Conference vmszoo::rc

    
    	Another view...

    Interesting reading - emotional to say the least!
    
    When a any group that is a minority, tries to estalish it's own
    turf/rights, it's always a fight - and as popular as R/C is, it
    doesn't compare with a sport like golf.  And while money may be
    a consideration, and the so-called importance of concentration
    needed by weekend duffers (of which I am one - and also an R/C'st)
    I just wanted to raise a point about noise pollution.
    
    If anyone has golfed, especially early in the morning when most
    folks (execpt for leagues) do, a lot of why folks golf is to enjoy
    the outdoors...feel the warmth of the morning sun, hear the birds
    and get close to nature...not everyone is trying to score birdies
    on every hole!  When walking on the course in the morning, I would 
    no more want to hear an R/C plane or gas car - even when I'm not
    hitting the ball - then I would want to hear a chain saw or power
    tool at 6 am on Sunday morning...a snowmobile at 11 pm at night...
    or some dirt bike running unrestricted exhaust trying to keep up
    with a harley running "tuned" pipes!  It's just the way things are.
    Some sounds are simply too offensive to most folks...and sadly,
    what is one person's tea is another's poison...
    
    Maybe the answer is to combine R/C flying with skeet shooting...
    you can always mount darts on the wings to help equalize the threat
    for shooters!
    
    
    

    While I sympathize with Al's comments in another note (by the way,
    thanks, Jeff, for starting a new note on this topic), it's not
    an unusual situation, knowing human nature. And you're going to
    have to change human nature to solve this one.

    Other hobbies have similar problems. Being a "ham", I can assure
    you that that hobby has taken much abuse over the years, being
    blamed for radio and TV interference that is caused by poorly
    designed consumer electronics. A significant effort of the ARRL
    goes into helping hams to deal with TVI/RFI complaints. Hams
    are discriminated against at the local level, via zoning
    ordinances that prohibit the erection of antenna towers (this one
    was recently helped by a favorable FCC ruling that can actually
    be used to override unreasonable local regulations).

    Several years ago I read a story about a ham who erected a tower
    in his back yard. Immediately, he started getting complaints from
    neighbors about interference. Finally he got fed up and took down
    the tower. And he had never gotten around to connected the tower
    antenna to his radio!

    The answer is to try to educate, and then find a way to coexist.
    I would guess that golf has been around longer than R/C, and has
    more participants, so we'll have to be the ones to modify our
    behavior. So, I'm going back to the note about sound reduction
    and find out all I can about that topic!

    Dave

>    Maybe the answer is to combine R/C flying with skeet shooting...
>    you can always mount darts on the wings to help equalize the threat
>    for shooters!

No - No - at the last glider competition we went to they were next to a 
sportsman club and you guessed.  BOOM, BOOM, BOOM very difficult to
fly when you keep hearing guns going off.

Bye          --+--
Kay R. Fisher  |
---------------O---------------
================================================================================
    
    
    

    It appears that some of statements have been misinterpreted or
    misunderstood, most likely due to a failure on my part to qualify
    them in adequate detail.
    
    First, allow me to say that I don't hate golf!  Many of my best
    friends are golfers.  :B^)  Additionally, I don't blame the 'game'
    of golf for whatever woes we R/C'ers suffer in pursuit of our own
    recreation.  As has been mentioned, golf is an extremely popular
    recreation/sport with a rich history and deserved popularity.
    
    What I _am_ tring to say is that golfers make poor neighbors for
    a flying field and wherever/whenever the situation exists where
    R/C shares an area with a golf course, the R/C'ers _will_ lose out!
    It's not a question of 'if,' it's simply a matter of 'when.'  Those
    of you who also golf are certainly more tolerant since you participate
    in both recreations and I don't say that every golfer or even most
    golfers are the problem.  The unfortunate truth, however, is that,
    even though their numbers may be small, enough golfers will blame 
    _any_ distraction, real or imagined, for a lack of skill/talent on 
    their part that those standing behind the cash-register _will_ listen
    and _will_ act to protect and assure a lucrative income.
    
