Forums

There seem to be some misconceptions around some of the constitution and rules. Correct me if I am wrong, but, as it is written accordingly in the rulebook;

1)Failsafes, the problem largely lies in the rule book that states that failsafes are only recommended. Nowhere I can find does it say they have to be used if a radio set has them. To change that in the Offshore rule set without addressing it in the general/H&S rules leaves a lack of balance, possible confusion and open to challenge.

2)Consultation period. There is NO consultation period in the constitution. As it stands, the committee can make a rule change, notify the membership and it comes into force no in less than six weeks. This is a source of a fair bit of frustration and at times the membership is left feeling walked over and not consulted. To send out a rule, proposal or otherwise and say there is a consultation period of six weeks and then it will come into force if there are no viable objections is unconstitutional. To send out a proposed rule for consideration and feedback with a set time frame, allowing for the membership to have input BEFORE making it a rule would be a fairer and wiser and more correct process.

This perhaps needs to be written up and put to an AGM or special meeting as a constitutional change.

For sure somethings need to change as the feeling among some members both present and past is not too healthy. There needs to be more focus on promoting model power boating from the committee rather than the constant changing of rules. Just fix the broken stuff, stop making more problems, and put focus on what benefits the hobby rather than personal bents! We went through a period of disgruntlement and loss of membership just 3-4 years ago and it would seem to be happening again, I really hope not though. More balance is needed in the calendar also as this year there has been only two oval regattas (plus the Marlborough challenge and two lap sprints) yet 13 offshore/endurance events. Too much of one thing can wear it out!

I am not having a dig at anyone individually, but please take these things on board and consider the position well.

Good work Brian, thanks for clearing that up. Looking forward to seeing those coreless servos in action.

The only point I'd make is that using an onboard failsafe is better than nothing. But certainly completely useless in voltage loss events which seems to be the main issue that 2.4 GHz sets are still susceptible to.

This thread is now closed.

😯 🙁 😕 😡