Snap rolls

[Bob Pastorello]

The more you add complex, power-hungry elements to the vertical maneuvers (or angular center manuevers), in Masters... the more you broaden the gap created by "equipment".  Or said another way, the result of these types of additions only forces MORE expensive equipment choices.

To broaden interest, and sustain long term flyers, should we not consider equipment costs ALSO as we consider sequence designs?

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


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Rcmaster199 at aol.com 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 11:28 AM
  Subject: Re: Snap rolls 


  Interesting regarding snap speed Ron. I believe a Pattern model snap can be slowed down and can be easier to judge that way. I slowed my 1 1/2 snaps of the last masters Ava down so I know it can be done. At the same time, I was rewarded by some and zeroed by another at the Nats. Why? not violent enough (verbatim one judge's opinion). 

  Making up rules as we go isn't a good thing. Be that as it may, Judging as a craft has come a long way and is better than it ever has been. But still some way to go. I am not concerned though; I think we are headed in the right direction.

  I also don't want these maneuver types removed from AMA Pattern schedules. And let's definitely put them in more visible locations. How about a center Snapping Square or Fig M or N? Or Humpty? The 45 dowline snap in the old masters was a good one too. How about a center Two Snaps in a 45 upline?  But I am reluctant to reduce Kfactor tho. 

  MattK

  In a message dated 12/30/2004 12:00:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, ronlock at comcast.net writes:
    Agreed.

    When our pattern judging hats are on, it's not our task to figure out if the model design is such that it doesn't show a break, or isn't set up to show a break, or isn't flown with technique to show a break.   

    We judge maneuver elements as best we can without making allowances for model limitations that might be perceived or claimed.

    Judging snaps is tough, in part because it happens so fast.   I recall seeing a dozen snaps by full scale AT-6 Texans - the snaps were slow and most pattern judges would be able to judge them accurately and consistently.

    Given the speed of a model snap, getting accurate and consistent judging remains a big challenge.  Lets continue looking for improvements in judge training, lets design schedules with fewer snaps, lets put the snaps in visible locations.

    I don't want to see snaps removed from AMA, if they stay in F3A.  Masters class-   is, can, and should be, a step on the way to F3A for those moving on.

    A thought for discussion- might we put a lower K-Factor on maneuvers with snaps in AMA schedules?   They remain for pilot challenge and judge training, but the impact of imperfect judging is reduced.

    Later, Ron Lockhart

      -------------- Original message -------------- 

      Wait a minute, we are not talking about flying Pattern with Decathlons and Cubs. Pattern models are supposed to be "thoroughbred" designs. We have very few limits as to what we actually design in. On the other hand, Scale models don't have that "free to design as you please" luxury. 

      Pattern planes have no excuses. I see no reason the desired features can't be designed in to facilitate desired outcome.

      MattK

      In a message dated 12/29/2004 5:10:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, d.pappas at kodeos.com writes:
        Thanks Doug.
        And yet we know that the full scale guys' snaps happen in geologic time, compared to us!
        Imagine the plight of diving judges.
        Maybe the solution is to "wimp-out" the snap description, and allow anything that looks like a train wreck ... NAAAAAH!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20041230/830a9b60/attachment-0001.html