    The point has been made, and well taken, that other recreations
    might react similarly to having R/C'ers as neighbors.  While probably
    true, I can only point to the isolated example of Mile Square Park
    where the only complainers are continually the golfers.  Few if
    any complaints are received from the tennis, handball, soccer, softball
    and other venues of the park, only the golfers.
    
    Let me hasten, again, to say that I'm still not attacking the 'game'
    of golf.  What I _am_ attacking is the minority of people in _ANY_
    activity, including golf, who are so intolerant of another group's
    harmless recreation as to gripe, bitch, complain and, eventually,
    deprive that group of it's right to pursue their diversion, with
    virtually _NO_ attempt to understand it, let alone meet with it's
    practicioners to seek a solution or compromise.  It always seems
    to be a case of "That group disturbs us, let's drive them off!"
    Not meet with them, mind you, "drive them off!"  
    
    As is the point of this topic, the majority of the burden to try
    to fix or at least peacefully coexist with this problem lies with
    us.  We _MUST_ police and discipline ourselves to reduce the nuisance
    factor as much as is practically possible and noise is only a part
    of the issue.  Irresponsible R/C'ers who shun the common sense rules
    of safety and responsible operation of their models are as big a
    threat, if not bigger, than noise.  How many times have you heard
    or read about a field being lost because of the behavior of a non-club
    member who thumbed his nose at those who were trying valiantly to
    live up to a use agreement?  Too many times!  As Jeff states, we
    _MUST_ do _ALL_ that's possible to make _ourselves_ better neighbors
    too, even if that involves offending or running off the non-conformists
    who insist on exercizing _their_ freedoms to the detriment of the
    majority.                       
    
    Summing up, intolerance and lack of consideration for others is
    absolutely "Numero-Uno" on my list of pet-peeves and I resent it wherever
    it occurs.  It's just unfortunate that, from the R/C posture/perspec-
    tive, all too often, those demonstrating this lack of common courtesy
    and understanding, happened to be practicioners of the game of golf.

      |
      | |      00	 Adios,      Al
    |_|_|      ( >o
      |    Z__(O_\_	(The Desert Rat)

>
>>    Maybe the answer is to combine R/C flying with skeet shooting...
>>    you can always mount darts on the wings to help equalize the threat
>>    for shooters!
>
>No - No - at the last glider competition we went to they were next to a 
>sportsman club and you guessed.  BOOM, BOOM, BOOM very difficult to
>fly when you keep hearing guns going off.
>

    Funny thing, here, is that I fly RC, Golf, and shoot Skeet.  I've
    always suspected that the three "sports" could be combined into
    one.  Certainly, some fun could be had shooting at flying models
    (not mine, though, yours, please), but I've never been able to
    work Golf into the equation.  Maybe some of you guys out there
    could help me with this.  If all three hobbies could be combined,
    it might well mean a boone to our problems with noise and loss of
    fields (of course, I fly electric, exclusively, so Golfers never
    complain to me, but I have occasionaly wondered if anyone at the
    Westboro field, which is state game preservation land, has ever
    been really "shot down" by some over zealous big-game pidgeon
    hunter).

    Randy (8^D)
    
    

    That's interesting, I too RC, Golf and skeet...  
    
    Al,
    
    I think one of the reasons that there seem to be a lot of contention
    is that both sports need a fair amount of open area.  Therefore
    you are more likely to have a flying field near a course.  With
    this increased frequency, you also get an increase in frequency
    of complaints.
    
    Yes, *EDUCATED* golfers could be more tolerant.  So let's educate
    them, not condemn them for complaining.
    
    cheers,
    jeff
    

    
    Combine R/C, Skeet & Golf, let's see...
    
