Intermediate Class

[Rodney Tanner]

Alan,
Let´s not forget that the 45 down, positive snap was originally included in the proposed Intermediate schedule and if I remember rightly, was approved. A group of well meaning but, IMHO, misguided people appealed to the rules body to have that and the preceding immelman removed for ¨safety reasons¨. So we lost two maneuvers, as nobody thought of adding a substitute.
I have been flying Intermediate for two years and am just moving up to Advanced where (horror of horrors) you have an inverted down 45 with a snap. Most of the time I still practiced Intermediate with the snap anyway, to learn a maneuver that is going to be important later. Obviously, one starts with level snaps and then progress to the 45 down with a snap. It takes some practice, you don´t just go out and crack it first time. (An IMAC habit!) 
Ask the any Intermediate pilot and I think the majority will be in favor of reintroducing the snap. The classes are progressive and require new trimming skills and flying skills, thats what it´s all about. :-)
Show a Sportsman pilot the Intermediate schedule for the first time and he probably won´t like the outside loop either, it takes time and use of the rudder and throttle to get it right. Of course this will be new to the Sportsman guy moving up, that is why he´s moving up, he is ready for the challenge.  
With the Cobra and Triangle there is a lot of emphasis in the class on drawing a 45 deg. line. So the progression to a snap on the 45 down is a logical one and IMHO a necessary one, in preparation for the Advanced class.
Respectfully,
Rodney
 
 
 
 
 

Alan Hewson <alan at countryworkshop.ca> wrote:
Is this for real?.......putting a 45ºdown positive snap into Intermediate????
Has anyone asked a Sportsman pilot lately to point his plane downward at a 45º down attitude, fly a straight line, DO A SNAP, fly more of a straight line, and then pull to level flight?
IMHO, if you are putting that maneuver in Intermediate, you will be scaring off many potential Intermediate flyers. I can only speak for myself, but, when I was at that level, you could not have even paid me to do that. I had trouble staying on the proper line doing a sequence of "Immelman....Outside loop....Split S" (which was in the sequence at that time).
I know that your decision on this does not affect what I will be flying, BUT,  it is something I believe in passionately. I have been a member of the Canadian Precision Aerobatics Committee for a few years and this type of scenario keeps coming up. I think that most of us making decisions on these matters have NOT flown in Intermediate for several years and we have forgotten what it was like to step up to that level.
PLEASE, go out, yourselves, and talk to Sportsman flyers about this......Maybe even see if they will try to fly the proposed sequence (or just this maneuver).
 
Thanks to the supporters of this list for creating a media where someone (like me) can send out an opinion (like I just did) and none of you will be seeing me until next summer when you will have forgotten all about this ( I hope).......RUNNING FOR SHELTER.
 
Alan Hewson
Thornton, Ontario, Canada

 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Bill Glaze 
To: discussion at nsrca.org 
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 11:57 PM
Subject: Re: Intermediate Class


As I understand it, this proposal is to reinstate 2 figures that were dropped from the original proposal.  I hope it passes the Board.  BTW: Anybody know when the vote is to be?  I'm having one of  Ron's senior Moments<G>  Bill Glaze

imarcnut at sbcglobal.net wrote:
Last year I heard a rumor that the Intermediate class would be adding 2 more maneuvers at the end of the program this up coming year.  The immelman turn followed by a 45 deg down line with a positive snap on center.
 
Is there any truth to this?
 
 
Gary "imarcnut" Russell


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20040123/7c377c60/attachment.html