NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
03-29-2012, 03:29 PM
#276
RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
I have not followed this thread closely however I could not help notice the amount of emotion which is being generated about this particular issue. Tha fact that this is an AMA matter then it really isnt any of my business to comment as I live in another country however I dont understand why the AMA simply cannot raise it's weight limits by say 5% which would probably allow most of the 2x2m meter models which are slightly over weight to compete. I would think more than 90% of overweight cases would fall within this bracket. As for the models which are heavier then I dont really think it will matter as most of those modellers may not be serious enough or interested enough to compete at the nats. I cannot see any case where raising this limit by 250grams will disadvantage the guy who wants to fly a model which weighs less than 5000 grams (glow, electric or gas). At least if a guy who currently flys F3A wants to compete at the nats with an overweight model he can at least fly in Masters class (assuming this is allowed) were the weight limits could be slightly higher.
Given the current financial climate and the dwindling number of aerobatic flyers we need to do whatever we can to keep the ranks. Everyone benefits if more aeromodellers are involved in Aerobatics!
Just seems like common sense to me -
Peter
Australia
Given the current financial climate and the dwindling number of aerobatic flyers we need to do whatever we can to keep the ranks. Everyone benefits if more aeromodellers are involved in Aerobatics!
Just seems like common sense to me -
Peter
Australia
03-30-2012, 08:56 AM
#277
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ossining,
NY
Posts: 2,819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
ORIGINAL: Mastertech
Would someone please enlighten me to the advantage someone has flying a 12 pound airplane over someone flying a 10.5 airplane?
Would someone please enlighten me to the advantage someone has flying a 12 pound airplane over someone flying a 10.5 airplane?
None, at present.
However, there is a vast difference between permitting a modest weight allowance for the lower classes - which we already have - and institutionalizing an across-the-board, whopping weight increase of 500 grams (almost 18 oz) for all classes, which is an open invitation for more powerful propulsion systems, higher-capacity batteries and new airframe designs. These will, of course, cost more.
Yes, the FAI 5kg weight rule will keep this in check somewhat. But this assumes that FAI is the destination class to which all aspire, when in fact a large majority have only the talent, time, and resources to shoot for a high placing in Masters, which is to a much greater extent the destination class in this country. To think that a 5.5kg allowance would not invite "technology creep" up the ladder to Masters is unrealistic at best.
This all started off with a couple of guys with models a couple of ounces over 5kg. Now we're up near 18 ounces?! Where does it end?
The simple solution would be to extend the current 115g allowance to Masters and be done with it. This would resolve nearly all of the complaints we have seen lately and would not throw the door wide open to a technological race.
And quite frankly, if somebody has attained the skill to fly Masters and can't get his model under 5115g, he needs to seriously re-evaluate his whole equipment situation.
But not to worry. I know that this reasoning - which has been presented before by those with a deep knowledge of Pattern history and far better credentials than mine - isn't going to sway the opinions of those seeking an easy answer.
03-30-2012, 09:33 AM
#278
RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
ORIGINAL: cmoulder
new airframe designs. These will, of course, cost more.
new airframe designs. These will, of course, cost more.
Changing FAI weight rules will for sure impact airplane designs, but I dont see how changing AMA rules would have any impact on airframe designs, outside of those that have the motivation and skill to design and build their own.
Just some thoughts from a nearby outsider
03-30-2012, 11:27 AM
#279
Senior Member
RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
ORIGINAL: cmoulder
None, at present.
However, there is a vast difference between permitting a modest weight allowance for the lower classes - which we already have - and institutionalizing an across-the-board, whopping weight increase of 500 grams (almost 18 oz) for all classes, which is an open invitation for more powerful propulsion systems, higher-capacity batteries and new airframe designs. These will, of course, cost more.
Yes, the FAI 5kg weight rule will keep this in check somewhat. But this assumes that FAI is the destination class to which all aspire, when in fact a large majority have only the talent, time, and resources to shoot for a high placing in Masters, which is to a much greater extent the destination class in this country. To think that a 5.5kg allowance would not invite ''technology creep'' up the ladder to Masters is unrealistic at best.
