? for the gentlemen

[T.S.Davis]

How will this be enforced?

Will racers that aren't even internet savy be allowed to race?

I get calls from guys that don't even own a computer.

[Dan Chase]

As you already know, Terry, as long as it's in NAMBA or IMPBA's hand's, we can't enforce it. It's just OUR agreement.

[Darin Jordan]

I'm not sure ANY NAMBA record is going to be able to be upheld anyhow... HOW do you tech batteries? Gentleman's agreement or not??

[Dan Chase]

Good point, Darrin, I think I asked that before and never got answer.

[T.S.Davis]

Actually any given venue can enforce it's own limitations. As long as the venue requirements don't conflict with the safety rules. Well, I should include a disclaimer. That's my interpretation of the text. Either organizations Exec board could step in and squash the requirements if they feel they are too much a of a deviation from the rules or are unsafe or something.

The problem is when you get someone registered that's not aware of the gentlemens agreement.

I've never run SAW other than for grins with no timer or anything. Not the same I know. Flint is only about 45 minutes from me. I don't know if those that run that event could see the difference between a 2s and a 4s. Let alone tech a 10s. I'm not even sure they allow FE. Surely they would. They're boaters.

Did IMPBA get a capacity limit?

[Jay Turner]

The Gentlemen's Agreement (GA) does not require enforcement - it is an agreement among gentlemen afterall. Clearly anyone who desires can run outside the Gentlemen's rules - as long as they are within the NAMBA/IMPBA-specified class rules. If someone outside the agreement sets a record, it will and should stand. The new record holder should not be looked down upon simply because he didn't agree with the GA.

Since most of the serious SAW competitors are GA signees, and since most of them are indeed gentlemen, I don't see a problem on that end.


dafgda

[Randy Naylor]

The Gentlemen's Agreement (GA) does not require enforcement - it is an agreement among gentlemen afterall. Clearly anyone who desires can run outside the Gentlemen's rules - as long as they are within the NAMBA/IMPBA-specified class rules. If someone outside the agreement sets a record, it will and should stand. The new record holder should not be looked down upon simply because he didn't agree with the GA.

Since most of the serious SAW competitors are GA signees, and since most of them are indeed gentlemen, I don't see a problem on that end.


dafgda

How can I put this:confused: what is the use, if the GA has no Peer preshure? (Sp)sorry

[Darin Jordan]

The Gentlemen's Agreement (GA) does not require enforcement - it is an agreement among gentlemen afterall.

You are missing the point Jay... If this is a NAMBA records race... then the boats must be tech'd to validate that they meet the NAMBA rules...

You may be allowed to run 10,000 mah, and choose to only run 4350... but it still has to be verified in tech that you didn't exceed the limits... It has to be measured, just like boat length or cell count or magnet type (M2-class), etc...

The form for record application says:

Pursuant to NAMBA rules, any member applying for a NAMBA record will notify the CD immediately following the boat’s record breaking run. The CD or his designee will ensure that the boat has been technically inspected and complies with NAMBA rules for the particular class in which the record is being submitted.

It has to be technically inspected... persumably by someone who is actually going to inspect it...

We hereby certify that the required inspection was performed on the above referenced boat and that it meets the specification for the class indicated.

SIGNATURE OF PERSON PERFORMING THE INSPECTION:___________________



So regardless of whether you agree to only run XXX oz. of batteries or not... there still is not a method noted by NAMBA to verify the capacity of the record setting boat's batteries... no official method, anyhow... so how is this going to be done...???

Or are you all agreeing that the records will only be "official" amongst yourselves?

I'm pretty certain that if I show up with a 2S2P of 5000mah PolyRCs and go for an N2-Mono record, my "peers" are going to insist that capacity be verified should I achieve my goal... HOW is NAMBA going to do that???

[Dan Chase]

How can I put this:confused: what is the use, if the GA has no Peer preshure? (Sp)sorry

It doesn't require peer pressure Randy, it's just a matter of honoring your word and respecting your peers.

[Old Sloppy]

You are missing the point Jay... If this is a NAMBA records race... then the boats must be tech'd to validate that they meet the NAMBA rules...

You may be allowed to run 10,000 mah, and choose to only run 4350... but it still has to be verified in tech that you didn't exceed the limits... It has to be measured, just like boat length or cell count or magnet type (M2-class), etc...

The form for record application says:



It has to be technically inspected... persumably by someone who is actually going to inspect it...



So regardless of whether you agree to only run XXX oz. of batteries or not... there still is not a method noted by NAMBA to verify the capacity of the record setting boat's batteries... no official method, anyhow... so how is this going to be done...???

Or are you all agreeing that the records will only be "official" amongst yourselves?

I'm pretty certain that if I show up with a 2S2P of 5000mah PolyRCs and go for an N2-Mono record, my "peers" are going to insist that capacity be verified should I achieve my goal... HOW is NAMBA going to do that???

