RE: 44th Annual RCRC Pattern Contest, Huntsville, AL Sept 15-16
All right, all right, here are the scores! Tony took the pictures, so he will have to upload them.
Posted on: 9/18/2012 7:57 PM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11232965

RE: 44th Annual RCRC Pattern Contest, Huntsville, AL Sept 15-16
Weather looks to be great this weekend, 16 registered so far, and I've heard of more coming. Come and join us!
Posted on: 9/10/2012 9:15 AM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11223766

RE: Huntsville BPA/CPA Contest
[quote]ORIGINAL: mdthomps Jon, I am Ralph White's brother in-law and I understand he left a starter and glow plug at the field.  I am in Madison, so if you want me to come and get them, let me know.  My cell number is 256-509-6924. Thanks! [/quote] It's here when you are ready!
Posted on: 8/21/2012 10:51 AM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Classic RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11201009

RE: Huntsville BPA/CPA Contest
Great event, thanks to all of you for coming! We found a starter, and a glow starter; ID them, and I'll send them to you! Scroll down for pictures and results. Pictures:
Posted on: 8/20/2012 12:47 PM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Classic RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11199842

RE: Huntsville BPA/CPA Contest
Placings: Novice: 1st: Tim Whitley 2nd: Larry Hill Advanced: 1st: Julio Arrieta 2nd: Mike Wingo 3rd: David Phillips III 4th: Curt Oberg 5th: David Phillips II Masters: 1st: Jamie Strong 2nd: Jon Lowe 3rd: Scott Smith 4th: Ralph White, Jr. 5th: Nick White 6th: Bic Green 7th: Ron Van Putte 4 points separated 1st and 2nd in Masters! Really fun to be that close. It was great meeting Ralph and Nick White, Curt Oberg, and Tim Whitley. Thanks to you all for coming! Mike Wingo did a GREAT job at scoring, and I can't thank him enough. We had results and trophies so fast, that people couldn't believe it. Gary Courtney, is out of his sickbed, and helped out with judging and got lunch for us; hope he's back up to speed soon.
Posted on: 8/20/2012 12:46 PM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Classic RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11199885

RE: Huntsville BPA/CPA Contest
Our Door Prize winner, Bic Green, with his new LA-1 kit generously donated by [b]R/C City, thanks to Jim Graham![/b]
Posted on: 8/20/2012 12:41 PM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Classic RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11199879

RE: Huntsville BPA/CPA Contest
more:
Posted on: 8/20/2012 12:39 PM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Classic RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11199875

RE: Huntsville BPA/CPA Contest
More:
Posted on: 8/20/2012 12:31 PM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Classic RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11199865

RE: Huntsville BPA/CPA Contest
More pictures:
Posted on: 8/20/2012 12:24 PM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Classic RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11199857

44th Annual RCRC Pattern Contest, Huntsville, AL Sept 15-16
The 44th Annual Rocket City R/C contest will be held at the Capt. Trey Wilbourn - RCRC field in Huntsville on September 15-16, 2012. The field will also be open to competitors for practice on Friday, Sept 14th at noon. The field is located at the intersection of Airport Rd and Leeman Ferry Rd within the city of Huntsville. A 600 ft paved runway, shelter, and an airconditioned clubhouse all await you. The RCRC website is [link]http://www.rocketcityrc.com[/link], and has more info and maps to the field. Sportsman thru Masters plus FAI will be flown. C'mon down and see us! Contact me via email or PM for more info. Flyer as attachment.
Posted on: 8/12/2012 5:35 PM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11190819

RE: Huntsville BPA/CPA Contest
The Huntsville BPA contest is less than a week away. Weather forecasts look very favorable at this point, with mild temperatures and good weather predicted. [b] As an added bonus, Jim Graham of R/C City has generously agreed to donate a LA-1 kit for a pilots drawing on Sunday![/b] The field will be open for practice at noon Friday, and we should be finished by noon to 1PM on Sunday. C'mon down and join us!
Posted on: 8/12/2012 4:50 PM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Classic RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11190804

