I have never liked the 6.2 g. minimum weight limit. It seems like an
unusually high minimum weight limit, especially for an indoor NoCal. It results in a
relatively heavy model that is only flown at the USIC (& a very few other
club events). It is not a practical model to fly in our typical low ceiling
gyms. And the resulted is that the Hosler is the only competitive design which,
for me, takes a lot of the fun out of the event. I think part of the
challenge should be in selecting a design that balances wing area & lightness. I
would favor using the FAC rules including the three flight total or as a second
choice a lighter weight limit such as 3 grams. With no weight limit (but FAC
restrictions on construction materials) It would be interesting to see which
designs prove to be successful. I.E. a very light model with modest dimensions
or a heavier model with larger cord, length etc. I think it would be a long
time before one design dominated.
One final thought, The USIC seems to have no mechanism for proposing rules
changes.
Gary Hodson
In a message dated 6/23/2008 1:50:44 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
jhood_at_hmcon.com writes:
I think that you nailed it on the head... :)
Although, I would fall in the first category, as I built a Fike two
years ago, and had a huge blob of clay on it to get it to 6.2g... and
did almost 6 min (almost got to third past a Hosler...) but it was
pretty much maxed out... if I could have gotten rid of the extra
weight, I think that it could have done 6 1/2 or better (it was built
like a tank...) It would have been pretty simple to get it to 4g...
John is right that building and trimming a Hosler is -at least- as
hard as building a Pennyplane..hard as building a Pennyplane..<WBR>. pr
WWII No-Cal to 6.2g isn't very hard, but you aren't going to be very
competitive with it... Which I really never understood the "logic" of
putting weight restrictions on classes like this anyway, since if you
can't build a typical No-Cal to 4g or so, then you -aren't- going to
be building a competitive Hosler anyway... so then just build what
you want and fly for fun... nothing wrong with that at all...
I like No-Cals, as they go together fairly quick, and are fun... but
I'm not going to build another Hosler just to have a chance to place
in an event...
I would suggest the following:
- 3g minimum weight
- Tissue or condenser paper covering, no film
- The other rules would stay the same...
I also think that it is ironic that all of the FAC No-Cal rules that I
could find had no weight limit, only on the USIC rules... go figure...
JH
--- In _Indoor_ConstructionIndoor_ConstrInd_
(mailto:Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com) , "John Kagan"
<john_kagan_at_joh> wrote:
> I think the obvious reality is that weight rule did nothing to
> preclude the use of lightweight indoor building technique. Instead,
> it simply reduced the viable subjects down to a single plane (unless
> you choose to fly more for more fun than for competition which, of
> course, is perfectly fine).
>
> The current models are at least as challenging as a Pennyplane, so
> the rule didn't achieve that goal either. Leaving the community with
> a few options:
>
> - change the weight rule to allow other subjects to be competitive
> (and EZB-like)
> - change some other aspect of the rules to de-emphasize Hostler
> Fury's (maybe a length restriction?
> - leave things alone and build a Fury
> - leave things alone and don't build a Fury
>
> Despite succumbing to the urge to respond, I probably fall into the
> last option :)
>
**************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for
fuel-efficient used cars. (
http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Received on Mon Jun 23 2008 - 17:38:04 CEST