    
    Here we are on the 4th hole...1st person tees off and drives the
    ball with a viscous hook, deep into the woods on the left side...
    but wait...a J3 spotter plane swoops down and quickly locates the
    ball, dropping a signal flare to mark the location...hurray!
    
    Second person, totally excited, realizes he has no tees left in
    his bag...but hark!  Here comes a resupply flight of Super Sportsters
    each pulling a tether line connected to an inflatable vinyl duck
    decoy...their course directly over the wooded area on the right
    side of the hole...yes, right through the murderous flack created
    by the eager and accurate skeet shooters hidden in the foliage...
    but never fear, on the horizon...it's a squadron of P51D's about
    to make a strafing run along the treeline...
    
    Meanwhile, on Omaha beach (large sandtrap, right side, hole #8)...
    
    :-)
    

Forgive me if I'm not as eloquent as some who have responded to this note. I
fully agree with Eric (.-1) and with one of the previous replies which sought to
explain the lure of a golf course early in the morning. Perhaps you'll wish to
discredit me since I'm hooked on silent flight but the best times I've had all
summer were the early Saturday and Sunday morning glider flights, when all I
could hear was the sound of the high-start and the goldfinches. I'm not a golfer
but I can certainly empathize with them in this respect. Folks who are involved
in a noise generating sport can easily tune out the noise, or further yet, get
high on the noise they are generating. I know, I've got four kids, three of whom
are teenagers. 

One of the most annoying intrusions on my peace during the Summer is the sound
of those water skidoo's or whatever they're called. It's not so much the noise
itself. Regular motor boats and ski boats make noise too. It's the constant
rev'ing up and down while riding the waves, much like the sound of a chain-saw
that drives me literally mad. A steady tone I could get used to but not knowing
when it's going to end, or start again really prevents any relaxation. Power 
planes could be put into the same category. I'm certainly in favor of 
maintaining as many flying sites as necessary but just try to understand others 
point of view.  Dave.

    What we're really dealing with here is human nature, and that's
    difficult to escape from without leaving the planet. Even desert
    rats can't go off and isolate themselves behind a cactus - soon
    enough somebody else will come along and claim it's their cactus
    and you have no right being there.

    Both the golfers, the flyers, and even the AMA are subject to
    human foibles (I don't really know what that word means, but it
    sure sounds good in that sentence!). I wouldn't count on the AMA
    to solve our problem for us, because a fair chunk of their revenue
    comes from advertisers, and unless the membership wants to cough
    up a hunk more money for membership, that ain't gonna change (even
    if they did, some of the members would complain that they like the
    advertisements - anybody who subscribes to RCM is used to paying
    lots of money for lots of ads :^)

    We're all human, and the problem is that we all would prefer that
    somebody else solve our problems. Coexisting has always been and
    always will be a difficult thing for humans to accomplish.

    Instead of fighting human nature, we have to find ways to turn it
    to our advantage. Since most of today's society revolves around
    money, I think that's one way to solve the problem and it will
    also tell us how truly sincere we are about pursuing our little
    hobby without bothering others. Before long, clubs will have to
    go out and purchase 100+ acre parcels to set up private flying
    fields that are fully isolated from current and future housing,
    golf courses, etc.

    Some serious money waving at the manufacturers is bound to stir up
    their interest in solving the noise problem. There is only one
    reason that the equipment isn't readily available now, and that's
    because we selfish R/Cers aren't willing to pay the price to solve
    our own problems. If we were really there with the cash, I
    guarantee you that some entrepeneur would be there with the
    product. Let's hope we don't lose all our sites before we're
    willing to pay for quiet engines. Then it will be too late.

    Any "real" shrinks out there who care to comment on this?

    Dave Hughes

    I know Eric is waiting for a reaction and I hope this doesn't
    disappoint him but I'm compelled to agree with the majority of each 
    and every reply thus far entered in this topic.
    