RE: 2102 FAI/F3A EUROPEAN CHAMPIONSHIP
Great coverage, JP, wish I was there. I look forward to your comments on the effects of the very difficult unknowns on the overall compeitition. Jon [quote]ORIGINAL: J-P Daily report of this event here http://jp-f3a.blogspot.fr/ Hope you will enjoy it ... JP [/quote]
Posted on: 8/4/2012 6:23 AM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11180582

RE: Great Team Trials!
We have a first rate team for South Africa. Congrats to all of the Team members! One thing became clear at this years Nats, which will also hold true at the worlds. Since BOTH unknowns count in the finals, along with one of the two F sequences, the competitors are going to have to spend a lot of time on practicing mock unknowns. They cannot afford a zero or near zero single manuever in either of the unknowns, or an "off" round, or they will not be in the running. With the old rules, you had a throw away unknown round; not anymore. I hope Chip doesn't mind me saying this, but he had issues with his first unknown, just an "off" round, and there was no way for him to recover to the top three after that. Second, the unknowns are now much tougher than the F sequence, a turnaround from what it was at the last World Championships. With such a high required total K for the unknowns, every center manuever has to be either a K5 or a K6. I judged the first unknown, and the first manuever could almost have been used by itself to determine who would win the round. Unbelievably tough sequences. one weird thing, both unknowns had a multitude of snaps, but there were no spins in either sequence. One good thing is that this new scoring method will prevent someone from winning the Worlds after the first F and first unknown. Last year, I believe CPLR won by getting 1000s for the first F and first unknown. Even if someone else had won both the second F and second unknown, CPLR had higher semi finals scores, so he couldn't be beat. Now they can't win until the last unknown is flown. Another thing has become clear to me. 1/2 point scores are desperately needed in FAI. The top fliers are so close in skills that differentiating them, especially in the P rounds and the semis, is extremely tough. The judges need the ability to distinguish between a slight flaw and a more serious flaw before they take off a whole point.
Posted on: 7/31/2012 5:28 AM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11175690

RE: OS 120 AX Special
Have you checked the rear bearing? Notorious for going bad after 25 flights or so. Use the one from the Os 140 rx fuel injected. Could cause all of your symptoms. Did you disassemble and clean your Carb? Bad gallon of fuel? [quote]ORIGINAL: I am interested in hearing from anyone who is using the new OS 120 AX Special or recognizes these symptoms I recently purchased one and after break in, installed it an Excelleron. My problem is that after 20 flights I can not find the ''sweet spot''. Both high speed and low speed needles are impossible to get zeroed in. The engine is very inconsistant. Unable to get a reliable idle. Small adjustments to low speed idle seem to have little effect. Engine surging at full throttle is common. Attempts to richen high speed mixture often results in erratic running or stoping. I have had several 120s but never an experience like this. Maybe this behavior has something to do with the changes to the engine and/or the low time. John [/quote]
Posted on: 7/18/2012 7:03 AM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11159771

RE: NATS 2012 : Let the journey begin!
Arch, I assume you mean that scores will just be withheld from the website on Weds, not from the competitors. Paragraph 8 of the Competition Regulations Generals requires that competitors see their detailed scores from the previous flight before their next flight. I had to remind Dave Guerin of this a few years ago, when I was refused my cut sheet from my next to last flight at the Nats by the score keeper; he took care of it and I didn't need to protest. Technically, it is also required before prizes are awarded and winners announced, but I didn't press that point. I know you are a stickler for the rules, but I thought I'd get clarification. Jon [quote]ORIGINAL: rcpattern The daily scores will be on the NSRCA NATS 2012 website within 30 min of flying Monday and Tuesday. Wednesday scores will be held until the banquet. The new scoring software makes it incredibly easy to get this info out. Thanks to Scott Smith for developing the new software and Derek Koopowitz for creating the website. Arch [/quote]
Posted on: 7/17/2012 6:41 AM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11158485