I would expect someone at the race would have similar batteries and/or know what they look like.

example: I know what a sub c cell looks like even with the shrink wrap missing...I don't need a scale or calipers...

There are not that many cells that are world record breaking quality.

The tech inspectors should be able to tell if you cheat.
Harry S.

[Dan Chase]

Darin, I think you and Jay are talking about two different things. If I'm not mistaken, Jay is referring only to the GA, you are referring to the broader picture of how NAMBA will tech the 10,000 mAh limit regardless of whether it's a SAW event or an Oval.

IMHO, With the GA, it's between the men that signed on, I would expect a certain amount of integrity and since we all know the records can potentially be eclipsed by 2p setup's and stand in the NAMBA or IMPBA record books, it's the 1p records we (the GA) count. I suppose it will be up to the men that signed on to the agreement to keep track of records set under the agreement. Personally speaking, when the SAW records are broken outside of the agreement, the NAMBA SAW record book will no longer be relevant.

[AndyKunz]

Personally speaking, when the SAW records are broken outside of the agreement, the NAMBA SAW record book will no longer be relevant.

But in the real world, once the records are broken within the NAMBA rules, the GA will be even less relevant than it is now.

Andy

[Jay Turner]

The GA is relevant only to those who signed it. All it does is limit the power in each class versus the NAMBA/IMPBA rules, nothing more. It does not eclipse any non-GA record, it is just a private agreement. Some seem to think it is supposed to be something more. It is not. It is open to anyone to join - but to those who decide not to participate - leave us alone. :moon:


asdfasd

[Darin Jordan]

It is open to anyone to join - but to those who decide not to participate - leave us alone. :moon:


asdfasd

Jay... If you look in the thread... I already agreed to it... happily... So as much as it's going to pain you and Joerg... I'm part of your "private" little group...

But even as such... If you break and existing NAMBA record, even under your GA... If the batteries can't be tech'd... I don't see how the record can be approved... by the current rules...

[Don Wollard]

Sounds complicated!

[AndyKunz]

Well I sure hope you guys figure this out before the Nationals, or before a club race ends submitting a new record. Darin's point that the CD cannot sign the form and keep his integrity is an important issue to be resolved.

It's like e-voting. If we can't trust the process, how can we be behind it? How can we trust a CD/Club/NAMBA if a record is accepted under the current rules?

As it stands, there's no way anybody can set a record at the Nationals. I know manufacturers like Randy and retailers like Ray will not be happy if all their first-place "should-be record" boats end up as "also-rans" in the long run.

Andy

[Darin Jordan]

As it stands, there's no way anybody can set a record at the Nationals.

I don't know if I agree with that completely... It's a little bit "gray"... but if we are trusting the manufacturers specs to get our nominal voltage for these cells, which we are... then we can trust their specs, or will, to get the mah ratings as well... based likely on weight...

The same could be done at the SAWs... Regardless of how he keeps trying to get everyone to THINK I'm just argumentative... I actually don't DISAGREE with Joerg and others concerning some of these ideas... I think if we require each competitor to provide the documentation for thier cells, we should be able to legitimately tech these cells... Seems like the only reasonable way to go about it to me...

[Don Wollard]

As it stands, there's no way anybody can set a record at the Nationals. Andy

This is a BIG deal for the world of FE's. I concur Andy. This is not a grey area as stated by others. Here is why. Last I read ... there where over 2,000 lipo patents pending - worldwide. Hundreds more coming. So how can these cells be the same - regardless whats opn the label?

Best of luck guys. Whatever is decided will set the trend for the future of the hobby. Choose carefully Mr Chairman.

[AndyKunz]

then we can trust their specs, or will, to get the mah ratings as well... based likely on weight...

I take it you mean data sheet weight vs. measured weight of the cells? If so, you better bring a good gram balance and calculator because from what we've seen, these vary at least as much as NiXX cells do. Weight is no more reliable than the label, extra shrink, added wires and connectors, etc. on the pack.

Andy

[raptor347]

I have a pretty hard line attitude towards tech stuff and records. My feeling is that there should be no records allowed under the current mah rule unless the record setting pack has been verified to be under the limit for the class (that means cycling the pack). I certainly wouldn't sign a record application going on manufacturers specs. Going by a spec sheet would be like a nitro racer handing the motor spec sheet to the tech inspector and expecting it to replace an engine tear down.

All that being said, as the rule stands I'm not planning to attend the LA SAWs this year because the rule isn't practical to enforce (especialy for the non-FE CD/inspectors). I didn't like this part of the rule before/when it was proposed and I didn't vote for it, but it passed and this is the mess we have to deal with.

As for nationals, all I can say is I'm not going to spend the evenings cycling other peoples packs to verify capacity.

Flame suit on!!!

[Darin Jordan]

Flame suit on!!!

No... Not a flame suit... remember??... ;)

http://weeklyad.target.com/target/images/target/bullseye.gif

[Dan Chase]

All that being said, as the rule stands I'm not planning to attend the LA SAWs this year because the rule isn't practical to enforce (especialy for the non-FE CD/inspectors).