    Also, I must admit that we in the western/southwestern area of the
    country are, perhaps, less sensitive to the noise issue due to the
    fact that we are much less densely populated (though that's changing
    daily) and we possess a wealth of desolate, generally federal or state 
    owned, wasteland at our disposal for use as flying sites which will 
    _never_, at least in our lifetimes, be useable for _anything_. 
    Therefore, our sites are not threatened by encroaching civilization,
    shopping malls, etc.  
    
    Where I and my small group of maverick buddies fly is on Bureau
    of Land Management leased land and we have written permission from
    the lessor, a rancher, to use it as long as we please.  Here I'd
    say, by all means, all you noisemakers come fly with us as we're
    so remote that we can bother no one.
    
    However, the point has been well made that this is not acceptable
    in many, perhaps most, situations in the densely populated areas
    and we'll have to be mindful of cleaning up our own act by whatever
    means including bringing pressure of one kind or another to bear
    on the industry to provide the means to quiet our recreation to
    an acceptable level.  As has been said, don't wait for the AMA to
    act; those clowns are too busy lining their pockets to care 'til
    the situation is so far out of control as to be too late!

      |
      | |      00	 Adios,      Al
    |_|_|      ( >o
      |    Z__(O_\_	(The Desert Rat)

    Gee, what an interesting idea! The way the anti-nuke folks (led
    by the No-Nuke-Duke) are talking, the whole state of Massachusetts
    will soon qualify as a desolate wasteland. Then the R/Cers can
    move in and make good use of this expensive real estate!

    RE: .11 Topic of buying 100 acre chunks of land for flying sites.

    This is exactly what some clubs are doing in Long Island, NY.  I don't
    remember which magazine I read this in, but some club down there bought
    a large farm, put a flying field in the middle of it, and used it for
    many years.  Then, when development had caught up with them (surrounded
    them), they succomed to sell the land to developers (at a hugh profit)
    and used the money to buy another farm further out from where they were.

    I think this kind of approach will be nesessary in eastern MA very soon
    if not right now.

                       _____
                      |     \
                      |      \                          Silent POWER!
      _        ___________    _________   |            Happy Landings!
     | \      |           |  |         |  |
     |--------|-  SANYO  + ]-|  ASTRO  |--|              - Dan Miner
     |_/      |___________|  |_________|  |
                      |       /           |     " The Earth needs more OZONE,
                      |      /                       not Caster Oil!! "    
                      |_____/

Just want to add that owning the land does the club no good in
defending themselves against noise complaints.  Neither does
having been there for time immemorial.  In both cases, you can
get thrown off just as easily as if you were a renter and had
been there for a week.

About the only time it helps to own the land is when you can sell
it at a profit and buy something else for that price.  I'll bet
that for all their profit the club you mention has had to settle
for a less desirable property, at a far greater distance, and at
a higher price than they want to pay or can reasonably afford. 

Sometimes I suspect that noise politics are really land
development politics.

>Just want to add that owning the land does the club no good in
>defending themselves against noise complaints. 

According to the article, the land they owned, was a big chunk - I think
they said 100 acres (or more????).  The idea was that their flying field was
in the middle and they were separated from all neighbors by at least 1/4
mile (or something like that).  Thus, noise was not a problem.  The catch
was that "dues" for the club were in the $100. to $200. range to help pay
for the initial mortgage.

The final reason they sold the land was from pressure from developers, not
noise complaints.  Either way, the bottom line is that they don't fly there
anymore.

I'll see if I can dig the article out from the dusty archives.  It might
have been in Model Aviation...

                       _____
                      |     \
                      |      \                          Silent POWER!
      _        ___________    _________   |            Happy Landings!
     | \      |           |  |         |  |
     |--------|-  SANYO  + ]-|  ASTRO  |--|              - Dan Miner
     |_/      |___________|  |_________|  |
                      |       /           |     " The Earth needs more OZONE,
                      |      /                       not Caster Oil!! "    
                      |_____/

    Eric,
    
    Yer' puttin' words in the ol' "Rat's" mouth; I never said we're
    immune from the noise problem.  I merely stated in all honesty that,
    due to our good fortune to have miles and miles of unpopulated,
    wide-open-spaces, we tend to be less sensitive to the noise issue.
    I couldn't agree more that it _is_ a problem that needs to be addressed
    and corrected if our recreation is to prosper.  Any/all ramifications,
    positive or negative, caused by the issue and our success, or lack
    of same, in fixing the problem will eventually be felt _everywhere_.
    