RE: Extreme Flight Vanquish 2m Build Thread
Stock hardware is fine. The only thing I replaced were the wheel axles, which I substituted with Central Hobbies aluminum axles for weight. If you want to use pin hinges, the ones supplied are not good. Replace them with genuine Robarts, or cut slots for CA hinges, which is what I did on my second Vanquish. The first shipment of Vanquishes used CA hinges. The stock pin hinges are soft, and will develop slop over time.
Posted on: 7/1/2012 7:51 PM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11139305

RE: CAELESTIA NEW F3A 2011
I tried these settings today on my HV80/ Pletty Advance today with inconclusive results. RPM and amp draw was about the same, regardless of which firmware or PWM/timing settings I used. I got around 6200 rpm with a 21x14 Falcon prop regardless of the settings/firmware. The only thing that did change was voltage ripple went down dramatically with the old firmware/timing/PWM changes. I'd been told by a Castle rep that ripple was affected by battery lead and ESC lead length as well as the internal resistance of the batteries, so this makes no sense to me. The dramatic change you describe may be something unique to the HV85. Now if someone can explain PWM to me and what outrunner mode is for PWM, I'd sure appreciate it! Don't mean to hijack the thread, but I'm finding this discussion interesting. Jon [quote]ORIGINAL: cmoulder Dana, I'm at the field now and just flew it after the changes. I set timing to high and PWM to 24kHz and rpm's went up to 5800, but the biggie was Anthony R's suggestion to change the firmware back to 3.2 from the latest 4.1 and now the power is ballistic. I did the first flight without even taching it and was very happy. Flew a little crazy just to push it a bit. Upon landing the motor was barely warm and the esc (remember mine is an older 85hv) was not even warm. [/quote]
Posted on: 6/26/2012 2:41 PM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11132859

RE: Extreme Flight Vanquish 2m Build Thread
No, everything else was ok. This is a typical fix from Hebert's triangulation trimming method. The incidence increase was the right thing to do. Jon [quote]ORIGINAL: RC Accessory [quote]ORIGINAL: jonlowe Fixes tail down attitude, corrects pulling to the canopy on uplines, less up elevator trim required. I had almost gotten there by myself (I have Gator adjusters on the back, and I'd
Posted on: 6/25/2012 4:49 PM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11131692

RE: Extreme Flight Vanquish 2m Build Thread
Fixes tail down attitude, corrects pulling to the canopy on uplines, less up elevator trim required. I had almost gotten there by myself (I have Gator adjusters on the back, and I'd been increasing incidence a turn at a time), then Andrew did it to a friends airplane, confirming what I had found. Not sure where my CG is at the moment, and I've started flying a different design. However the Vanquish is still an excellent airplane.
Posted on: 6/25/2012 12:58 PM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11131406

RE: Extreme Flight Vanquish 2m Build Thread
Oh, I guess that is your receiver pack in front of your motor batteries. I agree with the poster above, move your receiver pack aft and your motor batteries further forward. One thing we are finding is that Vanquishes like lots of incidence. When Andrew Jesky was here a few weeks ago, he increased the incidence almost to the limits of the adjuster slots on a friends Vanquish, around .8 to 1 degree. Flies lots better with more incidence. Jon [quote]ORIGINAL: RC Accessory Speed controller is already under the structure. My 850 mah Life batteries are due in next week. With the rain all this week and this weekend I am out of town, I will not be able to maiden the Vanquish to next week anyway. BTW... the Hyperion 90 size wing bags are a perfect fit for the Vanquish. They are about $33 from www.allerc.com. [/quote]
Posted on: 6/25/2012 7:45 AM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11130939