That wont effect me, I just go for the free beer and the women of low moral values... :D

Flame suit on!!!

Good idea!!!
Flames + Snowman = H2o :eek:

[Ub Hauled]

We gotta love you Dan,
you are too funny!!!
LOL

[AndyKunz]

Flames + Snowman = H2o :eek:

Dan,

Are you hinting that perhaps THERE IS NO TERRY DAVIS?

Or that TERRY DAVIS IS REALLY A BIG GUY LIVING ON THE LEFT COAST?

Andy

[T.S.Davis]

No mah restrictions. They never should have been an option on the proposal. It was an olive branch to the "we must have limits" crowd. The fervor bordered on hesteria. Those that wanted those mah restrictions have no answers.

[Darin Jordan]

No mah restrictions. They never should have been an option on the proposal. It was an olive branch to the "we must have limits" crowd. The fervor bordered on hesteria. Those that wanted those mah restrictions have no answers.

Amen, Brother Terry! :yeah:

[Old Sloppy]

the rule isn't practical to enforce.



You guys need to realize the whole system isn't practical to enforce.

Cycle the cells? With what brand equipment? Who is going to pay for this equipment?

For how many hours? Do we extend the race by a day or two for testing?

At what tempature? Each brand of cell will respond differently.

How many minutes do we cool off the cells before testing begins? With what timing equipment do we use? is it certified?

At what amp draw rate? Each class has different cell requirements.

You then need to buy the cells you damage, or the owner claims you damaged due to destructive testing..

The only logical answer is to rename all classes.
L2 ( 2 cells in series, no paraell allowed)
L2P (2 cells series, no para limit)
L3 ( 3 cells in series, no paraell allowed)
L3P ( 3 cell series, no para limit)
...
...
...
L14 ( 14 cell series, no para)
L14P ( 14 cell series,no para limits) ( my personal favorite)

This is techable and logical...and it does not favor anybody.

Harry S.

[brooks93]

I was going to stay out of this but, I guess I don't know whats good for me.

Personally speaking, when the SAW records are broken outside of the agreement, the NAMBA SAW record book will no longer be relevant


this is why the GA is a Crock of Crap. So anybody that runs more then 6s and sets a record the "MEN" won't recognize it.

You guys do know that the GA was ment for Riggers only when it was thought of by Joerg.

Even Joerg himself stated that it was not intended for monos, cats, or sport hydro's.

I have no problem with you guys doing the GA or 1p but, don't make it look like the guys that want to run 6s and above look like their records mean nothing. Either that or grow a set and run something bigger. There are only a handful of people that run Big boats and most of them are not on the GA for that reason. Make the GA cover up to 10s in everything except rigger.

i don't agree with mah restriction as its stated in the rules either and I also did not vote for it but its in so we need to live with it.

Harry it doesn't take renaming the class's to fix the problem. It takes someone to write a change and submit it but, thats to easy and they would rather freaking cry about it then do something about it.

[AndyKunz]

Another approach, but way too radical for the masses:

Get rid of ALL the voltage classes. Instead, apply only hull dimensions (min/max). If you need more limits, include weight (min/max) of the whole shebang.

Andy

[Darin Jordan]

Member of Club "I HAVE 2P"


That's really funny! :yeah:

Another approach, but way too radical for the masses:

Get rid of ALL the voltage classes. Instead, apply only hull dimensions (min/max).

Hmmmm.... I like the second part of that!! ;)

[eddieh]

Another approach, but way too radical for the masses:

Get rid of ALL the voltage classes. Instead, apply only hull dimensions (min/max). If you need more limits, include weight (min/max) of the whole shebang.

Andy

Andy yup waaaayyyyy to Radical, next thing we will see 32 cell n-2's yes they will be very small cells....:yeah:


I know i need to start looking for another hobby.....:moon:

[Dan Chase]

The GA is relevant only to those who signed it. All it does is limit the power in each class versus the NAMBA/IMPBA rules, nothing more. It does not eclipse any non-GA record, it is just a private agreement. Some seem to think it is supposed to be something more. It is not. It is open to anyone to join - but to those who decide not to participate - leave us alone. :moon:


Thank you, Jay!!! I don't understand why this is so hard for some people to understand!!! :rolls:

[Dan Chase]

Dan,

Are you hinting that perhaps THERE IS NO TERRY DAVIS?

Or that TERRY DAVIS IS REALLY A BIG GUY LIVING ON THE LEFT COAST?

Andy

No Andy, I was trying to lighten the moment of a serious situation. No hidden meaning, no hidden agenda. No reason to take out your secret decoder ring...

[AndyKunz]

Good, Dan, because I was being funny too.

Andy

[D. Newland]

I have a pretty hard line attitude towards tech stuff and records. My feeling is that there should be no records allowed under the current mah rule unless the record setting pack has been verified to be under the limit for the class (that means cycling the pack). I certainly wouldn't sign a record application going on manufacturers specs. ...

