hey gang this is an email i sent to greg page about next years contest


Hello,

My name is Scott Foster.  I am an undergraduate chemistry student at Miami
University, Oxford, OH.  First, I would like to thank you for giving
undergraduates the opportunity to compete in these design, build and fly
contests.  It has been an awesome experience being involved in such a
project.  However, after what I heard about this years contest (I could not
attend due to an all day medical college admissions test), as well as
previous years contests, it appears that the electric motors are not
performing.

    I began my modeling when I was 3 or 4 with the help of my father, who
competes internationally with his scale RC models.  I have been involved in
the hobby every since and have witnessed its evolution over the last 15
years.

    Based on my experience, and many other modelers opinion, it would be to
everyone's advantage to ditch the electric propulsion and use gas or glow.
Let me explain.  Many of the schools we compete against have enormous
budgets, and those teams are able to spend huge amounts of money on the
finest electric motors and controllers, as well as the best 'matched'
electric flight packs with the largest capacity (a characteristic that is
exponentially increasing).  Our school, which only has an aeronautics minor,
as well as many other schools, simply do not have the money to spend on this
type of equipment, let alone the ability to replace it and upgrade each year.
 Over the past two years we have spent thousands of dollars on this equipment
and to this day are having tons of problems with it.  We are not beginners
either.  I have been in electric modeling (on a bit smaller scale) for years
and have always felt that electric's are overweight, underpowered, expensive
propulsion source.  It is easily conceivable to understand that the more
money one has to spend on this equipment, the better the performance they
will achieve.  Even though we have 4 sets of motors/controllers and several
hundred dollars of batteries, if we really want to compete next year we will
have to spend thousands more to upgrade, and that is economically impossible.


    So what to do?  Here is my suggestion.  Limit every team to a
displacement on either a glow or gas engine.  This would bring about
diversity in the types and numbers of engines, yet would decrease cost, and
increase reliability.  Better yet, if you really want to make this contest a
true design contest, limit every team to an identical simple glow motor such
as an OS FX .46 or OS Fx .61.  These ultra reliable motors cost $120 and $160
respectively.  I have dealt with these motors for years and have never had a
problem with them.  In fact, I still fly planes with these type of motors in
them that are almost 10 years old!  If you desire to make the contest even
more interesting you could set your limit to a larger gas motor such as a US
Engines 41 cc motor with spring starter.

    If you are very concerned about safety, you can enforce a rule that
requires teams to start their aircraft with an electric starter or a 'chicken
stick' (a rubber coated dowel rod to flip the prop with).

     In conclusion, eliminating cost and technology as variables will greatly
increase fairness as well as enjoyment and make it a true design, build and
fly contest.  Thank you for your time and considerations.

Sincerely,

Scott Foster