Mass quoted in regulations.

Miket · Nov 2, 2018

I have just been reading up on all the new regulations which are in force and are likely to be coming into force.
They talk about affecting mass of aircraft of 250gm and over, which unfortunately, on the face of it, includes our Sparks.
However, I have just picked up on the fact that the weights are qualified with the wording 'excluding its fuel'. Now it could be argued that our fuel is the battery, and if I remove the battery, my spark weighs approx 200gms, without prop covers, battery retainer, landing gear etc.
If this is the case, it removes our quads from at least some of the regulations.
Anyone know if this is a valid point.

Crispjon · Nov 2, 2018

Miket said:
I have just been reading up on all the new regulations which are in force and are likely to be coming into force.
They talk about affecting mass of aircraft of 250gm and over, which unfortunately, on the face of it, includes our Sparks.
However, I have just picked up on the fact that the weights are qualified with the wording 'excluding its fuel'. Now it could be argued that our fuel is the battery, and if I remove the battery, my spark weighs approx 200gms, without prop covers, battery retainer, landing gear etc.
If this is the case, it removes our quads from at least some of the regulations.
Anyone know if this is a valid point.

I saw this also Unfortunately I don't think electricity ( which is the fuel really) has mass. I would love to be wrong!

Driverman930 · Nov 2, 2018

that's true yet when you weigh liquid (in fix wing) do you discount the weight of the container (fuel tank)? I think the lawyers are going to have "fun" with that question!! LOL

Andre Levite · Nov 3, 2018

I weighed my Spark when fully fueled at 100% battery. And then weighed it again without any fuel (8% battery)... No difference.

Based on my "experiment" I think there's no scientific or legal argument. Turns out electrons just don't weigh very much

I'm sure some wise guy lawyer will pull the same stunt

Miket · Nov 3, 2018

Ok, what would happen to the weight of a battery, if mah are reduced by 50%. It would be substantially lighter, and that would reduce the overall mass of our Spark. It is very similar to reducing the amount (ml) of a liquid fuel in a petrol aircraft, which IS apparently covered by the terms used in the regulations. I dont think your experiment measured the 'weight of electrons', that is too simplistic and ridiculous. Batteries rely on physical/chemical elements to produce a reaction that produces our 'fuel', the more 'fuel' we want to produce requires more physical/chemical elements, which will definitely weigh more, and has a strong bearing on the final weight of our Spark. This is probably the very reason for including the words 'excluding fuel', when calculating the final mass of an aircraft. Excluding the battery, my bare Spark weighs 202gm. RESULT!!!

Andre Levite · Nov 3, 2018

Miket said:
Ok, what would happen to the weight of a battery, if mah are reduced by 50%. It would be substantially lighter, and that would reduce the overall mass of our Spark. It is very similar to reducing the amount (ml) of a liquid fuel in a petrol aircraft, which IS apparently covered by the terms used in the regulations. I dont think your experiment measured the 'weight of electrons', that is too simplistic and ridiculous. Batteries rely on physical/chemical elements to produce a reaction that produces our 'fuel', the more 'fuel' we want to produce requires more physical/chemical elements, which will definitely weigh more, and has a strong bearing on the final weight of our Spark. This is probably the very reason for including the words 'excluding fuel', when calculating the final mass of an aircraft. Excluding the battery, my bare Spark weighs 202gm. RESULT!!!

If you reduced the mass of the battery by 50% as you suggested -- you would necessarily reduce the flight time by about 60% (accounting for reserve for return). So now you've reduced average flight time from 12 minutes to under 5 minutes just to avoid FAA regulations.

Landing every 5 minutes to change batteries is even more ludicrous than the concept of "weighing electrons spent for fuel". But the idea that electricity has no measurable weight as fuel was a serious answer to your question. ie: a fully fueled Spark weights precisely the same as one with all fuel depleted.

Trying to skirt FAA regulations just isn't worth all that effort. Even the new rules are pretty tame.

Miket · Nov 3, 2018

I cannot find anywhere that I suggested any change on the size, weight or power of our batteries. It was purely to give an example that just like liquid fuel, the power and life of a battery, corrolates to its size and weight. The point was raised purely as an interesting observation. Having said that, I would certainly choose to fall into the sub 250gm if I could. The simple question is, is the mass of the Spark, as detailed by regulations, calculated including the battery or without the battery, relative to 'excluding fuel' woding in the regs.
In fact, far from trying to avoid them, I welcome regulations providing they are reasonable, and are enforcable

Andre Levite · Nov 3, 2018

Miket said:
I cannot find anywhere that I suggested any change on the size, weight or power of our batteries. It was purely to give an example that just like liquid fuel, the power and life of a battery, corrolates to its size and weight. The point was raised purely as an interesting observation. Having said that, I would certainly choose to fall into the sub 250gm if I could. The simple question is, is the mass of the Spark, as detailed by regulations, calculated including the battery or without the battery, relative to 'excluding fuel' woding in the regs.
In fact, far from trying to avoid them, I welcome regulations providing they are reasonable, and are enforcable

You have a very short memory...

Miket · Nov 3, 2018

Andre Levite said:
You have a very short memory...

View attachment 7482 View attachment 7482

Hell, still cannot see where I proposed a reduction to the Spark battery. I put foward a suggestion that a battery could vary the mass of a quad according to the power of the battery, just like liquid fuel would by varying the volume.
I'm sure this little sequence is amusing a few of our readers, so lets agree to disagree and call it a day.

Andre Levite · Nov 3, 2018

Driverman930 · Nov 3, 2018

WOW I am for weight NOT including batt!

Miket · Nov 3, 2018

Miket said:
Hell, still cannot see where I proposed a reduction to the Spark battery. I put foward a suggestion that a battery could vary the mass of a quad according to the power of the battery, just like liquid fuel would by varying the volume.
I'm sure this little sequence is amusing a few of our readers, so lets agree to disagree and call it a day.[/QUOTE

Andre Levite said:

View attachment 7484 View attachment 7484[/QUOTE

Andre Levite said:

View attachment 7484 View attachment 7484

Click to expand...

Give it up Andre.
I DO NOT THINK WE SHOULD HALVE THE SIZE OF OUR BATTERIES AND THEREFORE REDUCE THE SPARK FLYING TIME. IF I GAVE THAT IMPRESSION DID NOT MEAN TO.

Please believe me.

Click to expand...