Artistic Aerobatics suggestions

[seefo at san.rr.com]

Sometimes.. competition is just for the competitors and not for the 
viewing public. I think trying to make aerobatics into a spectator sport 
takes away from the competitors. 

-Doug


On Mon, 26 Jan 2004, Dave Dolzine wrote:

> I could see it now....
> 
> "Van Nostrand, a Cinderella story out of Dallas Texas, only needs one more
> 4-point to secure his victory.... OHHH NO, an over rotation. He not going to
> be happy with that one."
> 
> -DD
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
> [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Lance Van Nostrand
> Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2004 10:52 AM
> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> Subject: Re: Artistic Aerobatics suggestions
> 
> 
> If it wasn't for the announcers building up each golf shot and describing
> what's at stake and recognizing beauty or exaggerating the problems of
> hitting a ball inthe rough, watching golf would be far more boring.
>    When you are at a golf event as spectator, you can stand in one place and
> watch each player approach you and you can observe their travails.
>    I think we need in pattern to connect to spectators more.  Not to ignore
> their presence.  We could also use some commentary on what is happening so
> the observer can develop "favorites" and root for something.
>    In scale and large jet events, there is a line up of planes and pilots
> and the public can examine them and talk to the pilots.  We could have a
> corner where we place an announcer and some observation seats where one of
> us describes what is going on, what place the current flier is in, what
> mistakes are seen, etc.  Just like golf - to make it interesting to watch.
> 
> Thoughts?
> --Lance
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Peter Pennisi" <pentagon.systems at bigpond.com>
> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 6:27 PM
> Subject: RE: Artistic Aerobatics
> 
> 
> 
> Look at the following Golf has. I enjoy my game of golf occasionally but I
> can't think of anything more boring to watch unless I am playing. Pattern is
> the same, unless you're involved in some capacity it is boring to watch. Why
> is golf so popular? - not sure, maybe because it is easy to understand and
> the top players in the world have become household names, draws a lot of
> corporate interest etc.
> 
> Pattern will never reach those heights. As long as you enjoy the hobby for
> yourself that is the main thing. If only we could draw an international
> celebrity into flying pattern the public may start to take a little
> interest.
> 
> Pattern to the uninitiated is far too complex to understand. It is too
> precise and specialised to become a public domain interest. How will a
> spectator ever understand why Joe Bloggs only received a 4 instead of a 6
> for a 4 point roll?
> 
> AAA at a pattern comp would be fun. The only reason why I would do it is for
> me. If the general public find it interesting to watch - that would be an
> added bonus.
> 
> PP
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] On
> Behalf Of Rcmaster199 at aol.com
> Sent: Saturday, 24 January 2004 9:07 AM
> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> Subject: Re: Artistic Aerobatics
> 
> Eric,
> Unless we are judging and have to watch the flights (or at least should
> watch the flights), we often don't look at the other pattern flying much. At
> least that's been my experience in nearly twenty five years of competitive
> pattern flying.
> 
> It seems about the only time we carefully observe or even scrutinize a
> flight when we are NOT sitting in the JC, is when the fellow just above us
> in the standings is flying or when a name flier is flying. But even then, we
> seldom actually observe a complete flight
> 
> Is Pattern boring to watch ? Yeah, probably, to the uninitiated observer it
> probably is. If anyone of the Pattern people performed a perfect Cuban say,
> the observer could just as soon yawn. I doubt the observer would fall asleep
> if a plane was coming down to touch the rudder under full control, making
> all that racket, at the far edge of the runway. Lets be brutally blunt about
> danger appealing to many.
> 
> Are "they" having more fun? Sometimes I think they do, especially when we
> are having a problem with that alky burning, glow plug blowing, bearing
> chewing cantakerous bunch of metal parts. We get upset when our trim doesn't
> hold. They just fly or hover or whatever. We get right down anal about noise
> reduction and distance out and weight and 2x2 meters and "they" don't!!!
> 
> I did the IMAC thing for a short while but came back. The plane flew well
> enough even though it was a 10 lb overweight ARF(kinda reminded me of me
> actually). It was just too damned big and heavy and a real pain to haul
> around. Not my idea of "FUN"
> 
> BUT, I still love Pattern and all its self induced variables. That's my
> bottom line. It's irrational to feel this way but I just do. I guess it
> appeals to my desire for geometric precision and to the discipline it takes
> to strive for perfection.
> 
> IMHO
> 
> regards
> 
> Matt K
> 
> 
> Subj:Artistic Aerobatics
> Date:1/23/2004 10:07:44 AM Eastern Standard Time
> From:Eric.Henderson at gartner.com
> Reply-to:discussion at nsrca.org
> To:discussion at nsrca.org
> Sent from the Internet
> 
> 
> 
> As some of you may know I ran an FAI-FG1 event a couple of years ago at the
> Nat's after the finals. Quique, Troy and Chad Northeast put on a really
> great show for us while we waited for the Masters and FAI results.
> 
> I have not heard much about this event type since then. I was wondering if
> the FAI adopted it or not.
> 
> Flying a pattern type plane to music is very attractive. It is one of the
> few times where the plane does not drown-out the music! More correctly said,
> the planes have to comply with size weight and sound FAI regulations. They
> do not actually have to be what we fly in a pattern contest. Some guys use
> the same planes and swap-in 3-D wings and stabs. They often change their
> props.
> 
> It is, of course, the rest-of-the-world's version of IMAC freestyle.
> 
> I have written, not without a shot or two across my bows, that the
> delineator between precision aerobatics and scale aerobatics is that pattern
> is based on practicing the routine, a lot!
> I see IMAC pilots practicing tailslides and Harriers and torque rolls, but
> rarely the routines they fly. In particular, wannabe IMAC pilots fly the
> hover stuff for most of their flights. Once in a while I "push my luck" and
> I ask them why they practice most, the thing that they will do least, in a
> contest. (Maybe once in a freestyle routine at the end of an event).
> 
> The answer always is, "Because I want to get better at it and it is fun".
> Are they having more fun than us? I know that watching a loud plane hover
> over the runway is fun for a while but it gets old pretty quick and even
> becomes annoying. A bit like when we played our 45's on repeat. We coul
> listen to the same song, that we had just purchased, but our allegedly
> tone-deaf fathers were soon motivated to become "discus" throwers!!!!
> 
> The question is still out there however, "Are we boring?" and "Do we,
> (pattern pilots), need be more watchable"???
> 
> Regards, it is still winter - Eric.
> 
> 
> ============# To be removed from this list, send a message to
> # discussion-request at nsrca.org
> # and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
> #
> 
> =====================================
> # To be removed from this list, send a message to 
> # discussion-request at nsrca.org
> # and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
> #
> =====================================
> # To be removed from this list, send a message to 
> # discussion-request at nsrca.org
> # and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
> #
> 

=====================================
# To be removed from this list, send a message to 
# discussion-request at nsrca.org
# and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
#