RE: Extreme Flight Vanquish 2m Build Thread
Move your speed controller to the side or on the bottom of the structure, and move your batteries forward some more. You have a lot of room there to move your batteries forward. Actually, they are pretty far aft right now. Jon [quote]ORIGINAL: RC Accessory I agree with the statements about batches of the kit. I am using a Dualsky 6360-12 which is nearly 2 oz heavier than the Torque motor. My tailwheel is the F3A Unlimited tail wheel assembly which is epoxied in place. Even if I used 10 grams of epoxy, that far back would result in needing more nose weight. My 1700 LiFe rx pack is as far forward as it can be and I still moved my batteries forward to get the CG about 180mm. I plan on pulling the 1700 for a 850 LiFe, saving 1.5 oz and maybe the Falcon v2 prop which would save 2 oz over the APC 20x13E prop, but then the batteries would have to be moved even more forward to compensate. I do not know if the weight issue is caused by the tailwheel installation or the new rudder/fin configuration, but none the less I would be very tail heavy if I had used a lighter weight motor. Any weight savings I can incorporate or change equipment would be up front so I am not happy about the situation. If I have to change the motor for example, I would be forced to use heavier batteries. [/quote]
Posted on: 6/25/2012 7:27 AM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11130910

RE: Nuance
[quote]ORIGINAL: TonyF Mike, I went to the eye doctor last year. She told me then my left eye is starting to develop a cataract. It's not developed enough for removal surgery so I'm going to have to live with it for a while. Does make things really tough at times. It sucks getting old! In my opinion the airplane tracks in yaw beautifully. So far I have seen no reason to add anything even with the Contra. My problem in tracking is only a visual problem and only when down low running in to center. It may take a color scheme change to get fully confident with my visual of the model. Or maybe a new pair of eyes! [/quote] Tony, I had cataract surgery on my first eye in 2005, and my second eye last year. I told the doctor that it was affecting my ability to pursue my hobby, and that I needed excellent sight at 150 meters. He used that info to tell the insurance company that I needed cataract surgery sooner than later because it was affecting my ability to do things. My first surgery was on an eye that was so near sighted that I had around 20/400 vision uncorrected. Probably a congenital thing. The lens inplant corrected it to around 20/30 or so, which the doctor said was a home run because I started off so bad. It was easily corrected to 20/20. The second eye really improved my flying. I also find that I have to use much darker sunglasses than I used to. I find that Model Glasses prescription sunglasses work well. Besides the tints that come with Model Glasses, I use a greenish/yellow mirrored tint that is available from their golf line of lenses. Different tints in different light conditions make a big difference for me. My normal glasses are progressives, but my Model Glasses are bifocals, because I find they give me a much larger area of in focus vision than the progresses for flying. After the first surgery, I flew the next day. Only have to wear a protective cover at night. It is well worth it. Following this thread closely as I just got my Nuance flying. Moving the cg forward is helping me also.
Posted on: 6/22/2012 9:16 AM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11127752

RE: Extreme Flight Vanquish 2m Build Thread
Just checked the MAAC rules, here: http://www.maac.ca/docs/2012/pac2011rulebook.pdf 11 lb limit, same as in the US. FAI is and has been 11 lbs Jon [quote]ORIGINAL: Flyer88 Hi Guys I appreciate all the input. Yes the rest of the plane will be pretty much as light as I can get with exception of the two mods Ive done. All my wires are shortened and resoldered to fit. I build stuff to last. Zip ties just dont cut it for me, although I know they work. In Canada we don't have a weight limit for what we fly but if your FAI then I guess there is a max of 12 lbs all up.........I think ? I dont totally agree with super light, as some people like a higher wing loading compared to others but we'll see how she goes once I get her in the air. OUr field has some very good Pattern pilots including one of the top pilots on the circuit, so I should have lots of help if I have questions about trimming her up. Take care Cheers Flyer88 [/quote]
Posted on: 6/15/2012 6:03 AM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11118984