    I continue to say that, while it _shouldn't_ be that way, in contrast
    to yer' native S.M.A.E., our AMA is an ineffectual body of self-
    interested hierarchy who will do nothing, save for lip-service,
    to rectify the problem.  Were it not for the insurance, I predict
    as many as 8-9 out of 10 members would drop their membership due
    to the borderline [dare I say} corrupt behavior of our national
    organization.  Those who openly/publicly criticize the AMA are publicly
    ridiculed/ostracized (like dist-X VP, Dave Peltz and others who've
    come before) and, eventually, forced out of office by questionable
    if not devious means.
    
    The 'good-ole-boy' faction is in full control of the AMA and are
    only artificially concerned with our problems except as it affects
    their wallets.  That's why I say, short of a unanimous uprising
    by a majority of AMA members, the AMA cannot be looked to to come
    up with a solution...we who are suffering the greatest impact will
    have to do it ourselves or it won't get done; never mind how it
    _should be_.
    
    Please believe that I'm in complete sympathy and accord with all
    the points that have surfaced in this topic, though I must remind
    myself from tmie to time that this is not just someone else's problem
    just because we're not suffering any immediate setbacks resulting
    from it.   

      |
      | |      00	 Adios,      Al
    |_|_|      ( >o
      |    Z__(O_\_	(The Desert Rat)

Geez Al, them are some pretty heavy words.  I've characterized
the AMA groupies as being harmless buffoons, but I've never
thought of them as being self-serving.   In looking back at the
AMA through my magazine collection, I find that the same
problems, the same opinions, the same solutions re-appear over
and over again.  Yes, they were complaining about losing sites
due to noise even in my first volume of RCM, back in 1964.

In fact, a reading of the intrigues in the earlier magazines
would make one think that they were written yesterday. I've heard
that part of being president of the AMA is being tarred,
feathered, burned in effigy, and run out of town sooner or later.
Its been said that people like Bill Winter and Don Lowe are just
too nice to have such things happen to them.

I think though, that the AMA in its own blundering way, perhaps
more concerned about advertising revenue than they should be, is
doing what it can to support its membership.  It is, as has been
stated earlier, really in the final analysis up to us, the rank
and file members, to clean up our own acts.

We shouldn't expect our organization to help us further than with
the legal advice they try to give.  Noise is a local problem
multiplied a thousand times, but it must be solved locally by the
clubs and ultimately by us at our field boxes.  There is no other
way. 

I doubt that the AMA, even if they were as powerful as the other
AMA (I love telling people that I'm an AMA member), could
influence the foreign manufacturers of our radios and engines
much more than they have. 

    A very interesting subject. After reading 19 responses Ive just
    got to add my two db's worth.
    
    Clubs form. The good ones charge up to $500 entry and $100 a year
    dues. This pays for that big peace of land and paved runway. Of
    course you must belong to the AMA and follow the rules.
    
    The rest of go out to the public flying field and create noise problems
    for the other activities. One note reply reminded me that Supulvda
    Basin also is right on a Golf Course. One of the nicer sites in
    the LA basin. 
    
    The thought occured to me that the golf course probably makes money.
    Green and Cart fees. The above mententioned field and others in
    LA are free.
    
    In the Dallas the noise problem occurs only at the public flying
    fields. All club fields have leased land that is remote from anything
    resembling a golf course.
    
    My question is: Are the notes persons that see the noise problem
    using a public facility or are they members of a well organized
    " probable expensive " private club? In other words are you spending
    your hard earned money on a place to fly? Or due you want to use
    that free public facility and have your cake too?
    
