NAMBA PropWash for March 2008

[Darin Jordan]

March 2008 PropWash is out...

http://www.namba.com/content/library/propw.../2008/march.pdf

Lots of pros and cons in there concerning the FE proposals... LOTS of misinformation as well...

Also note... There aren't any N1 proposals out there, so I'm not sure what the guys at D1 are talking about... they apparently aren't that closely in touch with what's happening...

I find it rather interesting just how many Nitro-heads are suddenly experts in current FE technology and what needs to be done with it...

Lohring... Your article is out of touch with reality and what has really been happening with FE... Had you had ANY amount of interaction with your NUMEROUS local FE clubs, beyond your one real race at the Nats last summer, you wouldn't have printed such mis-information... Anyone who can state that these ideas and proposals "haven't been tested" simply isn't paying attention... No hard feelings... just very disappointed in your lack of perspective... (we can forget all these FE differences when we get together to run the Thunderboats! )

To the rest of you... Vote as you will... It'll all come out in the wash... Just remember whose money it is you are working with...

 

[brooks93]

Darin,

Even though I agree with most of your post nothing good will come from this thread. We just need to let the vote speak for itself.

you can lead a horse to water but, you can't make them drink. You can however get kicked.

if it fails it fails. if it passes it passes. either way we still get to play with boats and keep our hair

 

[Darin Jordan]

Darin,
Even though I agree with most of your post nothing good will come from this thread. We just need to let the vote speak for itself.

you can lead a horse to water but, you can't make them drink. You can however get kicked.

if it fails it fails. if it passes it passes. either way we still get to play with boats and keep our hair

Kelly,

I agree with most of what you are saying... but if all that results from posting this is that ONE person sits back and says "Hmmm... how valid are these arguements"??? ONE way or the other... then I think that's a good thing...

We have people who have NO involvement in FE telling the masses how things "should" be... Just trying to give a little perspective to the situation...

I'm done with this... we'll let it ride from here...

 

[Bill-SOCAL]

My perspective is that it appears that the people who support the new FE rules are active in FE racing.

It also appears that most (not all of course) of the public opposition comes from outside the FE community.

Just something to consider.

Oh well. Time to vote and move forward.

 

[brooks93]

Darin I understand. I wasn't bashing you. I am sure you know that.

the one thing that got me was D1 saying that there boats would be illegal under the new rules and they asked the other district to run under club rules. What to stop D1 one from following there own advice?

 

[AlanN]

Would not "HOGWASH" be a bit more of an appropriate title?

 

[Grimracer]

Carefull with this post guys...

Grim

 

[Andy Greene]

March 2008 PropWash is out...
<a href="http://www.namba.com/content/library/propw.../2008/march.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.namba.com/content/library/propw.../2008/march.pdf</a>

Lots of pros and cons in there concerning the FE proposals... LOTS of misinformation as well...

Also note... There aren't any N1 proposals out there, so I'm not sure what the guys at D1 are talking about... they apparently aren't that closely in touch with what's happening...

I find it rather interesting just how many Nitro-heads are suddenly experts in current FE technology and what needs to be done with it...

Lohring... Your article is out of touch with reality and what has really been happening with FE... Had you had ANY amount of interaction with your NUMEROUS local FE clubs, beyond your one real race at the Nats last summer, you wouldn't have printed such mis-information... Anyone who can state that these ideas and proposals "haven't been tested" simply isn't paying attention... No hard feelings... just very disappointed in your lack of perspective... (we can forget all these FE differences when we get together to run the Thunderboats! )

To the rest of you... Vote as you will... It'll all come out in the wash... Just remember whose money it is you are working with...

Darin, re-read the presidents message once again in that same issue, most of your statements are offensive to the voting members , and still you wonder why ???? You speak as though-if your not running an F/E boat NOW- you dont count- THINK AGAIN !!!!!!

 

[Darin Jordan]

You speak as though-if your not running an F/E boat NOW- you dont count- THINK AGAIN !!!!!!

