[SPAM] Re: Displacement during snap rolls (was Why is it so
quiet?)
Archie Stafford
rcpattern at comcast.net
Wed Dec 29 10:58:10 AKST 2004
Sorry, sent this response to the wrong subject line.
I have no issues if one judge scores a maneuver a 0, which the others may
score it a 9 or so. The problem is getting all the judges to look for the
same things. There will always be discrepancies in the scores. This is a
subjective matter. When we run into problems is when the rules are
interpreted multiple ways for the same maneuver. Unfortunately we could add
30 pages to the rule book, just on the definition of snaps, and we'd still
be having this discussion. I'm not sure there is a good way to clarify the
rules so that everyone looks for the same things. The frustrating ones as a
pilot are when you ask afterwards, and you have a judge say "yes, I saw it
break, but it was not enough of a break," and that was from a judge that was
up for consideration for being the judge that we send to France next year.
To me that is like saying, "yes, you did a 4 point roll, but you did not
stop long enough at each point."
_____
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of DaveL322 at comcast.net
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 2:23 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Re: [SPAM] Re: Displacement during snap rolls (was Why is it so
quiet?)
Errors in track can occur in pitch, roll, and yaw. They are all subject to
downgrades on the basis of 1 point per 15 degrees.
Whatever the appropriate downgrade is for "excessive" vertical displacement
on a snap should be the same downgrade that is applied for "excessive"
lateral displacement. Depending on the position of the snap (viewing
angle), the vertical and and/or lateral displacement may be very hard to
see.
Snaps occur from a stalled condition - achieved by the "break" which must
be visible. No break, score is zero. While there is not a specific
downgrade for displacement (vertically or laterally), I believe the 1 point
per 15 degree rule can be applied. If the overall geometry of a manuever is
adversely effected by the displacement of the snap, the downgrade should be
1 point per 15 degrees of geometric error in the maneuver. For instance -
- 45 downline with 1 positive snap in calm air.
- Assume no other defects excepting displacement in pitch during the break.
- As measured between the finish of the entry radius and the start of the
exit radius, the track of the plane is a 30 degree angle.
- The track of the plane is incorrect by 15 degrees. Using 1 point per 15
degrees the manuever would score a 9.
Obviously enough, the amount of displacement would have to be huge to change
the overall line by 15 degrees - so in practice, the deduction would be much
smaller than one point (if any).
Perhaps some relation to stall turns is possible -
- Stall turns can be downgraded for the upline and downline track not being
parallel.
- Stall turns can be additionally downgraded for the pivot radius being too
large (even when the upline and downline are parallel, but not
superimposed).
Displacement in a snap is kind of like displacement in yaw at the top of a
stall turn. Ideally, an airplane yaws about the CG in a stall turn - but
this rarely happens in practice - so the rules allow for a nominal pivot
radius (displacement) without downgrade. I think this same idea could be
applied to displacement (vertical and lateral) of snaps - but it would have
to be in the rulebook.
Thoughts? (as if this string won't run on and on for the next few days,
<G>).
Regards,
Dave
-------------- Original message --------------
> This is another example of the intent of a thread wandering far
afoot....as the
> original questioner, I'd like to refocus my point.
> Simply put - according to our CURRENT rules, there is NOT a downgrade
criterion
> for offsetting of the track during a snap maneuver.
> I understand the "more skillful" guy should get a point reward (by not
getting
> a downgrade that others may receive), but my point is ----
> What is the rule basis for the downgrade?
> And since I'm specifically talking about LATERAL track offsets, not
vertical
> or angular, there aren't "general" guidelines to handle this.
> My point being that there SHOULD NOT be a scored difference between the
line
> that shifts and the line that doesn't, all other factors being identical
between
> the quality of the two snaps.....simply because we don't have the criteria
> identified.
>
> Or am I just being logical again?
> >
> > From: Bill Glaze
> > Date: 2004/12/29 Wed PM 01:39:00 EST
> > To: discussion at nsrca.org
> > Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: Displacement during snap rolls (was Why is it so
> quiet?)
> >
> > Ed:
> > If a new track is acceptable, then, that is a de facto downgrading (by
> > not allowing for extra skill) that is being applied to the pilot who
> > can, and does, perform a real snap, as opposed to a "fake" snap, and
> > keep it on the same line. By not downgrading the pilot who shows a
> > different track even though it is parallel, you are not giving a premium
> > to the pilot who can perform the difficult task of keeping the snap on
> > the same line of the maneuver. It can be done; first time I ever saw it
> > was at the TOC on a vertical snap where all the competitors save for one
> > person, were offsetting their vertical snaps 2 wingspans to the right,
> > (double snap rolls, to the right) This individual was able to keep his
> > snap rolls exactly in line. They looked much better. Was he rewarded?
> > In a way, I guess. That year he won the TOC, but not, of course, for
> > snap rolls alone! BTW: I believe you were there that year, Ed.
> > Again: Sorry to be so prolux!
> >
> > Bill Glaze
> >
> > Ed Alt wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Dave:
> > > Track & heading are different things, so I'm referring to a new track,
> > > exactly parallel to the original one, being 100% acceptable. A new
> > > heading however, ought to be subject to the point per 15 degrees
criteria.
