Re: Y2K2

From: Nicholas Ray <lasray_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 20:53:13 -0400

I think this whole thing is about perceived injustice. Someone will come up with a gizmo that does 30 more seconds and requires a 1.45g model. And those that have it will whip out their Y2K2 and here we will be again.

Sent from my iPad

> On Apr 17, 2014, at 8:24 PM, Don Slusarczyk <don_at_slusarczyk.com> wrote:
>
> Then why not ban carbon VP props? Makes just as much sense as arbitrarily banning any other aspect of the model such as covering, boron, etc. If carbon is too heavy in the weight budget then you have to sharpen your pencil and come up with a work around. When NASA needed to help Apollo 13 get that square filter into a round hole, banning the wrong filter would not fix or address the problem at hand. Now with 1.4 grams the 50mg you need is no longer an issue.
>
>
>> On 4/17/2014 8:13 PM, ykleetx_at_gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> In my opinion, having Y2K2 is an advantage. It's 50 mg of budget that most of us don't have. When you are out of budget on a 1.2 g model, having 50 mg removed makes a huge difference. I can't fly a carbon prop with a VP because the carbon prop is too heavy. It would be easier if I had Y2K2.
>>
>>
>> -Kang
>
> --
> Don Slusarczyk
> www.DonsRC.com
> Home of the Wicked EDF Motors!
>
Received on Thu Apr 17 2014 - 17:53:14 CEST

This archive was generated by Yannick on Sat Dec 14 2019 - 19:13:48 CET