That's not at all what I "speak" as... but I can see how one might take it that way... Several of those articles in PropWash are written as if you don't count IF you currently run an F/E boat... so go figure... The majority of the opposition to the proposals is coming from OUTSIDE the F/E community... or so it appears...

The point is that there are articles being written by people with little or NO FE experience, making statements about a technology they know little or nothing about, and coming across like they are an authority on the subject... IGNORING information provided by those that actually ARE, and making statements that can be clearly proven to be misinformed...

Meanwhile, those of us IN this section of the hobby are spending our hard-earned money to maintain a race fleet and enjoy our little niche... and it appears our fate is in the hands of those mentioned above? Sound right to you???

I am not intending or aiming to offend anyone... though inevitably that seems to be what results... I'm simply asking that you consider carefully whose fate you are dealing with here... and also consider where the knowledge in these topics lies.... Who knows more about the subject at hand??? A few predominantly Nitro racers who MAY have have tested the FE waters a couple of times... or those who have spent most of their RC boating existence entrenched in the FE corner of the hobby and have been intimately involved in working with this technology???

All we are asking is that EVERYONE give this a fair shot and consideration, listen to those that truely know about the technology, Then vote as you will...

With what it costs to currently field an FE boat these days... I don't think it's too much to ask that people not just blindly vote on this stuff and that they consider the arguements carefully...

 

[Andy Greene]

I understand your deep hearted concerns - but I personally am against any type of hull length restrictions for ANY type of racing. We will agree to disagree on this subject for the lack of band width. As Im sure many Nitro/Gas racers will say the same- I don't EVER want that this to spill over to "our side" as you might refer to it from your posts - of racing.

By the way - in post #3 - you said-

I'm done with this... we'll let it ride from here...

What happened :blink:

Hey Alan , glad to see you back

 

[Darin Jordan]

By the way - in post #3 - you said- I'm done with this... we'll let it ride from here...

What happened :blink:

Hey Allen , glad to see you back

Well... I was directly addressed and compelled to respond...

I don't EVER want that this to spill over to "our side" as you might refer to it from your posts - of racing.

There wouldn't ever be any need to do that... You guys have built-in limits do to the nature of your Internal Combustion engines... Any power gains you might achieve are relatively small in comparison to the gains that an FE system can gain... You simply can't treat FE the same way as Nitro or Gas... we have different limitations completely... This is where experience with the subject matter really matters...

 

[Andy Greene]

By the way - in post #3 - you said- I'm done with this... we'll let it ride from here...

What happened :blink:

Hey Allen , glad to see you back

Well... I was directly addressed and compelled to respond...

I don't EVER want that this to spill over to "our side" as you might refer to it from your posts - of racing.

There wouldn't ever be any need to do that... You guys have built-in limits do to the nature of your Internal Combustion engines... Any power gains you might achieve are relatively small in comparison to the gains that an FE system can gain... You simply can't treat FE the same way as Nitro or Gas... we have different limitations completely... This is where experience with the subject matter really matters...

Your redundancy to the references to the lack of knowledge are astoundingly foolish. Let post 3 speak for you and be done- I am.

 

[Darin Jordan]

Your redundancy to the references to the lack of knowledge are astoundingly foolish.

Well... there certainly seem to be several who think I'm that... For the record, I wasn't referring to "lack of knowledge", but lack of experience... It's an important distinction... I have quite a bit of knowledge about Nitro and IC engines... but I've never tried to build, run, or race one in RC...

Done...

 

[Bill-SOCAL]

Having read Lohring's article on the Thunderboats I am a bit confused.

For Thunderboats it is OK to have maximum length limits (as well as minimums).

Those minimums render several existing boats illegal.

It is also OK to have rules, that while not perfect on this pass, can always be tweaked in the future.

Yet his article against the FE proposals say length limits are bad. Making existing boats illegal is bad. Maybe having to tweak rules in the future is bad. And for those reasons the proposed FE rules need to be voted down?

Well, then how is it that the Thunderboats are OK, but the FE rules are not??

I'm lost (and not for the first time).

You see, it is a logical fallacy to use the same argument to argue for one thing and to argue against another. Hence my confusion.

