Why was it introduced? Why the arbitrary 2-meter limit?

I understand that it followed FAI, but why?

My point being, some people feel that the weight rule is antiquated and pointless because they have to spend a little extra time or money to conform to it. It is seen as an imposition and to continue to follow it promotes the herd mentality. I have made my stance on the weight rule known in the other thread, so I’m going to play devil’s advocate.

Since the reasoning for the genesis of the weight rule seems to be cloaked in ambiguity, and the best explanation that has been given is that it just was; why don’t we look at eliminating the size rule? After all, it’s been done that way for years. I’ve been looking for an excuse to sell my soul and every worldly possession to build a Dalton Extra 300 MEL with a DA200 anyway, so if I could fly it more by flying it legally in a pattern contest; that would be sweet.

Why is the weight rule less important than the size rule?

Scott, I would like some more information in your post 193. I would like to know which countries (specifically in Europe and Asia) have passed such rules. If possible, I would like to see a report from the aerobatic SIGs of each country that details:

1. When they raised their weight limit.
2. Why they raised their weight limit.
3. What ramifications they have seen, if any, from raising the weight limit.
4. Some sort of gauge of how much it has helped their sport; locally and nationally. I would envision this as being a graph showing the number of participants from events (excluding DNFs), and contrasting that with the numbers post-increase. I think a trend of several years prior to the weight increase’s introduction would show a good trend.

The purpose of this is to see if it actually helps gain an appreciable amount of participation from people in lower classes, or if it’s just water cooler banter amongst the peanut gallery and those who either don’t go to contests, or fly two rounds and leave.

My personal history will tell my feelings quite well. I’ve never had a ton of money to spend on the hobby, and I didn’t receive really any help from my parents when I was living at home. There is no way in the world that I could dole out the money that most ARFs command these days, not to mention not really being able to afford a kit recently. I can’t/couldn’t afford to build an airplane to conform to increasingly strict rules that require a different airplane, truthfully. That being said, I did have a rather large benefactor that helped me get into the hobby; Joey Hayes. We worked out a deal for his Partner that allowed me to start flying pattern. I flew that airplane from my first contest in Sportsman all the way through to my first several Masters contests several years later. This included two Nats participations. I honestly would probably still be flying it if I hadn’t lost it due to a battery issue (owner/operator induced).

The resale value of anything is drastically less, from what I’ve seen and experience, than what one pays for something. You can lose quite a bit of money selling an airplane to try and fund a newer one, and further be in the hole if you are upgrading. I could not do that. I can, however, be smart and put in the legwork ahead of time and have an airplane and equipment that will work for what I need it to and last me. Complaining about having to buy different batteries because they didn’t work for you because they were too heavy is a bit like complaining that you bought a Telemaster and are mad because you expected to be able to fly pattern with it.

For those that want to interject something about my whining about sponsorship dollars/support, save it. Not interested in that discussion and I promise you I have more facts to argue my case than anyone could possibly have conjectures.

In any case, if someone can answer the question of why the two-meter rule was made; a tangible, real reason why (akin to Keith’s explanation, which made me chuckle), and if the information that I requested regarding other country’s experiences with weight increase can be answered, maybe I will be able to see that I was wrong all along and that increasing the weight will contribute to the continued health of pattern. Honestly, I would not be opposed to checking those sources myself, and I would be happy to compile a report for presentation.

Until then, I will still see it as the same small group of folks that claim to not have a problem making weight, but are simply concerned modelers. I have my opinions, and many, more experienced modelers whom I truly respect and look up to, share these same opinions. I am more than happy to be proven wrong.