RE: Re: A6 to become new AMA event ?

From: Ken Achée <ken_at_achee.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 16:51:54 -0600

Sounds like it’s time for A-6 Pro. and Limited A-6. Let the pro class be
what ever Don’s proposal ends up being.

 

Let the limited class be the rules Mark proposed below with two qualifiers.

 

Limited is open to anyone who has not won two sanctioned A-6 events, Limited
or Pro. Yes that includes if you won two when you were a junior or a
senior.

 

Once the Limited Class begins anyone who wins three sanctioned Limited A-6
events or posts three or more 6 minute flights is required to move up to
Pro.

 

Ken,

 

Old, but still a novice.

 

 

 

From: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
[mailto:Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mark F1diddler
Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2010 3:19 PM
To: Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Indoor_Construction] Re: A6 to become new AMA event ?

 

  


Although in the past I claimed I don't care what happens, I do want to see
*something* or other settled with A6. It's probably time to stop supposing
we can successfully combine a functional "novice class" together with an
event that keeps the experienced indoorist excited about the class also
(well, depending on what you call excitement.) So, it's time to favor one
side or the other, (not to imply there are only two sides to this.) John
Barker (UK) makes the general case that we should keep present flyers happy
with whatever they enjoy, period, since there are so few new flyers who ever
stick around.

Gary Hodson writes,
<<To repeat myself, A6 is an entry level indoor duration event. I think
everyone would agree that was Clarence Mather's intent, as evidenced by the
restrictions on wood sizes, flat bladed props, covering material, etc.
Covering with paper is not at all difficult. It may be different from
covering with plastic but it isn't difficult. >>

Okay, then, I will adopt a position to make A6 an "entry level duration"
event, but even closer yet to the stated intentions of Clarence Mather in
the original A6 article. Some of the criteria I recall from the orginal A6
article is "easy to build", "fits in small box", "can bump around low
ceiling," and "no special indoor materials." I can picture a good model that
can not only do all the above, but would also arrest the perception
(perception) that a newcomer's A6 will be instantly outclassed by a superior
design expertly built by the experienced. For this, let's take a cue from
Limited Pennyplane--maximum dimensions specified, with no direction to
stretch out, and a generous minimum weight.

Clarence Mather's orginal A6 model should be the maximum dimensions in
everything except prop blade width. His wing was 10" X 3". His tail was
5.25" x 2". His overall length was 9.5" excluding prop. This may seem "not
pretty" to the experienced, but to newcomers who have never had a 3 minute
flight, it will be beautiful.

Covering Solution Proposal.

Materials landscape in USA:
Light "veggie bags" plastic is available almost universally in grocery
stores. Some are lighter than others but a common weight is .34g/100 sq".
(Cheap-priced grocery stores often use thinner bags.) The lightest similar
generic sheet plastic I have found is nominal .25 mil Frost King "drop
cloth" material, and it weighed .300g/100 sq", purchased at Menards,
(Midwest chain store) $4 for a FF club's lifetime supply. (Can't imagine
painters liking to use this plastic because it loves to float.)

Coincidentally, the lightest reported condenser paper also weighs .300g/100
sq", and only a few indoorist have it. Presumably any other kind of paper is
heavier than .300g/100 sq".

A6 v1.0:
Any covering to be permited that weighs at least .300g/100sq" Flyer should
be simply trusted to affirm to CD if asked, "I did not sand or stretch the
covering to make it lighter."

Notice no weighing should be necessary after the newcomer can figure out
what a light grade veggie bag feels like, and if you trust my numbers. All
concerned, please verify and report. A typical veggie bag of .350g/100sq bag
would only weigh .025g more than the lightest (reported) C-paper (over 50
sq" of A6 surfaces.) I believe (?) C-paper requires a lilttle bit more
adhesive than this plastic, so that's a wash regarding any significant
weight-buying advantage.

With the specified dimensions and a plastic covering coincidentally matching
the lightest unobtainium condensor paper, should be easy to hit 1.2 gram
without needing 4 lb wood. But if the Mather A6 cannot be built to 1.2 g
with approximately 6 lb wood, and with the above plastic, then the minimum
weight should be raised to whatever.

Feedback, especially from affected newcomers solicited.

Mark F1diddler
Received on Sun Jan 31 2010 - 14:52:21 CET

This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:45 CET