Flame suit on!!!

Oh the drama, Brian! You mean to tell me that if Darin sets an N-2 Mono Sprint record with a 2S1P pack of PolyRC 5000's, you'll want to peak then drain the pack before signing the record form?? Surely there's no grey in this example.

We have precedence in using manufacturer data, so I'm not sure why it's now a problem. Nothing will ever be perfect with this stuff.

This isn't a flame. It's more like me looking under your dress to see what you've got going on down there...:moon:

[T.S.Davis]

...and those that haven't participated but would like to? Do it the "gentlemens" way or stay home. Well, maybe you still can race but we wont like you or give you any respect. Sounds....inviting.

okay, now I'm just being a drama queen. haha

[MR truckpull]

You guys do know that the GA was ment for Riggers only when it was thought of by Joerg.

Even Joerg himself stated that it was not intended for monos, cats, or sport hydro's.


Joerg, is this true??

So the 6S rule (GA) is only for riggers.

Up to 10S for Monos, Cats, and Sport Hydro.


Larry

[Ub Hauled]

The way I look at this GA is that it is kinda like a bet between friends:
"- I bet you that I can beat anyone here with only X cells at X mAh!". Then some of the other friends join in. You can be part of this group of friends or not, your call, but I refuse to believe that someone will be discriminated if he/she run their boats with the mAh specified by the book... it would be discriminating some one that runs fewer cells then the max allowed... it'd be nonsense... childish really.
The "Top Guns" would be faster then us regular folks even with half mAh anyway.

[raptor347]

Oh the drama, Brian! You mean to tell me that if Darin sets an N-2 Mono Sprint record with a 2S1P pack of PolyRC 5000's, you'll want to peak then drain the pack before signing the record form?? Surely there's no grey in this example.

We have precedence in using manufacturer data, so I'm not sure why it's now a problem. Nothing will ever be perfect with this stuff.

This isn't a flame. It's more like me looking under your dress to see what you've got going on down there...:moon:

The 1P pack goes in the pile to get cycled just like anything else.

The problem isn't with manufacturers data, it's the way the rule is written. The question is capacity, to measure it you cycle the pack. The point of a tech inspection is to verify that the example that set the record is within the rules.

Back when I played with stupid fast stuff you climb in, a tech inspector once told me over a beer "Just because we know you can't possibly break the rules with that setup doesn't get you out of tech inspection".

Hell, if it's Darin's pack I'll tech it twice;). You never know what those sneeky aerospace guys will come up with.

As for the last question: They're big and brass and they make up for other inadequacies!:moon:

[AndyKunz]

Joerg, is this true??

So the 6S rule (GA) is only for riggers.

Up to 10S for Monos, Cats, and Sport Hydro.


Larry

The starting post:

http://rumrunnerracing.com/feforums/showthread.php?p=179448&highlight=agreement#post179448

[Darin Jordan]

As for the last question: They're big and brass and they make up for other inadequacies!:moon:


You guys... These are visualizations... and I'm sure I'm not alone in this thought... that I JUST DON'T NEED!! :doh: I mean like gag me with a spoon... :p

[lohring]

When are the electric SAWs at Legg Lake? The District 19 schedule says November 10 and 11 for the November SAW. We plan to be there doing our best to annoy all the electric racers, the same as last year.

As far as tech inspection goes, I've always gone on the principal that if your equipment performs better than mine, I know it's illegal since I'm cheating.

Lohring Miller

[Capt Ron]

The way I look at this GA is that it is kinda like a bet between friends:
"- I bet you that I can beat anyone here with only X cells at X mAh!". Then some of the other friends join in. You can be part of this group of friends or not, your call, but I refuse to believe that someone will be discriminated if he/she run their boats with the mAh specified by the book... it would be discriminating some one that runs fewer cells then the max allowed... it'd be nonsense... childish really.
The "Top Guns" would be faster then us regular folks even with half mAh anyway.


sorry Ub...

but the way you see it isn't even close...

i'm on the GA list and have met and run with most of the folks that are signed on to the agreement...

our motives are being second guessed off the charts...

from protecting our records to having no balls...

give it a break...

like Jay Turner said, it's not nearly as complicated as folks make it out to be...

take the time to chat with Dan Chase about this issue next time you see him...


Ron

[Ragged Edge]

As far as tech inspection goes, I've always gone on the principal that if your equipment performs better than mine, I know it's illegal since I'm cheating.

Lohring Miller

:yeah: I love it :yeah:

Like I always say:
Win when you can, loose when you must, but always cheat!!!

[Ub Hauled]

Will do Capt...

[raptor347]

When are the electric SAWs at Legg Lake? The District 19 schedule says November 10 and 11 for the November SAW. We plan to be there doing our best to annoy all the electric racers, the same as last year.

As far as tech inspection goes, I've always gone on the principal that if your equipment performs better than mine, I know it's illegal since I'm cheating.

