I do have to plead guilty as charged because I believe my radio HAS a throttle and it is NOT on a two position switch, I am well known for bolting on more power than the 'book' calls for. As an example, the current bird was designed around a G-62 and it is going to get a 3W-75 but there have been some structural adds made to reduce the risk.
Jim,
Being alittle hypocritical here aren't we??? You bash the turbine guys for not following the rules, but you break them yourself. So I guess that rules don't apply to you but should apply to the rest of us?
Don't see my logic? Don't think you have broken a rule? Well the manufacturer recommends an engine range for you so in essence he has designed an airframe with a particular structural limitation in mind. It doesn't matter that you have reinforced that airplane YOU disregarded the manufacturers recommended engine range for the model. I am just trying to see how your logic in this matter is ANY different from my logic in turbine related matters.
I'm with Ghost Rider on this one, BUT I want to see you explain your rationale when YOU are trying to tell ME that MY airplanes are not worthy of more power. If you are flying ARF's or anything else for that matter the responsibility for safe operations lies ultimately in YOUR hands not the hands of the AMA or ANYONE else. WHY should the AMA have to come up with rules and regulations to try and cover YOU or ME for that matter?