 

[raptor347]

At least Lohring is consistant (or inconsistant if you compare the two articles). He took this stance from the beginning and won't be swayed away from it. Even though it's 180 degrees from what FE racers in the district that he represents want.

I like the district 1 tripe better. They're the only ones who run a district points series. They are absolutely correct. The three district 8 FE clubs have 33 races scheduled this season, both sprint and 1/10 scale. 6 of those conflict with the gas/nitro district races, so they can't be sanctioned (per the rule book). 7 dates are in conflict between the 1/10 club and the sprint club so there are another 7 that can't be sanctioned by one club or another. Just playing per the rule book it becomes a scheduling nightmare. Then there's the logistics, district 1 would fit in one of the four states that makes up district 8 there's a bit more area to cover. Oh well, so many choices of where to race this week I guess that's the problem with having an active district.

I love the one about a small club dictating the rules. Let me see, the proposal was writen by active racers from 6 districts including 5 current record holders and a national high points champion (oh look, there are people who have credentials on this side too).

From the district 1 web site, there were 19 total active racers in the "District Points Series". The most active class had 9 racers for the season.

The puget club had 26 active racers in 2007. The most active class had 21 racers for the season. That's just one club in district 8.

It looks to me more like District 1 is the little club that's trying the dictate rules to the rest of the country. That could just be my interpretation :blink:

I just call it as I see it.

 

[lohring]

Classic Thunderboat rules are limiting performance by setting the MINIMUM size of a boat. Otherwise, with the reduced power of a stock engine they would end up smaller than the current group of Gas Sport Hydros. Minimum length limits in this class will result in equal, but slower racing. From years of racing "stock" outboards, I dislike stock engine rules, a different issue.

I believe that trying to limit performance with MAXIMUM length limits will result in faster, less controllable boats. This is not the view of the large general group of electric racers in my district, but the electric scale racers, an equally large group, limit performance by specifying power plants for hulls with set sizes. I think this is a better, but more difficult approach. It is what electric racers in other parts of the world are trying to do. We'll see what approach works best. I bet Brian's boats will still be the fastest under any rule set.

Lohring Miller

 

[brooks93]

an equally large group, limit performance by specifying power plants for hulls with set sizes. I think this is a better, but more difficult approach. It is what electric racers in other parts of the world are trying to do.

they do that because its a spec class. a bigger version of LSH

are you saying because other country's are trying to do it different way then us that we are wrong even though we have been running them for over 4 years in heat racing? Its a pretty bold stance if thats the case

 

[AlanN]

I believe that trying to limit performance with MAXIMUM length limits will result in faster, less controllable boats. Lohring Miller

Beliefs are fine for religion and such but not for boat racing.

If you actully attended and of the other US lipo powered venues you could have some real facts to base your 'beliefs' on.

 

[D. Newland]

... You speak as though-if your not running an F/E boat NOW- you dont count- THINK AGAIN !!!!!!

Andy-This is a good point.

We all know how the NAMBA voting structure is set up. You pay your dues, you get to vote. Pretty simple.

And NAMBA FE members have abided by these rules. Even with all the drama last year about the LiPo proposal and some fear of "outside influence" messing with the vote, it passed by an overwhelming margin. I forget the specifics but I think it had 90% approval (if anyone has specifics, please share) with something like 87 total votes cast. A pretty pathetic number, really, considering the online time we spent on that thing.

But, it was good for FE. Maybe not perfect, but I bet even Dist 1 would agree that it was good for FE. In fact, they don't want to change it, so I count that as an act of acceptance. I'm not sure why they feel they need to be "Silent no more...", they seem to enjoy the current set of NAMBA FE rules that have endured quite a few revisions in this decade.

The one thing, however, all NAMBA members need to keep in mind is the disproportionate number of members between Nitro, Gas and FE. NAMBA FE is only 110 +/- members strong. Wayyy smaller than the gas/nitro NAMBA membership, which puts us on defense when those outside of FE start to blow our house down. I'm not referring to feedback and opinions...We're all for that. I'm referring to a blatant attack and rally of votes from outside of FE to shoot this thing down.