Lohring Miller

As far as I know, there won't be any electric only SAWs this year. You certainly weren't annoying me last year. It was great to see the huge beast go!

I've got to give Mark Grim a call tonight to see if he has any ideas on the tech problem.

Another quote from an SCTA tech inspector-
"Loopholes are just rungs on the ladder to the top"

[BILL OXIDEAN]

As awesome as it is to run, I knew lipo would turn out a big bickering mess of rule bending, pouting, and disagreement not to mention cheating..
In my opinion, people cheat beceause they NEED to :confused:
A one year trial in a couple of classes would have been WAAAAY more
"user freindly".. Just to see what problems could arise, then the
issues would be on a smaller scale and easier to
deal with

Just my 2 cents..

[D. Newland]

The problem isn't with manufacturers data, it's the way the rule is written. The question is capacity, to measure it you cycle the pack. The point of a tech inspection is to verify that the example that set the record is within the rules.

Agreed...don't know what else to say about it, other than let's try to find a reasonable solution to teching. As a racer, I wouldn't expect, nor would I want a race organizer/CD to cycle packs. It's going to be yet another give/take scenerio in the world of FE model boat racing!

Hell, if it's Darin's pack I'll tech it twice;). You never know what those sneeky aerospace guys will come up with.

NO!!! It will be the start of another series of RR threads! Just kidding, Darin. Keep up the good work. :)

As for the last question: They're big and brass and they make up for other inadequacies!:moon:

You forget that I got a look-see at the Sardine race when you were on the driver stand.

[AndyKunz]

A one year trial in a couple of classes would have been WAAAAY more "user freindly".. Just to see what problems could arise, then the issues would be on a smaller scale and easier to deal with

The one-year trial (and then some) was conducted by a number of guys in the Mid-West.

NONE OF THE PROBLEMS LIKE
. OVER-THE-TOP AMPERAGES,
. MAJOR UN-INTENTIONAL FIRES (they even demo'd how HARD it is to make one)
. EXCESSIVELY FAST BOAT SPEEDS
. HUMONGOUS HULLS IN SMALL CLASSES

AROSE DURING THEIR TESTING.

Andy

[BILL OXIDEAN]

The one-year trial (and then some) was conducted by a number of guys in the Mid-West.

NONE OF THE PROBLEMS LIKE
. OVER-THE-TOP AMPERAGES,
. MAJOR UN-INTENTIONAL FIRES (they even demo'd how HARD it is to make one)
. EXCESSIVELY FAST BOAT SPEEDS
. HUMONGOUS HULLS IN SMALL CLASSES

AROSE DURING THEIR TESTING.

Andy


Wow! I guess a one year trial wasn't the answer.. good to know Andy
Maybe things changed when SAWS nuts got involved

[D. Newland]

The problem isn't with manufacturers data, it's the way the rule is written. The question is capacity, to measure it you cycle the pack. The point of a tech inspection is to verify that the example that set the record is within the rules.

Actually, if you don't mind, I'm going to take a little stronger stance on this.

To cycle the pack for a tech inspection, you have to first drain it 100%. That can't really happen accurately with LiPo's, right? There's always something left in the tank, unless you want to damage the cells.

There has to be a better way.

[Darin Jordan]

There has to be a better way.

There is... DUMP the mah limits... ;)

[Terrance Nissen]

There is... DUMP the mah limits... ;)

...and add hull length limits...;)

[Darin Jordan]

...and add hull length limits...;)


Yah... Yah...Yah... Yah... Yah... Yah...!
http://www.jedisparadise.co.uk/childrenstv/Hong_Kong_Phooey/Hong_Kong_Phooey040.jpg

[Ub Hauled]

Hong Kong Phooey...
I vote for Karate Chop allowed in races
:)

[D.Smock]

You forget that I got a look-see at the Sardine race when you were on the driver stand.

I knew he had some big ones.:thumup: Are they really brass???? ROFL:D

Doug

[Darin Jordan]

I knew he had some big ones.:thumup: Are they really brass???? ROFL:D

Doug

Sure they are.... brass terminals are standard in FE applications, aren't they??? ;)

[Dan Chase]

There is... DUMP the mah limits... ;)

... in favor of weight limits... that would only allow about 5K - 6K mAh...:wave:

[lohring]

This is a copy of the post in the Rules section. I forgot about hull size limits. There are many ways to regulate motor power for the electric classes. The current rules are one way to set classes that is difficult to check without time consuming tests with expensive equipment. This was pointed out above. You are the experts, so figure out a better way. So far the suggestions have been:

1) Take the manufacturer's word on cell capacity (the current rules as they will be enforced)
2) Determine capacity by weight (or volume) and voltage
3) Limit maximum or average current electronically
4) Limit currents by increasing run times under the current rules (my thought)

Are their better ones? How can the current rules be enforced?

Lohring Miller

[AndyKunz]

... in favor of weight limits... that would only allow about 5K - 6K mAh...:wave:

Which works very much against those guys who wan to run steel-cased cells (NiMH, A123, other LiIon, etc.). Some people might like the perceived safety advantages, others the costs, ...