This all started off with a couple of guys with models a couple of ounces over 5kg. Now we're up near 18 ounces?! Where does it end?
The simple solution would be to extend the current 115g allowance to Masters and be done with it. This would resolve nearly all of the complaints we have seen lately and would not throw the door wide open to a technological race.
And quite frankly, if somebody has attained the skill to fly Masters and can't get his model under 5115g, he needs to seriously re-evaluate his whole equipment situation.
But not to worry. I know that this reasoning - which has been presented before by those with a deep knowledge of Pattern history and far better credentials than mine - isn't going to sway the opinions of those seeking an easy answer.
ORIGINAL: Mastertech
Would someone please enlighten me to the advantage someone has flying a 12 pound airplane over someone flying a 10.5 airplane?
Would someone please enlighten me to the advantage someone has flying a 12 pound airplane over someone flying a 10.5 airplane?
None, at present.
However, there is a vast difference between permitting a modest weight allowance for the lower classes - which we already have - and institutionalizing an across-the-board, whopping weight increase of 500 grams (almost 18 oz) for all classes, which is an open invitation for more powerful propulsion systems, higher-capacity batteries and new airframe designs. These will, of course, cost more.
Yes, the FAI 5kg weight rule will keep this in check somewhat. But this assumes that FAI is the destination class to which all aspire, when in fact a large majority have only the talent, time, and resources to shoot for a high placing in Masters, which is to a much greater extent the destination class in this country. To think that a 5.5kg allowance would not invite ''technology creep'' up the ladder to Masters is unrealistic at best.
This all started off with a couple of guys with models a couple of ounces over 5kg. Now we're up near 18 ounces?! Where does it end?
The simple solution would be to extend the current 115g allowance to Masters and be done with it. This would resolve nearly all of the complaints we have seen lately and would not throw the door wide open to a technological race.
And quite frankly, if somebody has attained the skill to fly Masters and can't get his model under 5115g, he needs to seriously re-evaluate his whole equipment situation.
But not to worry. I know that this reasoning - which has been presented before by those with a deep knowledge of Pattern history and far better credentials than mine - isn't going to sway the opinions of those seeking an easy answer.
03-30-2012, 11:28 AM
#280
RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
ORIGINAL: can773
Who is going to design airframes specifically for AMA Sportsman thru Masters? Would it not make sense for a producer of a pattern kit, to design it to be able to be legal worldwide for a larger sales base? In that case many would fly it under FAI rules which remain at 5kg, so it would make sense to design for that rule set...no?
Who is going to design airframes specifically for AMA Sportsman thru Masters? Would it not make sense for a producer of a pattern kit, to design it to be able to be legal worldwide for a larger sales base? In that case many would fly it under FAI rules which remain at 5kg, so it would make sense to design for that rule set...no?
Chad’s observation hits the preverbal nail directly on the head in my opinion.
03-30-2012, 11:34 AM
#281
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (1)
RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
ORIGINAL: rcprecision
Chad’s observation hits the preverbal nail directly on the head in my opinion.
ORIGINAL: can773
Who is going to design airframes specifically for AMA Sportsman thru Masters? Would it not make sense for a producer of a pattern kit, to design it to be able to be legal worldwide for a larger sales base? In that case many would fly it under FAI rules which remain at 5kg, so it would make sense to design for that rule set...no?
Who is going to design airframes specifically for AMA Sportsman thru Masters? Would it not make sense for a producer of a pattern kit, to design it to be able to be legal worldwide for a larger sales base? In that case many would fly it under FAI rules which remain at 5kg, so it would make sense to design for that rule set...no?
Chad’s observation hits the preverbal nail directly on the head in my opinion.
<br type="_moz" />
03-30-2012, 04:03 PM
#282
RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
ORIGINAL: can773
Who is going to design airframes specifically for AMA Sportsman thru Masters?