RE: Extreme Flight Vanquish 2m Build Thread
[quote]ORIGINAL: Flyer88 3/4 of an oz...... abouts In the grand scheme of thing its nothing Baltic Birch ply [/quote] Flyer88, I looked at your posting history, and it appears this may be your first pattern airplane. If it is not, I apologize. I've built two Vanquishes, so I've been down this road. Weight is everything in pattern. We fight to remove grams, much less ounces. There is an 11 lb/5 kg limit to be legal for competition. Further, the less weight, the less stress you put on your batteries, and the better the planes fly. The Vanquish, if you are careful, will come in around 10 3/4 lbs with mid-weight batteries (Turnigy Nanotechs). I used all stock hardware, with the exception of the wheel axles, in which case I used Central Hobbies aluminum axles to save a little over 1/2 ounce; in contrast to your adding weight. A 2-56 screw and blind nut hold the wheel pants on just fine. I am using the same speed controller you are, and I simply zip tied it to the bottom of the nose structure where yours is. There is no need to do anything more as the speed controller hardly gets warm, and the structure surrounding it allows for cooling. We cruise at 1/2 throttle most of the time, so they don't get hot. You are also not dealing with vibration, so zip ties are all you need, and they weigh next to nothing. Your batteries won't be that far up in the nose anyway to get the right cg, so you don't have to worry about that. You need to block off the bottom round opening in the cowl to get proper airflow; use some depron and foam safe CA. There is way too much inlet for the exit area for air, so blocking off the bottom cools things down. Use the shortest servo extensions you can, make sure your battery leads and motor leads are as short as possible (wire weight really adds up), and avoid the temptation to add anything you don't absolutely have to. Just my two cents.
Posted on: 6/14/2012 8:16 PM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "Electric Pattern Aircraft"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11118687

RE: 2012 Peach Pattern Classic - Who's going?
Thanks to Emory for a great contest. Well run, and he ordered nice weather to boot! Keith, what happened to the Memphis contingent on Sunday? Party too much Saturday night?
Posted on: 6/4/2012 8:49 AM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11105861

RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
[quote]ORIGINAL: VerneK Unless I missed it, I haven't seen a single post in this thread expressing concern for an Intermediate pilot transitioning into Advanced. Let's see, in Intermediate, you learn how to keep a fairly basic set of maneuvers in the box. That's what Intermediate is, learning to fly in the box and at that level, it's a huge step. Now from there, we go to Advanced where you have to learn how to do a slow roll, 4-point roll, snap, and spin. Do you really think Advanced should be more difficult, or Masters for that matter? If we don't keep the steps reasonable for pilots on their way up, nothing else will matter. You won't have enough contestants at a local contest to fill a country bar on a Tuesday afternoon. That's what the sequence building guidelines are all about. You can't ever build a new schedule simply looking forward to the next higher step. You always have to have your eye in the rear view mirror. If you don't, the next look you get will be an empty mirror. Verne Koester [/quote] Verne, I moved from intermediate to advanced and from advanced to masters not all that long ago. At the time, intermediate to advanced was easy, advanced to masters was extremely difficult for me. The advanced sequence at the time had been dumbed down so much (zero inverted entrances and exits) that it did not do a good job of preparing me for masters, and wasn't that much harder than intermediate. I went thru advanced in two years, went to masters because of peer pressure and pointing out. In hindsight I wish I had stayed there for another year or so to fly the current advanced pattern so I would have been better prepared for masters. In contrast, I've heard from some (by no means all) current intermediate pilots that the sequence is too easy, and they like the challenge of advanced. And the good news is that advanced is now challenging enough to keep them there a few years, so I think the sequence needs to change occasionally because of that. We also have to remember that advanced has some required manuevers by the sequence guide, like the 4 point and the slow roll, so the rest of the pattern is built around those manuevers. I had all of those, but the rest of the sequence was not challenging enough. The current 2012 advanced sequence is challenging, and I'm seeing it at the contests I've judged. Jon
Posted on: 5/24/2012 7:12 AM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11092945

RE: Proposed 2013/2014 Sequences
[quote]ORIGINAL: MTK [quote]ORIGINAL: TonyF, Dave L Personally, I think changing the Advanced schedule this cycle is not needed. At the contests I've been to and judged I have not seen an over abundance of the current advanced pattern being flown extremely well. And I have seen very few pilots fly it in both directions. I think a change is unwarranted. +1 on not changing Advanced.... [/quote] At our local contests, I have seen at most 2 Advanced pilots at any given time I think. Dave and Tony are right...What's the point of changing it? [/quote] It may be a moot point because I understand the NSRCA Board voted to change it in the last few days. That being said, I've seen several people stay in Advanced for years, and not progress to Masters, and I've seen a couple of older Masters pilots petition and go back to Advanced. An occasional change in the sequence is not a bad thing, and make sure the pilots that fly it year after year don't get bored and drop out altogether.
Posted on: 5/22/2012 6:37 PM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11091099