Good idea :rolleyes: - why not just say "thou shalt run only Brand X cells" - it's makes about as much sense. Just alienate everybody who doesn't run exactly what you want. Isn't that how the Sport rules got screwed up worse than they already were?

Andy

[Darin Jordan]

This is a copy of the post in the Rules section. I forgot about hull size limits. There are many ways to regulate motor power for the electric classes.

Are their better ones? How can the current rules be enforced?

Lohring Miller

Lohring,

Hull size limits would put a practical limit on how much power can be used... You are only going to get soooooo much power into a 27" N2 boat... period... Any more and the boat won't be drivable... and you won't be finishing races... Reasonable racers would select power based on what the hull can handle and what will allow them to finish...

I know that Joerg and others may disagree... but they are ignoring the reality of what has actually been happening... Even Jay Turner stated that he is against hull size limits for the reason that we "need" to be able to grow the hulls to "deal with" improving technology and increased power levels... (I'll go back and find the thread if needed... but hopefully Jay will agree that I paraphrased this correctly...)... That notion alone supports my arguement... The steadily increasing hull sizes over the past three seasons does as well... In that time, we've gone from 24-29" P-Sport boats to 33" Sport 20 hulls... and people are still looking at even bigger hulls...

Perhaps if you combined hull-size limits with some kind of weight/volume maximum for cells... or maybe even motors like the IMPBA is suggesting... you'd have all the limits you'd need to manage the growth...

Another idea might be to take away the minimum voltages for the classes... If someone has a combo that they feel they just HAVE to run on a 2S setup, but a 27" hull can't handle it, or the motor for the combo is too heavy to fit the rules for the N2 class, let them go run it in P... or something like that...

[Steven Vaccaro]

Length gets my vote. Its the easiest to tech.

[lohring]

The trouble with size limits is I doubt that they will work as well as you think. An example from straight line racing is Joerg's electric hydro compared to Mike Bontoft's 25cc (not last years 36cc monster) hydro. Joerg's boat had around 8 hp as did Mike's. Electric motors do have a more desirable torque curve and can run more efficient props because they can turn more rpm. Joerg went 140 mph, Mike went 110. Joerg's boat was much smaller than Mike's. A second example is my electric mono (a 25" Dark Horse). The first tests show that it is a good bit faster than a 33" Seducer mono with a 3.5cc nitro engine. It is still very controllable at this speed. I know I'm not comparing apples with apples, but good design will be able to get around the size limits to some degree. I think a method to limit the power available in a constructive way will be the most desirable.

Lohring Miller

[AndyKunz]

Exactly the point. Then driving skill and hull design will be the controlling factors, not cubic dollars in the drivetrain.

Andy

[Alan]

Hull length regulations have been more widely accepted by racers in OH MI and Canada. If you even try to compare motors from different mfg'ers and determine as to how they will be seperated you will have a mjor headache on your hands. Aside from general size you will not be able to regulate winds. Only a few makers actually stamp the windings on the can...others just use stickers if even that.

[Old Sloppy]

But size alone is a flawed concept.
How many inches is Joerg's rigger?
Devide the mph by inches and all boats must now be CF riggers in order to compete.
Lets just outlaw all non spec classes & return back to the days where FE was considered "toys". (sarcasm)
Size minimum's are more realistic, given the desire to advance the hobby.

Harry S.

[brooks93]

again.

Saws needs it own rules. it can not follow oval rules anymore.

the Saw rules should cover
1s to 6s riggers
1s to 10s mono, sport hydro, and cats

[Ub Hauled]

SAWs are a beast on their own little world...let's make it "official" and have SAW rules.

[AndyKunz]

That would be good. Then we can go back to the days when the SAW boats were actually oval boats with a bigger prop and no/smaller skid fin.

Andy

[brooks93]

thats what mine are Andy

[lohring]

Compared to piston engines, the power available from an electric system is really simple. Volts times amps times motor/controller efficiency equals power to the propeller. Since the speed is proportional to power cubed, small differences in power aren't going to make much difference in speed. With batteries, the volts part is easy. It's the amps part that we need a rule for. Everything else is smoke and mirrors and misses the point.

Lohring Miller

[Steven Vaccaro]

Compared to piston engines, the power available from an electric system is really simple. Volts times amps times motor/controller efficiency equals power to the propeller. Since the speed is proportional to power cubed, small differences in power aren't going to make much difference in speed. With batteries, the volts part is easy. It's the amps part that we need a rule for. Everything else is smoke and mirrors and misses the point.

Lohring Miller
In full bodied hydros and monos, size would be a large help in this problem. I don't see a better solution and to this point in time I have not seen anyone propose a better solution. What we have now is a bunch of clubs in the country that are starting to break off and run their own rules. It wont take much time for those clubs and members to say to themselves "why do we need namba?". If someone reading this is interested in the well being of the "namba" organization they should really think about addressing this QUICKLY.

