Snap Rolls.....are they legitimate/ RE: displacement during snap rolls discussion

[DaveL322 at comcast.net]

A slight modification to the definition of a good pattern maneuver - "Easy to fly, Hard to perfect, and easy to judge".

To me, judging at the most fundamental levels should really consist of 2 aspects -
1)  Was the correct maneuver flown?
2)  What downgrades should be applied based on an analysis of each element/component of the maneuver?

The idea here is that all manuevers in all classes are composed of distinct elements, to which end if a individual is capable of judging lines, radii, roll rates, angles, centering, etc., they should be able to do so for any class for which they have memorized the sequence.  Good judging is about judging the elements, not the overall impression of a manuever.

A different approach to judging is to develop a list specifically stating downgrades for every possible error in every maneuver and then commit to memory all of the the downgrades and hope the list is complete (and it never will be).  The list of specific maneuver downgrades would be far longer than the list of elements, which can be applied to every maneuver.

If a particular manuever or element is too difficult to judge, then it is that way for all classes.  If "we" chose to remove snaps from the sequences, it would only be from the AMA sequences (I doubt it would ever happen in FAI), creating a distinct difference between AMA and FAI, which is against the recent trend to harmonize AMA and FAI to the extent that is practicable.  BTW - the "ideal" airplane design and setup changes pretty dramatically if snaps are not part of the sequence - same thing can be said to a lesser extent if the combined roll/loop manuevers are absent.

With regard to what individuals / classes might want to see in "their" schedule, some level of structure/planning/cohesiveness needs to be part of the plan.  Another debate for the ages has always been which jump between classes is too large, too small, where the bigger jumps should be, etc.  Anyone who has been a part of developing a schedule (or a whole set of schedules) knows how difficult it is to assemble a single sequence with the goals of being easy to fly, hard to perfect, and easy to judge -  not to mention having a balance of different manuevers that present nicely and are a part of an integrated set of sequences that teach/stress specific aspects of piloting, setup, trimming, etc in a progressive manner. 

Regards,

Dave Lockhart
DaveL322 at comcast.net

-------------- Original message -------------- 
Bob:
I remember being told that a good pattern maneuver is "hard to do, easy to judge."  While I, too, enjoy doing snaps, this discussion has made me wonder if there is any place for them in pattern.  And, I am beginning to backpedal (because I admittedly like them) and am wondering if there is any place for them at all except in, possibly, FAI.  And even there, the only reason for them would be the mandate by the  international body.  Inasmuch as I have no control over this issue, I'm just musing.

Bill Glaze

Bob Pastorello wrote: 
That is an excellent point, Chris.  And your modesty to not add "Intermediate National Champion" to your credentials is noted.
    The issue of a virtually-uncontrollable maneuver EXCEPT for entry and exit, does bring a valid question about it's place in our game.  I think Ed Miller mentioned (sorry if wrong) that longer-duration maneuvers with more easily-visible segments have their OWN level of difficulty.
    In '99, when I was working on the Rules Committee, and we were designing new sequences one of the suggestions in Masters was a Center maneuver, a square loop with 2/4 on U/D, 1/2 on horizontal legs.  We were TRASHED for even suggesting such a thing!!!
    The reason I mention that is to consider difficulty and pilot challenge, wouldn't most of us agree that the square loop I describe would be more easily judged, and more challenging for the majority of pilots than the downline SINGLE snap we have in '05 ???

Since we're in a rules cycle year, maybe this is a good time to rethink the "required elements" of every class, and look more for "what do guys WANT to have in the sequence?"

Great thread starter, Chris.

Bob Pastorello
NSRCA 199  AMA 46373
rcaerobob at cox.net
www.rcaerobats.net


----- Original Message ----- 
From: White, Chris 
To: discussion at nsrca.org 
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 8:49 AM
Subject: Snap Rolls.....are they legitimate/ RE: displacement during snap rolls discussion



Please excuse me if I'm repeating, or committing a "faux pas" ( I think I spelled that right:) ) ....but I am really interested in hearing opinions to the following:

1) Do snap rolls add or detract from the legitimacy of judging precision aerobatic pilots capabilities?
2) Do snap rolls add to the credibility of precision aerobatics?

I'm new to the game, but a "stalled" maneuver is a maneuver that is not "flown on the wing" .  An overwhelming percentage of the other maneuver segments in our patterns are flown on the wing and are able to be judged accurately and with a minimum of "impression" influence.  Since the Snap Roll it is not "flown" through it is not fully controlled....lack of control indicates somewhat of a wildcard that penalizes capable pilots experiencing a "bad" maneuver.  

I have seen many good snap rolls in competition, some done by great pilots, some by new guys.....my question is: Should there be a "wild card" allowance?  Is anyone capable of flying consistent snap rolls that are consistently judgeable to clear and concise requirements?   I believe I'm hearing an overwhelming "NO".  If the answer is no, then maybe they should be removed.

