Re: [RCSE] Heavy Boomerang - Elevon issues

[Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech]

Dan Borer writes:

>...If the rules state 'no resin coated'
whatevers, then that means they will not be
tolerated--PERIOD. The rules are to create an even and safe
field; they are not there to be ignored.<

I've been listening to this thread as a reasonably objective bystander. I'm
now going to do something that I'm sure I will regret later, and stick my
nose into something that I don't think I know all the details about. Of
course that's how we learn, by asking questions. Oh, well, here goes...

If I remember correctly, one of the other posts to this thread mentioned
that the rules outlawed COMPOSITES (not "resin coating") in the tail
surfaces, meaning fiberglass/epoxy, carbon fiber/epoxy, etc.. Technically
speaking, resin coated elevons as I understand them (i.e.: they are epoxy
smeared onto the wood, no glass cloth involved) are not composites in that
sense. They are merely wood painted with epoxy, as opposed to painting it
with Varathane, or butyrate dope, or Sears all-weather latex. It's
essentially just another kind of paint. Would K&B Superpoxy, Hobbypoxy
paint, Black Baron, or Rustoleum's epoxy-based stove and refrigerator paint
be therefore illegal as well? They're all ways of applying epoxy resin to
wood. In fact, virtually all modern paints are based on some sort of resin,
so that if the rules really do specifically outlaw "resin coating", then
they essentially outlaw virtually all paints, not just epoxies.

The other point that someone else pointed out was that the rules actually
say that "nothing within an inch of the leading edge can be hard or
reinforced." It seems to me that most of the aircraft in question have
elevons that are further aft of the leading edge than that, and therefore
are not involved in that rule in the first place.

Dan, Jerry, et. al., if as Dan stated, "The rules are to create an even and
safe
field", then there should be a fairly clear and obvious explanation that
shows why this particular rule is necessary, and exactly how it provides
those "even and safe field" benefits it claims. Otherwise it's just another
unnecessary rule. So far I haven't heard anything from the pro-rule camp in
this little flame war that clearly explains why this is a good rule in the
first place. All I've heard so far in this rule's favor boils down to
little more than "Because I said so!" As a reasonably unbiased (other than
the fact that I don't like unnecessary rules that don't provide any
observable benefits) observer in this debate, I'd like to hear a logical
explanation of this. That explanation should also deal clearly with why
this supposed hazard is an issue now, where it apparently hasn't been an
issue in the past at other similar events. If it's really a significant
hazard, then there must be some logical explanation why other organizers of
similar events in the past haven't needed to make an issue of it. To assume
otherwise would be to assume that all of those other organisers were either
uneducated with the realities of their events, or were being intentionally
stupid. Have we recently learned something new that suddenly identifies a
new or previously unrecognized hazard, or a hazard that is peculiar to your
event and not to other seemingly similar events?

If such an explanation exists, then I'd bet that other organizers of
similar events will see the wisdom in this rule and adopt it for their
events as well. I'm sure you had some reason you believed that this rule
was necessary. What is it?

OTOH, if there is no such explanation, then it seems to me that someone is
just being hasty and arbitrary, without really concentrating on that goal
(as stated so clearly by Dan) when they formulate all these new rules. If
it's your event, that's your privelege, but it doesn't make your event
better if you do that. If you clutter your event with arbitrary and
unnecessary rules, folks will choose to spend their precious recreational
time at someone else's event.

So, which of those situations is it? Inquiring minds would like to know!


Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.bright.net/~djwerks/
RCSE-List facilities provided by Model Airplane News.  Send "subscribe" and 
"unsubscribe" requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]