RE: R/C Aerobatics Contest Board Initital Vote
[quote]ORIGINAL: CLRD2LAND Jon,    You're right.  My apologies.  I did not see in the ''logic'' where it was defined that the ''weight limit'' was what was currently enforced i.e. the 115g would be good.  As far as voting goes, I did not abstain but please understand I was NOT asking Mr. Lockhart to do so but I am under the impression that's what happened because there is one less vote on that proposal vs. the others.  None of the 3 BoD members that were on the Rules Proposal Committee was asked to do so and in retrospect, that was probably the right thing to do.  It wouldn't have affected the outcome however so I do fall back on that to sleep at night.  [:)] [/quote] Peace![:D]
Posted on: 5/21/2012 7:05 AM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11088692

RE: R/C Aerobatics Contest Board Initital Vote
[quote]ORIGINAL: klhoard [quote]ORIGINAL: jgg215 . . . . . . The RC Aerobatic rulebook has eight safety rules including: 6.1: <span style=''font-size: 10pt; ''>The CD at an AMA sanctioned event has the authority to perform safety inspections of any equipment and to prevent any participant from using equipment which in the CDs opinion is deemed unsafe. [/quote] . That rule is so nebulous that a CD could walk up and down the flight line disqualifying every single airplane.  Why does that rule have to be repeated in the Pattern section when it is just a copy of the authority every CD running a Fun-Fly has? . Did the NSRCA take a look at the Pylon and C/L Combat SIG's helmet rules to see if we could incorporate them into our operation? . [/quote] Shhhh, don't give them any ideas!
Posted on: 5/21/2012 7:02 AM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11088687

RE: R/C Aerobatics Contest Board Initital Vote
[/quote] The weight penalty was proposed by Ron Lockhart who sits on the CB.  My belief is that is why there are only 10 votes compared to all the others as he should not be able to vote on his own proposal.  As his proposal reads however, this would eliminate the modest 115g allowance for the lower classes and defeats why they added it in the first place. My other concern is that I think some of y'all are misunderstanding what has happened here.  The NSRCA listened to you and removed the arming plug requirement from its rule proposal to fall inline with FAI which the CB tends to follow very closely i.e. 5000g.  The proposal that was accepted was a copy/paste of the original NSRCA proposal which y'all not only disliked but were pretty upset about.  Now, the CB has gone against popular opinion (which, after talking to some folks, they are not required to uphold popular opinion) but have also gone above and beyond by eliminating a proposal which stays exactly inline with FAI and gone to something that will increase the weight in the model with no allowance and introduced a Safety Requirement which, by all rights, should be in the AMA Safety Code if at all.  The point here is that we are not arguing that we should have an arming plug but that the CB has decided for us that is a better idea than staying inline with current FAI standards. As far as the weight issue goes, that's done with in my opinion, it was turned down.  I hope the CB recognizes that Mr. Lockhart's proposal eliminates the weight allowance in the lower classes.  I do think that it's interesting however that the 5500g proposal lost by one vote.  Obviously, there was some sort of interest in it. [/quote] My bad, I should have said Ron instead of Dave. Scott, as a NSRCA board member, did you abstain when the NSRCA voted on your proposals? I assume you did if you are asking Ron to do the same. Ron's proposal is fine as written. It says that the 5% penalty applies "shall be assessed for those models weighing up to 5250 grams." Since the weight limit is 5115 for sportsman thru advanced, they are ok. The 5% would apply if their airplane weighed between 5115 and 5250 grams. Read it again. It does NOT say 5% is imposed if the plane is over 5000 grams.
Posted on: 5/21/2012 6:57 AM by Author "jonlowe" in the forum "RC Pattern Flying"
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/fb.asp?m=11088677