I fly RC pattern because in my opinion it is more graceful and precise in appearance as compared to IMAC.... not that I don't respect IMAC pilots capabilities and enjoy the show.  But, I sometimes I wonder how "Snap Rolls" fit into RC Pattern....and it sounds as if I'm not the only one.   (I like to see snaps....I just feel there are variables beyond the pilots control which penalize inconsistently)  I think a pilot should be judged on control....not inertial physics. (is that a real term????:) )

Just my thoughts and question to the group....respectfully submitted,
Chris

(as a CFII, airshow nut and pattern guy and whatever other credibility I can throw in:) )
-----Original Message-----
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Ed Miller
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 7:11 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Displacement during snap rolls (was Why is it so quiet?)


Seems the never ending snap discussion was beat to death here last year too. This will be long but hear me out. No doubt what I'm about to say will at the very least be controversial. That's fine with me as I think we need to think outside the box more often. My wife enjoys watching figure skating. Being the "supportive spouse", on occasion I will watch for a bit with her. It seems in figure skating, the multiple rotation jumps, triples and even quadruple rotation variations is where all the judging ( and viewing ) emphasis is placed in a skaters routine. It also seems the judging is focused on 2 things, the entry to the jump and "sticking" the landing. Frankly, those that say they can see every element of the skaters rotation are, IMHO, full of blank. It plain happens too fast. I have better eyesight than most, in my younger days I could pick up the stitching and rotation of a baseball thrown at 90mph. I'll admit, some of that sharpness is gone but, I honestly cannot pick up all the rotation elements in a figure skaters jump in real time ( we all can when they replay it in slow-mo ). Ever since the snap roll was introduced into precision aerobatics, an oxymoron IMHO, we have had the same problems judging snaps as professional figure skating judges have judging triple toe loops. I have watched ( and learned some ) from the real snap masters, aka Lockhart and Pappas, yet, when in the judges chair I look for departure in pitch ( entry ) and "the landing " of the maneuver ( exit ) . So, to me, we've introduced snaps into precision aerobatics to separate the wanna be pattern jockey hackers like me from the gifted, talented folks like Lockhart, Pappas, Hyde, etc. but in fact what we've done is actually dumbed down our judging criteria. These talented flyers will find the setup and stick movements to present a maneuver such that it defies the laws of gravity. However, most of us are only humans and as judges, only judge what can we realistically see and honestly assess in a snap roll. Most all snap rolls I've seen don
e and performed rotate at such a speed that again, the exit is the focus. Once in awhile you can pick up the obvious aileron roll exit. There are many more elements of a snap roll besides entry and exit yet as I read/delete/read/delete, etc. the discussion we are having here, it boils down to entry and exit positions. The ex-masters maneuver of 2 rolls in opposite directions. It is a thing of beauty when done properly  takes a lot of time to perform, especially compared to our beloved snap rolls, has many more places for the pilot to screw up that are EASILY VISIBLE to the judges besides the entry and exit points. That's precision aerobatics IMHO. AMA pattern was always smooth and graceful until someone decided as the FAI does, so must the AMA. Some will say it's progress, new maneuvers, it's just raising the bar to let the cream rise to the top. I'm on the side that the bar has sunk into the cream. Maybe the some of the lost NSRCA members felt similarly.
Ed M.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Doug Cronkhite 
To: discussion at nsrca.org 
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 4:33 PM
Subject: RE: Displacement during snap rolls (was Why is it so quiet?)


The rules for family 9.9 are as follows:

"Snap rolls represent one of the greatest challenges to judge. This is primarily due to two factors: (1) the "snapping" characteristics of different types of aircraft are unique; and (2), snap rolls are a high energy maneuver that occur very quickly. Snaps happen so fast, in fact, that is is virtually impossible for a judge to determine the exact order in which events occur, especially at the beginning of the snap. There are no criteria, therefore, for seeing nose and wing movement initiated at the same time as with the other autorotation family, Spins."

The rest of the paragraphs deal with snaps not autorotating through the complete revolutions and so forth but there is no criteria whatsoever for line displacement. This would be impossible to deal with actually since aircraft snap so differently from one type to another. A top level unlimited airplane like an Edge, Cap, or Sukhoi displaces very little, but people flying lower classes in Decathlons, Clipped Wing Cubs and so forth displace a great deal in a snap. There's just no way to fairly judge with a single standard across all aircraft types.

-Doug






From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Dean Pappas
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 1:15 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: RE: Displacement during snap rolls (was Why is it so quiet?)


Thanks Doug,
You don't happen to have the piece of text in a form that could be pasted into this forum, do ya'?

Dean Pappas 
Sr. Design Engineer 
Kodeos Communications 
111 Corporate Blvd. 
South Plainfield, N.J. 07080 
(908) 222-7817 phone 
(908) 222-2392 fax 
d.pappas at kodeos.com 
-----Original Message-----
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Doug Cronkhite
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 4:14 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: RE: Displacement during snap rolls (was Why is it so quiet?)


No track downgrade Dean. Since a snap roll is a yaw induced maneuver (or should be at least) it's nigh-impossible to actually snap the airplane and not displace the line a little. Especially when you consider the low weight and inertia of our airplanes as compared to full scale.

-Doug
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20041230/e6632e56/attachment-0001.html