A there would be very few post or less than we have now. Just my .02 cents.
Lynn

So far, I have the lone vote for .15 cid limitation, but have no opposition whatsoever to the .25 limit.

I follow this forum primarily because of its attention to smaller aircraft and the expertise of the members in solving problems associated with small engines and small planes. As Bill pointed out, the .061 and .074 Norvels have already taken us out of the 1/2A class.

I do feel that 1/2A in the title gives the forum a designation separate from the other forums and should be retained -- the forum description "These are the small ones..." might be modified to reflect that discussions relative to larger models are also welcome -- and perhaps indicating that most members are flying models with wingspans under 48".

Regards,

Andrew

I voted for up to .10 cid limitation, not that I have anything against the larger modelers, nor do I wish to see them turned away. But, like Andrew said I follow the forum because of the interest in the /2A class, and expertise of the like-minded people here.
I guess I just wonder if questions regarding models with engines greater than .10 or .15 cid are really best answered here. Thats why the other forums are here.
I also wonder if some of the questions regarding larger models don't drop into the 1/2A forum because its top on the list of forums.
Anyway, good times, no hard feelings I don't want to see anyone looking for answers turned away.
--Derek

Well...

As I said to start with, this is completely unofficial, mainly curiosity on my part.

What I don't understand is having more than 160 views and only 21 votes.

Bill.

Perhaps the discrepancy between votes and views is because some of us lurkers don't feel qualified to vote?

-Rick, the utter newbie, who's first power plane will just _barely_ fall into the seemingly accepted guidelines of this forum at .30ci 4s.

welll i don't come here often but i do fly 1/2a. if its called 1/2a, then i say lets keep it 1/2a!! otherwise you get a "1/2a forum with a mix of a and whatever else anybody else wants to throw in" 1/2a requires different building skills, different flying skills and heck even a different frame of mind!!

thats my nickels worth!

john

I say go up to .40,, after that is big planes..technically we (being 1/2a) would have to stop allowing posts after .074 right? and a forum from .074 to .10, then .15 to .25 or .32 would be redundant, so from .010 to .40 should handle it well,, also a lot of .40 talk is trainer stuff anyway....oh and William.. there are lots of posts where you (anyone) asks a simple question and 50 people look at it but no one answers it... its the nature of the beast so to speak...Rog

IMO this site has been self moderated and well done at that. Look at how many posts involve larger than "1/2A" engines/planes.... not too many huh?

I dont think any change is needed. And I especially dont think anyone asking about, say, a Cox 09 or similar, should be booted out to another forum where the rest of the guys will go "Huh?"

Just my opinion but why change it if it isnt broken?

Andrew J Coholic

Do we really have a problem here? I agree with 'ajcoholic'.Leave the name the way it stands. Some times we get a weird post but it is ignored.If it aint broke dont fix it.

AndrewJ:

As I said, nothing official. And I suppose just as much to find out what size people here were playing with as to ask aboout a limit.

And Roger:

The question about the views/votes ratio was rhetorical. Didn't expect a serious answer.

Bill.

I don't really post a whole lot in this here forum, so my voice is a small one, but I have to agree with ajcoholic--if it ain't broke don't fix it. I have a variety of powerplants ranging from GWS ips electric drives up to a fox .40. When I have questions on anything .25 or smaller, I come here first and look around. IMHO, the SMALL credo does well to cover our situation here.
And, Digger, FWIW, RCGROUPS has a 1/2a forum now, but this one is FAR more active.

I completely agree with ajcoholic:

I like to fly and build 1/2a planes, but I understand that not everyone powers their 1/2a plane with a 1/2a engines.. Example: My Ace Whizard is powered by a Cox .049, but I also have a Herr Starcruiser (also a 1/2a plane) has a Norvel .061 mounted on it (even though I'm too scared to fly the darn thing!) I still consider this 1/2a group to be the place to ask questions about both planes and both engines. Also, a lot of guys power their 1/2a warbirds with Norvel .074 engines.. But, I still see these planes to be 1/2a.

I found this forum when looking for 1/2a sites, so I think if we changed the name, a lot of new people that are interested in 1/2a stuff would have a harder time finding the forum. Personally, I see engines like OS .10's and bigger to be another size all together, but I guess if you can fit one on a 1/2a plane, then there you go! Maybe if we HAD to define the aircraft that will be covered in this group, we could go by plane weight or size? I would guess that 32oz would be the upper limit, but I could be too much of a newbie to decide that.

I don't know.. I know this is an informal poll, but my vote is for keeping this group how it already is..

Jason

I think that 1/8- 1/2A should mean anything smaller than A (.15). As many other have said it; Planes which are often designated as 1/2A are often powered by larger and smaller powerplants. However Planes designed for .15-.30 engines have more in common to .40 size planes than 1/2A.
I would prefer a forum spanning the A-.35 size planes (which I enjoy too). The topics with these planes would result in different answers.

I voted for "None of the above". If the forum is limited to .049 and under, then a seperate SMALL forum should be created. If not, then maybe this should renamed as a small forum, as there are currently no other forums on RCU for discussing small planes.

Personally, I would like to see a small forum with .26 and under or electric equivalent and a seperate 1/2A forum allowing up to .09 glow only. Or, as Legend4 suggested, a 1/2A sub forum.

Out of curiosity, how do 4-stroke engines fit into the official convention, if you will... is an OS20 four-stroke technically a "B" motor due to its .20ci displacement, or (as the poll options seems to imply) do they (4-strokes) get special dispensation?

Rick Lindsey:

The classic AMA relation 4c to 2c is 4c displacement times 0.6 gives the rating used. In other words, a 1.20 4c is considered to be equivalent to a 0.72 2c engine.

I tried to follow that pretty closely when I posted the poll, but i did fudge a bit in some places.

Bill.

didnt really mean anything with my answer Bill, I just have noticed lots of posts that either no one knows the answer, or wants to comment, so they just go to the bottom of the page and fade out even though 100 people stop to look at them,,Rog