[brooks93]

the problem is you have people pulling someones puppet strings in the back ground and writing articles based on what ifs and mythical numbers that have nothing to do with oval and besides on paper are not even real or could be. But hey lets throw these crazy numbers out there to drum the dooms day sirens. At least he could consult some people that have raced them in oval and saws.

[brooks93]

If someone reading this is interested in the well being of the "namba" organization they should really think about addressing this QUICKLY.

the members have to fix it not namba. no magic wand sorry

[Steven Vaccaro]

the members have to fix it not namba. no magic wand sorry
I think I comprehend how namba works Kelly. Let me re-phase it for you, unless someone steps up and rights a rule to be voted on nothing will happen and things we only get worse for NAMBA. EVERY ACTIVE club that I have spoken to is moving in a different direction, AWAY from NAMBA.

[brooks93]

unless someone steps up and rights a rule to be voted on nothing will happen and things we only get worse for NAMBA. EVERY ACTIVE club that I have spoken to is moving in a different direction, AWAY from NAMBA.


whats stopping them? They all want someone else to do it.

[Darin Jordan]

...unless someone steps up and rights a rule to be voted on nothing will happen and things we only get worse for NAMBA.

Steven,

After the bashing that the "old guard" here put on some of us last year... WHY would anyone who supports one of these modern and sensible ideas be willing to step forward and carry that target?? Even the mere mention of putting something forth such as the IMPBA is proposing draws scowls and jeers from those who are presumed to "know"...

As for needing to control the amps... Outside of rigger designs... When someone puts a 27" N2-Mono together that would be capable of wielding a setup capable of running 300amps continuous... AND be competitive (in other words, doesn't need to weigh 10lbs to stay on the water...) THEN I'll believe that length limits aren't the answer to CONTROLLING how much power we USE... NOT what's available, but what we can actually PRACTICALLY USE... Outside of that, I don't give a rip if someone wants to put a 300amp setup in the 27" hull... It's just going to break a lot of equipment, and won't be finishing races...

[Steven Vaccaro]

Here is the message that has just been posted before edditing:
***************
whats stopping you Steve?
***************


Time, and lack of racing experience with lipo.

I see other guys that actively race around the country jumping ship. Its a shame. Instead of fixing what was working well, they decided to split what was already a small group. Don't take that as a shot at you Kelly! I know you have done more than your fair share.

[Darin Jordan]

whats stopping them? They all want someone else to do it.

Hmmmm.... Our club worked alongside those who didn't want to wait around for "someone else to do it"... and look where it got us... right here... :rolls:

And in reality... the negatives were mostly generated from a few key people whose opinions seem to be valued above all others....

By the way... Another uneventful and FUN raceday with Lipos yesterday... Did lose another IB4200 NiMH pack however... :rolleyes:

[brooks93]

not a shot I know. which is why I edited mine so it wasn't a shot at you.

lack of experience is a big thing but, some chose to look at paper over experience which is why I am getting pissed about it. The rules haven't even been really been raced yet.

I have been racing them in open class's for 3 years. I have pushed them hard and have pretty good idea of whats possible and whats not using equipment that can do these magical numbers. I have saw raced them also. and found the opposite of whats being posted.

Had one setup that we tried a 2p setup with a 3080/4 turn on a 40/160. I had the setup at one point pulling out 8000 mah in 4 straight line pass's (2000 mah's a pass. That setup was slower by 3 mph then the setup that pulled out 900 mah a pass and the 40/160 didn't thermal either.


but lets keep hearing about these arc welder power setups that on paper should do (fill in your own BS here)

[AndyKunz]

Compared to piston engines, the power available from an electric system is really simple. Volts times amps times motor/controller efficiency equals power to the propeller. Since the speed is proportional to power cubed, small differences in power aren't going to make much difference in speed. With batteries, the volts part is easy. It's the amps part that we need a rule for. Everything else is smoke and mirrors and misses the point. (Emphasis mine)

That's a misconception, Lohring. We don't need to limit amps if we have a sane other limit.

During WW2, planes got small at first (Hurricane vs. Spitfire) then as time moved on the engines caught up and planes went back up in size (Bearcat). Why? Because you need a larger airframe to carry the firepower, and because you need to control the power you have available.

If you are in say Formula 1 racing, you have a fixed engine to work with. You make the hull/airframe/chassis appropriately sized for the power from the engine. If you turn the equation around, and limit hull/airframe/chassis you don't need to control the limits on the powerplant - the craft will limit that for you, because it will still need to be controlled safely.

If you go back to the early days of racing, you see this sort of thing working itself out. NAMBA rules are still in the 1920's, and trying to put a limit on the amps (harder to control than a fuel limiter) you are trying to drive a horse in a straight line with only one bit and one side of the reins.

