F3A Finals, Judges View

[Earl Haury]

Congratulations to all the Nats Finalists, Nats Champion Jason, runner-up Quique, and the US Team Jason, Chip, & Sean, as well as Team Alternate, Don.

Here are some of my thoughts from the F3A Nats finals basis what I observed from the Judges chair. These are my views only, I did not / have not seen the work of other judges (other than the outcome).Hopefully these observations won't offend anyone. Other Judges may feel free to do the same, in agreement or challenge, so as to best serve the game.

The Judges discussed snaps and distance at length, along with the usual details, in a number of "official" and impromptu sessions. Of course, snaps require a "visible" attitude break and separation from track in pitch (from the flight path) before rotation is started and stall maintained throughout. Barrel rolls and axial rolls score zero. 

Unfortunately, there are some (pilots and judges) who believed that there is an undocumented exception for rolling circles regarding distance out. This isn't true in pattern. Maybe it comes from IMAC or is an artifact of TOC? The downgrade highlights for the rollers include mention of downgrades for distance / size. Anyway, the consensus was that visibility would the criteria for rollers rather than a hard distance "wall".  

We (Judges) observed "calibration" flights at 150, 175, & 200 meters and warm-up flights before F-05 and each unknown. The wind conditions were strong down the runway with a fair inward slant as the finals started and then diminished a little as the day wore on. 

The wind, and the pilots desire to stay close in, created severe right (and some left) side box violations. Generally, in an effort to "save" the box there was often no line between center / box maneuver, which now costs a point on the (higher K) center maneuver and the TA. The TA was either flown well, but mostly out of the box, or the maneuver was compromised to reduce the box error. Either way, large downgrades. I don't know if the pilots thought that better scores were available inside 150 m, they were trying to stay in to setup the roller, and/or the were loath to fly the attitudes needed to hold track in the wind (more downgrades here). Centering was also not executed well for many maneuvers in either direction, but being late on downwind maneuvers was fatal! As the day worn on this improved by pilots moving out a little, managing the wind better, and the lessening of the wind.

The early round rollers were huge, suffered numerous roll rate changes, and oval in shape (wind). It's pretty obvious that the finalists all have better eyesight than me! Very few rollers started rolling at center, some were ruddered around some 45 degrees (3 pts) before the roll started. The wind made these tough, but the pilots let the wind reek havoc by flying the rollers so big (as to make it difficult to roll slow enough) that the wind really elongated the "circle". Huge downgrades! As the day wore on some dramatically improved their rollers (as the wind lessened) by reducing the diameter. 

Snaps were another item. Obviously a number of pilots refined their technique to provide just enough (very rapid) pitch change to effect the minimum track separation with stall, a rapid rotation while reducing the elevator to maintain minimum stall, and allow a very clean finish. Nothing wrong with that, but some took it too far! In certain maneuvers the break was not visible. No visible break = 0!  As some snaps during a flight were nice - others left doubt, again- possible wind effect. A number of judges must have observed the same thing, as obvious adjustments were made by some pilots after reviewing their scores, but (in my opinion) going too far in the other direction. These snaps now became departures from track in pitch / yaw & roll for several degrees before stall (downgraded 1pt / 15 in each axis) were ugly, and the offsets often destroyed the general maneuver geometry. Seemed that the decision was that a downgrade (even if large) was better than a zero. Then some of the altered ugly were barrel rolls which also = zero. 

Box, snaps, rollers cost the most points. The standard defects are alive and well. Then there was some very good flying. The F05s and first unknown were tough in the wind! The 2nd unknown was a wimp (pilots must have been getting tired when they put that one together). At least the 2nd unknown gave the Judges an opportunity to get rid of some of the basket of 10's were holding most of the day.

My strongest suggestion for improved scoring is pretty simple. Be a student of the game, understand the maneuver descriptions and apply techniques to clearly present those maneuvers to the Judges. Don't give the Judge something to doubt! For example, ugly "wifferdils" don't get it for snaps. They don't need to jump all over the sky and screw up the rest of the maneuver. They do need to clearly show a break and maintained stall. Rollers should not (and may not) exceed the distance limits. The choice is to start at 175 m and do a 100 - 125 m roller in, or to start close in and make the diameter small enough to stay inside the limits. Rollers are neat done slow and big - but that isn't what's required (without a rule change), smaller is easier, less affected by wind, and will score better. Don't misunderstand me here, a rule change to allow rollers to visible distance is OK by me - but a dispensation from the rules (at any level of authority) is totally inappropriate, sets a dangerous precedent, and is bad for pattern.

Earl Haury
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20040724/d3b10ae1/attachment.html