    Bob
    
    PS. I don't golf. I fly the load ones. PYLON.

    Re: .-1,
    
    I don't know the details but I do know that the Spulveda Basin site
    has been lost.  Whether it had anything to do with proximity to
    the golf course and/or noise, I don't know but the site, home of
    the B.I.R.D.S., one of the oldest R/C clubs in the nation, has been
    lost!    

      |
      | |      00	 Adios,      Al
    |_|_|      ( >o
      |    Z__(O_\_	(The Desert Rat)

    I was hoping maybe your information was old. I was at the basin
    three weeks ago for a F1 contest. Its one of the nicest sites in
    the country. I make at least two contests there a year.
    
    I got on the phone a few minutes ago. The BIRDS lost their flying
    field some time ago. It was in Carson. Industry moved in and built
    a Mall. Civilation got them. They have not had a flying site in
    some years.
    
    Supulvda Basin is a public field. Extreamlly well maintained. Just
    North West of the Ventura and San Diago Fwy's.
    
    Boy you had me scared.
    
    Bob

    Re: .-1,
    
    Sorry 'bout that!  I obviously confused the B.I.R.D.S. situation
    with Sepulveda Basin.  Verrrry glad to learn that I was wrong!!!    

      |
      | |      00	 Adios,      Al
    |_|_|      ( >o
      |    Z__(O_\_	(The Desert Rat)

    	In this months AMA magazine there is an article posted under
    "Sound and Model Aeronautics" that talks about noise (of course).
    Within the article the writter makes a comment about pattern that
    I disagreed with.  Below is the letter I wrote and mailed detailing
    my views on his comment.  I thougt it would be good reading for
    the noters and perhaps spurr on some discussion...
    
    
    
    						Tom
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
  TO:						FROM:
	Mr.Howard Crispin Jr.				Mr. Thomas J. Tenerowicz
							167 Ely Avenue
							West Springfield Ma.
									01089

	SUBJECT;  Comments on "Sound & Model Aeronautics", December 1990

	I am writing you concerning one statement you made in your December
 1990 column on pg. 118. You stated ;

	" If your field has a sound level rule it will probably be impossible
 	to fly AMA Pattern Aircraft,"  "models there".

	I agree with most of your column except the statement written above.
Detailed investigation will reveal that RC Pattern is the most active form of
RC aircraft striving for reductions in noise. Yes F3A class pattern has a noise
rule because FAI has a similar rule. However, all classes of AMA RC pattern
has taken up the task of reducing noise. Voluntarily!!  No noise rule exists
at present in AMA class pattern yet the planes being flown have adopted the
noise reduction efforts required to fly F3A.  RC pattern is the only group
within all of the Academy of Model Aeronautics that has a comprehensive 
noise reduction proposal (RCA-92-42). It's obvious that you haven't been to
a pattern contest within the last couple of years or pattern fliers within
your area are not following the current trend. In my area the average
(and majority) RC pattern flier understands full well that noise is an issue
that needs to be addressed.  Not because someone else had to pass a rule but
because we (pattern fliers) in general are responsible.  This is not to say
that other fliers are not responsible, most are. Most fliers just need to be
informed of what noise can do to a flying site and how to avoid it.  Yes,
individual clubs need to measure the concern about noise and enact noise levels
that meet those concerns.  The clubs have one other responsibility. They need
to teach their members what improvements to make to reduce noise.  This training
is vital, without it noise reduction effort just will not work no matter how
good the intentions.
	All other groups should take an example from Pattern.  If all 
competitors in a given event are required to meet a noise reduction requirement
the resulting restrictions are common to all. Case in point is Pylon Q500
racing in my area. The competitors are allowed to use old flow threw mufflers
(not stock for the engine specified) that are loud yet boost the engine by 
app. 500 rpm's.  If the rules were changes to require a different specific 
muffler that reduced noise and all competitors were required to use it the 
net result would be mute.  Speeds may be reduced however this would be
consistent for all competitors.  Flying skills (which is the goal of Q500)
would still be the deciding factor.  There simply is no need for the noise
but then there is the resistance to change.
	With the encroachment of humanity on land becoming more and more common,
reductions in flying site availability are inevitable.  Changes in noise are
inevitable or you are certain to loose a flying site.  Change now, while you
have the opportunity!  With the noise question being resolved you can go on to
work the other public relations issues that can/may force a club out of a site.

