ORIGINAL: NdFrSpeed
Jim
Your partly wrong with the weight,I think the weight limit should be rasied is because right now if you build a twin turbine aircraft ,and there are more and more guys staring to build these,totally empty,its real hard to get the plane much under 44lbs,more like 46 to 48 for a safe aircraft,and it would be nice to carry enough fuel for more than a 3 minute flite.There should allmost be two weight limits,one for single enigne ,and one for twin engine.
NdFrSpeed
GIVE ME A BREAK!
Let me repeat what I SAID and please read more than just the first two sentences instead of trying to put words in my mouth! In fact, read the ENTIRE paragraph! I have even put in a space to break out the part of what I said that you seem to have ignored.
ORIGINAL: Jim Branaum
SNIP
I have yet to see a single suggestion except for the AMA EC to go away and leave the turbine guys alone. I am beginning to think that if we went to the FAI weight limits (around 34 pounds IIRC) and required all sanctioned turbine events to be at APPROVED TURBINE fields (by the AMA and to a standard - no houses or trees within a 1/4 or 1/2 mile circle or so), I might begin to be comfortable enough to try to sell that approach.
However, it seems that you guys want more fuel (read that as WEIGHT). So instead of telling me how much I don't know, WRITE SOME EFFECTIVE RULES TO GOVERN TURBINE OPERATIONS THAT YOU WILL ENFORCE! Actually, that is what I thought the TRC (with JPO guys) DID. So what is the problem if the EC wants to look over what appears to be conflicting information? That IS what has fired this mess up.
SNIP