heh, I could just imagine
'But officer, the balsa weighed a lot less before it soaked up all that blood'

Imagine what?

In general larger models fly better than smaller models. They tend to be more stable, less affected by wind, less "touchy" on takeoff and landing. Oh, there are exceptions, but there are with everything. I've always favored the larger end of "small" models (i.e., 60" wingspans and up) although my druthers and my transportation realities are somewhat at odds these days - hard to fit a 6'+ single piece wing in a Honda Civic. My list of planned acquisitions includes a fair share of 1/4 and 1/3 scale subjects. May take a few years, but I'm (semi)patient.

I'm a member of the club that voted to not allow experimental aircraft even with a waiver. The reason for it was that the allowed flight area of our field is fairly narrow because of recreational areas nearby, and the bigger planes would be cramped to stay within it. There were no issues with the planes themselves or the pilots who fly them, simply the practical matter than big models needs lots of space and we don't have it.

I have been reading the response to the weight limit. Some of the answers shocked me, that some of you would lie about the weight of your plane to keep from going through the wavier process. The wavier is not hard to obtain and is for everyones safety, including yours. it never hurts to have a" qualified inspector to look overyour plane.make sure of your flying ability. My thought is the only pilots who might object to these requirements might not meet the criteria needed for the wavier. My personal opinion is A.M.A. has let the wieght exemption get way out of hand. But, that just my opinion.Smitty

Large Scale, my suggestion would be to ask Wendell, he will tell you exactly what you need to do as he has many hours of building and flying time with the B-17. A plane such as yours is just about going to come out overweight.

I'm sorry but I have to take exception to your stated reason for not allowing experimental aircraft over 55 pounds to fly at your field. We did the test flights with our 42% 75# Super Decathlon at your field to obtain the waiver. This was done with club permission and before the vote was taken. At no time did we fly near the picnic area or over people. The video is on YouTube.

Just because an airplane is big doesn't mean that it can't be flown in a relative narrow area. I have flown many times at your field and on many occasions have observed the fast turbine powered jets covering far more area than the area where we flew the Super Decathlon. I've seen many small planes fly over the picnic area and in some cases go down in that area as well as the lake just beyond the picnic area. I don't think you have banned jets and small airplanes.

Big simply does not mean that there is no way to control where the plane flies. I can takeoff the SD before the end of your runway make two turns to the left and come right back down the runway never getting more than 100' from the runway. Any competent pilot with a really big plane can do the same.

I really respect and like the people who run your club, I just happen to think this was an ill conceived rule and would like to see it repealed when you move to your new field.

Well right or wrong, that's the reason the rule was made and it was via a unanimous vote. I'm in full agreement with you that there are pilots of smaller planes that go past our allowed airspace and that big plane pilots could stay within it. But that's the rule that was made so we follow it or seek to change it. Much appreciation for your kind words about the club, and hopefully our new facility (if it ever actually gets finished) will have a more generous flight area.