Andy

[Mark F]

You guys might want to look at what the F5B airplane guys are doing to equal the playig field. There going to start using watt limiters that will be set to a derired number. You can pull all the amps you want but when you get to the limit number of watts the limiter shuts off your motor. I talked to Steve Neu this weekend and they think they got all the bugs worked out so they will be available soon. Once you figure out how many watts you want per class then every one will have to have one if you want to compete in that class. I dont think they will be that expensive so shouldn't be to much wining about that part. As soon as they are available I will let everyone know.

Mark

[Darin Jordan]

I dont think they will be that expensive so shouldn't be to much wining about that part. As soon as they are available I will let everyone know.

Mark

When you talk of expense... aren't the F5B planes ONE class of airplane?? Multiply whatever you come up with for cost by 4 or 5... that's what most of us would have to put out to outfit all of our boats with these things...

Will be interested to see what it is they've come up with... Sounds like one solutions... albiet an unnecessarily complex one...

[Dan Chase]

When you talk of expense... aren't the F5B planes ONE class of airplane?? Multiply whatever you come up with for cost by 4 or 5... that's what most of us would have to put out to outfit all of our boats with these things...

Hmmm, that sounds like the same argument I was making over LiPo for those of us who had not switched last year...

[AndyKunz]

EXCEPT, Dan, that LiPo's were not mandated "thou shalt run LiPo cells" whereas a limiter like this would necessarily be mandated for all the people running that class. MAJOR difference.

Andy

[JfromJAGs]

I was a few day sick and offline, so I missed all of it until now.

What a development, from a simple question, based on a missunderstanding of the agreement, to the common understanding that the current rules are worthless, because impossible to tech.

Well, I'm not going to comment on the discussion - everything has been said at least 10 times and there are very good reasons against a general hull size limit replacing power rules.

There are just 2 things I want to address:

1. The question was: is the 6s agreement riggers only? NO, for 2007 the agreement is for all SAW classes. The idea was to test LiPo's for SAWs in 2007 and then work on a set of new international SAW rules for 2008. The new rules may include riggers with more than 6s, as well as classes with way more cells than just 6. I don't know yet, but we are working on it.

2. I don't like the assumption that everyone who wins or sets records cheats. This is the wrong picture and it also does not apply. Thanks.

Joerg

[Dan Chase]

EXCEPT, Dan, that LiPo's were not mandated "thou shalt run LiPo cells" whereas a limiter like this would necessarily be mandated for all the people running that class. MAJOR difference.

Andy

You mean not mandated unless you wanted to be competitive... :rolls: :rolls: :rolls:

You should go into politics, Andy, you have more way to spin a story then Clinton!

[AndyKunz]

Darin sent me an e-mail this morning. He was running year-old NiMH 3800's and beat new 4200's that were considerably faster.

Andy

[Dan Chase]

What does comparing 3800's to 4200 have to do with anything on this thread? :confused:

I'll just defer back to what Jay said about the GA, "but to those who decide not to participate - leave us alone." :moon:

[JfromJAGs]

He was running year-old NiMH 3800's and beat new 4200's that were considerably faster.

Yes, and Lewinsky did it better than Hillary.

[raptor347]

Can somebody please remove my name from the "List". I don't see the way this has been presented and is proceeding as doing our hobby any good. I don't want my name tied to the politics that has come out of it.

What started as a discussion of self imposed limits between the three people most likely to build over the top hydros has turned into something else.

[Old Sloppy]

What started as a discussion of self imposed limits between the three people most likely to build over the top hydros has turned into something else.


I second that idea...:yeah:

I do not want "rigger speed restrictions" imposed on my class.

I do not wish to race riggers at this time.

In order to compete I would be forced to build a smaller model.

I do not want a very small group redirecting SAW's to their favorite hull type.

Only certian hulls respond favorably to 6s, other hulls are in effect kicked out of racing against NAMBA & IMPBA rules.

Harry S.

[JfromJAGs]

Can somebody please remove my name from the "List". I don't see the way this has been presented and is proceeding as doing our hobby any good. I don't want my name tied to the politics that has come out of it.

What started as a discussion of self imposed limits between the three people most likely to build over the top hydros has turned into something else.

I removed you from the list. I'm sorry Brian, if I upset you. I do respect your decission, although I don't understand it at this point.

The whole world is about something else most of the time. Yes, it started out as a self imposed limit, but we also talked about safty and as a recommendation for others. We wanted this to be the new set of SAW rules, at least me and some others understood it that way. There were also others involved than just 3, others who run offshore and mono's. They also voted for a 6s1p maximum for all classes at that time.

Joerg

[AndyKunz]

What does comparing 3800's to 4200 have to do with anything on this thread? :confused:

SKILL LEVEL, DAN! There's more to racing than pure power.

I'll just defer back to what Jay said about the GA, "but to those who decide not to participate - leave us alone."

:moon:

Participate in what, Dan? Your club of "gentlemen?" We can't talk about what goes on in a "gentleman's club" on a family board.

Or is it directed at those who haven't participated at every SAW event that you have gone to? Where were you when I earned my shields?

Andy