> > >
> > > Ed
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: David Lockhart
> > > To: discussion at nsrca.org
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 11:40 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Displacement during snap rolls (was Why is it so quiet?)
> > >
> > > More than 1 pilot was awarded 1 or more zeros in the 2004 US NATs
> > > F3A final on snap maneuvers. The "average" snap in subsequent
> > > flights in the finals showed more break / displacement (of course,
> > > any break / displacement is infinitely more compared to none,
> > > ahem.....).
> > >
> > > A stalled entry is a required element of spins - no stalled
> > > entry, score equals zero. No different for snaps. Judges are
> > > required to judge what they actually see (not what they think
> > > may have happened), and pilots are required to show / demonstrate
> > > / complete all required elements to avoid downgrades (which may be
> > > a downgrade to zero).
> > >
> > > To specifically answer Bob's question - my opinion - if the
> > > geometry of the manuever is not compromised, then no downgrade.
> > >
> > > Another question(s) - In a given maneuver involving a snap, the
> > > exit track of the plane is 15 degrees different than the track
> > > prior to the snap. What is the downgrade if the change in track
> > > is abrupt? What is the downgrade if the change in track is smooth?
> > >
> > > Regards and Happy Holidays,
> > >
> > > Dave Lockhart
> > > DaveL322 at comcast.net
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > >
> > > From: Ed Alt
> > > To: discussion at nsrca.org
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 11:04 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Displacement during snap rolls (was Why is it so
> > > quiet?)
> > >
> > > Good topic Bob. If the model really did a snap roll, it had
> > > to displace somewhat. If not, and if you could actually tell
> > > that it did not, that could be an indicator that a snap roll
> > > did not actually happen. Generally, the model has to displace
> > > to a new track, however slight, from the yawing and pitching
> > > moments introduced. The criteria should perhaps be that you
> > > are able to able to maintain the new track exactly in parallel
> > > to the pre-snap track. How much offset is OK is hard to say,
> > > but things generally start looking suspicious whan it's much
> > > more than a couple of wingspans. You would generally start to
> > > see other obvious problems, such as barrel rolling, if the
> > > displacement were really large. For another perspective, I
> > > think the Scale Aerobatics Flying and Judging Guide does
> > > a decent job of describing how to grade a snap.
> > >
> > > Ed
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Bob Pastorello
> > > To: discussion at nsrca.org
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 10:31 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Why is it so quiet?
> > >
> > > It can be very, very bad.
> > > Or not.
> > >
> > > Let's talk about displacement of the flight track during
> > > snap rolls. Whatcha y'all think? Is it downgradeable,
> > > and if so how much, and what is the criteria?
> > >
> > > Bob Pastorello
> > > NSRCA 199 AMA 46373
> > > rcaerobob at cox.net
> > > www.rcaerobats.net
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Mike Hester
> > > To: discussion at nsrca.org
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 9:21 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Why is it so quiet?
> > >
> > > Ya well, it's definitely not going on the primary
> > > bird. For that I have a trusty OS 160FX with vp30
> > > pump. I know it will run when I want it to run.
> > >
> > > Just like me "testing" a new design, testing my
> > > feather cut, testing my composite skillz (or lack of),
> > > so far so good. Of course I didn't make the YS, so
> > > that one is more of a massochistic tendancy methinks.
> > > I'm not skeert to spend a buck. Plus it wouldn't take
> > > too much to drop in an OS if it comes to it. I've
> > > gotta see for myself if the fire is as hot as it
> > > looks. I usually suffer 3rd degree burns right after
> > > one of these moments.
> > >
> > > Classic last words: "How bad could it be?" =)
> > >
> > > -Mike
> > >
> > > PS Ok ok NEXT year.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Bob Pastorello
> > > To: discussion at nsrca.org
> > >
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 9:47 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Why is it so quiet?
> > >
> > > You have less than 3 days, then. Could be tricky
> > > for you.
> > > Besides, how does one "try" something that costs
> > > $700+ ? Sounds a bit like "testing" the $3500
> > > plasma tv.....
> > >
> > > Bob Pastorello
> > > NSRCA 199 AMA 46373
> > > rcaerobob at cox.net
> > > www.rcaerobats.net
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Mike Hester
> > > To: discussion at nsrca.org
> > >
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 8:38 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Why is it so quiet?
> > >
> > > YS SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!
> > >
> > > Better?
> > >
> > > =)
> > >
> > > -Mike
> > >
> > > P.S. I am actually going to try a DZ 160 some
> > > time this year. This could mean the apocalypse
> > > is near.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: William C. Harden
> > >
> > > To: discussion at nsrca.org
> > >
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 9:33 PM
> > > Subject: Why is it so quiet?
> > >
> > > I know someone out there has something
> > > interesting to say. So stir something up!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Bill
> > >
> >
> >
>
> Bob Pastorello, El Reno, OK, USA
> rcaerobob at cox.net
> www.rcaerobats.net
>
> =================================================
> To access the email archives for this list, go to
> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
> To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
> and follow the instructions.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20041229/29e34b99/attachment-0001.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list