ORIGINAL: TonyF
I can't make heads or tails out of the survey results posted here. And I really can't understand or see this talk about "What" and "How". Something about that discussion is going right over my head I guess. It still looks to me that the NSRCA BOD decided that the majority of pattern fliers flying electric models are not responsible enough to operate them safely and they are dictating some process that I practically guarantee is not done at the majority of practice fields and will only cause difficulties if anyone attempts to enforce this Safety rule at an event.
While I feel that the rest of the proposals are good, I really feel that this arming rule is going too far.
The "what" is better known as a "requirement". The "how" is, for lack of a better way of saying it,
how you meet the requirement. One of the things you are taught to avoid in engineering when specifying what a system must do is letting
your concept of the implementation creep into the requirement. That's what you saw happen with the original rule proposal for the arming switch.Now, it's up to
you how tomeet the requirement if the rule passes.