So, what do we do?? Sit back and take it because Nitro/Gas members may be running FE in the future?? I'm not going to pose a question regarding Dist 1's plan of attack because I can figure that one out on my own.

I guess we should wait until the votes are cast to ask that question..but I'll ask it anyway because I'm getting the feeling that FE will always be a target for this type of situation soley because we are the smaller of the Nitro/Gas/FE groups and some question our ability to fine tune our racing program.

It is agreed (excluding Dist 1) that FE is missing something in the rules. Some sort of limit. Power, length, whatever. A solid and well established group of FE Racers got together well over a year ago to hammer this thing out. We brain stormed, we practiced, we tested it and we raced it. A textbook example of how this process should go. We feel we came up with something good. Very good. We researched as many fellow FE NAMBA members and the basics of this proposal was striking a chord with them. A majority of them. It's already adopted in many FE NAMBA districts.

We also feel this proposal will put an end or severly reduce future proposals focused on the FE power system.

However, there's a good chance we'll never know how NAMBA FE members voted on this proposal. That would be a problem. A big problem. Whatever happens, I just want to know where my fellow FE'rs stood on this thing.

 

[jimi911]

... You speak as though-if your not running an F/E boat NOW- you dont count- THINK AGAIN !!!!!!

Andy-This is a good point.

We all know how the NAMBA voting structure is set up. You pay your dues, you get to vote. Pretty simple.

And NAMBA FE members have abided by these rules. Even with all the drama last year about the LiPo proposal and some fear of "outside influence" messing with the vote, it passed by an overwhelming margin. I forget the specifics but I think it had 90% approval (if anyone has specifics, please share) with something like 87 total votes cast. A pretty pathetic number, really, considering the online time we spent on that thing.

But, it was good for FE. Maybe not perfect, but I bet even Dist 1 would agree that it was good for FE. In fact, they don't want to change it, so I count that as an act of acceptance. I'm not sure why they feel they need to be "Silent no more...", they seem to enjoy the current set of NAMBA FE rules that have endured quite a few revisions in this decade.

The one thing, however, all NAMBA members need to keep in mind is the disproportionate number of members between Nitro, Gas and FE. NAMBA FE is only 110 +/- members strong. Wayyy smaller than the gas/nitro NAMBA membership, which puts us on defense when those outside of FE start to blow our house down. I'm not referring to feedback and opinions...We're all for that. I'm referring to a blatant attack and rally of votes from outside of FE to shoot this thing down.

So, what do we do?? Sit back and take it because Nitro/Gas members may be running FE in the future?? I'm not going to pose a question regarding Dist 1's plan of attack because I can figure that one out on my own.

I guess we should wait until the votes are cast to ask that question..but I'll ask it anyway because I'm getting the feeling that FE will always be a target for this type of situation soley because we are the smaller of the Nitro/Gas/FE groups and some question our ability to fine tune our racing program.

It is agreed (excluding Dist 1) that FE is missing something in the rules. Some sort of limit. Power, length, whatever. A solid and well established group of FE Racers got together well over a year ago to hammer this thing out. We brain stormed, we practiced, we tested it and we raced it. A textbook example of how this process should go. We feel we came up with something good. Very good. We researched as many fellow FE NAMBA members and the basics of this proposal was striking a chord with them. A majority of them. It's already adopted in many FE NAMBA districts.

We also feel this proposal will put an end or severly reduce future proposals focused on the FE power system.

However, there's a good chance we'll never know how NAMBA FE members voted on this proposal. That would be a problem. A big problem. Whatever happens, I just want to know where my fellow FE'rs stood on this thing.

That is an excellent post. I an not a NAMBA member (for percisely the reasons outlined in this post)... what has really disturbed me about this whole ordeal is not the proposals or that people have differing views on proposals ... it is that racers outside of the class effected by the proposal seem interested in taking the power away from actual FE racers. If the shoe was on the other foot, and it was Nitro in FE's position ... how would you feel?