						Regards


						Thomas Tenerowicz

Well said Tom.  

Bye          --+--
Kay R. Fisher  |
---------------O---------------
################################################################################

    Tom, 
    
    Just a couple of questions:
    
    1.  What's a "flow threw" muffler? 
    
    2.  Did you really mean "mute" or "moot" when you talked about every
        one using the same type of muffler?

    Ya,
    	Moot...
    
    Flow threw is a muffler that has an open chamber from front to back.
    Air passes threw the muffler and picks up the exhaust gas at the
    end of the muffler.
    
    Tom

    Re: .-1, Tom,
    
    I think Bruce might'a been havin' his way with ya' a bit and the word
    yer' 'a lookin' fer' is _through_, as in "I walked through the door,"
    not threw, as in "I threw the ball through the window."  :B^)  That is,
    yer' talkin' 'bout a flow-through muffler.  BTW, if you can't find the
    ball after throwing it through the window, you _lose_ it, not "loose" it.
    Loose is when yer' engine is about to fall out 'cause the bolts are loose.
    
    So much for Grammar 101 for today.  :B^)  :B^)
						 __
				|      |        / |\	   	       
      	         \|/		|______|__(o/--/  | \	   	       
      | |        00	       <|  ~~~  ____ 04 ---- | --------------------
    |_|_|        (O>o		|\)____/___|\_____|_/	   Adios amigos, Al
      |     \__(O_\_	        |	  |___/	 o	   (The Desert Rat)

    right on bra (as they say in Hawaii)

Just received a copy of the Noise and Model Aeronautics from the AMA, it looks 
good.

Copies are available fro the AMA HQ Membership Dept at a cost of US$10. 

It is good value and very informative.

John

    
    
    In the latest Competition Rules Book from the Ama two catagories
    have initiated sweeping noise reform.  pattern and helicopters.
    For pattern the noise is measured from 3 meters on the right side
    of the airframe.  The plane resting on the ground. The meter 30mm
    above the ground. If on tar the measurements must be 98db or lower.
    on grass it's 96db of lower.  For helo's it's 96db with the chopper
    in a hover 1.5 meters above the ground slightly down wind on the
    exhaust side of the chopper.
    
    
    I suspect that this will become my clubs rule and guide for noise
    measuring.
    
    
    
    
    
    On a slightly different line.  I'm in the process of building a small
    add on muffler for my 40 four stroke engine.  The plan is to cut four
    brass disks 3/4" OD from stock.   A 1/8" hole is drilled in the stack
    of disks to act as an alignment and assembly tooling hole.  The disks
    will be bolted together and trued up.  The two disks will be drilled to
    accept an inlet/outlet tube.  This is soldered to the disks.  The other
    two disks will be drilled to make a pathway from one side of the disk
    to the other. These holes will be oriented to one edge. Like at 3
    o'clock.  The disks will b e assembled onto an 1/8 " threaded rod
    alternating. Inlet at 3:00 baffle holes at 9:00, second baffle holes at
    3:00, outlet at 9:00.  The metal assembly will then be frozen and the
    silicon tube boiled.  Then they are assembled and the ends secured with
    a tie wrap or clanp.  I hope to test the 40 four stroke with the
    header, then add the manufacturers expantion chamber and then replace
    this with my muffler.  Test for noise and rpm's each time the exhaust
    set-up is altered.  See what the results are and then reevaluate the
    project.
    
    
    Tom