Who is going to design airframes specifically for AMA Sportsman thru Masters?
03-30-2012, 05:06 PM
#283
RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
I guess one may not even need to get a new airframe to take the advantage. One could simply get a new pair of wings with larger area to provide extra lift for the added weight. It depends on how much extra weight is allowed.
03-30-2012, 09:23 PM
#284
Senior Member
My Feedback: (25)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
Then you get into issues of pushing the size limit, insufficient tail volume/possible shorter tail moment depending on if the planform was altered, reduced snapping and rolling characteristics if the area comes from a longer span, etc. If you can't get the wings with which the airplane was designed light (not necessarily THE cause for replacing wings in this example, but certainly valid), how are you going to get larger wings equal or lighter weight?
The simple thing to do is to buy a good, quality airframe from the onset and be reasonable in your building and setup of it. Personally, I've never had a new airframe, and none of them have had trouble making weight. None of them were particularly featherlight when I acquired them either. None of the new electric 2M airplanes I've put together have been overweight. All of them had wheelpants, the wingtubes they were supplied with, the landing gear they were supplied with, etc. It's not difficult (nor expensive in my experience), and I'm not special. I don't get it.
Let me go on to say that I'm sure I've ruffled a few feathers with my comments regarding weight. For that, I apolgize and to all with whom I've entered discourse directly, please know that none of my statements are personal and I harbor no ill feelings. I simply have my viewpoint and it happens to not be congruent with others in this discussion. I entertain any and all conversation public or private and am would love to talk about this.
The simple thing to do is to buy a good, quality airframe from the onset and be reasonable in your building and setup of it. Personally, I've never had a new airframe, and none of them have had trouble making weight. None of them were particularly featherlight when I acquired them either. None of the new electric 2M airplanes I've put together have been overweight. All of them had wheelpants, the wingtubes they were supplied with, the landing gear they were supplied with, etc. It's not difficult (nor expensive in my experience), and I'm not special. I don't get it.
Let me go on to say that I'm sure I've ruffled a few feathers with my comments regarding weight. For that, I apolgize and to all with whom I've entered discourse directly, please know that none of my statements are personal and I harbor no ill feelings. I simply have my viewpoint and it happens to not be congruent with others in this discussion. I entertain any and all conversation public or private and am would love to talk about this.
03-30-2012, 09:48 PM
#285
Senior Member
RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
ORIGINAL: Mastertech
Would someone please enlighten me to the advantage someone has flying a 12 pound airplane over someone flying a 10.5 airplane?
Would someone please enlighten me to the advantage someone has flying a 12 pound airplane over someone flying a 10.5 airplane?
03-31-2012, 06:12 PM
#286
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Denham Springs, LA
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
ORIGINAL: MTK
It's wing and power loading that are keys. Weight alone is but a number
ORIGINAL: Mastertech
Would someone please enlighten me to the advantage someone has flying a 12 pound airplane over someone flying a 10.5 airplane?
Would someone please enlighten me to the advantage someone has flying a 12 pound airplane over someone flying a 10.5 airplane?
So, what you are saying is, if weight goes up then wing size and engine power must also go up?
Brian
03-31-2012, 09:08 PM
#287
Senior Member
RE: NSRCA Candidate Rules Proposal Survey is available
Weight alone is less important Brian. To oversimplify a bit, a 12 pounder flying on a 1200 sq inch wing will fly superbly given the right amount and type of power...In contrast, a 10 1/2 pounder flying on an 800 sq inch wing, less so.
There are several other key factors but that's the basic idea
I think Mastertech meant that given a common design and all else being equal, the 12 pounder will not fly as well as the 10 1/2 pounder...he's correct on that! But I could be wrong in my assessment of Mastertech's actual meaning
There are several other key factors but that's the basic idea
I think Mastertech meant that given a common design and all else being equal, the 12 pounder will not fly as well as the 10 1/2 pounder...he's correct on that! But I could be wrong in my assessment of Mastertech's actual meaning
