Distances

[Jerry Stebbins]

Steve, that makes me ask an immediate "WHY" they both have to have the same input/advantage/disadvantage.The rule book does not specify both have to have the same info. Again it is the Pilot's responsibility to present "for the judges to evaluate,and per the rule book". What I think I see when I am flying, and also when calling for someone, is not always consistent with what the judges apparently see. I expect the judges to use the best info they can have to judge me. The more standardized they are collectively, the more accurately, and consistently they can tell me how bad I am really doing. That way we should reduce  the large spread of judges results/scores we sometimes see.
That brings up another point--is the AMA judging video supposed to be true to the rules, in all aspects.I would expect it to be, but it seems to add some things I do not find in the rule book.
Flame suit on!!!!!!!
Jerry
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Steven maxwell 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 12:54 PM
  Subject: Re: Distances


   Something to think about is the judges and the pilot has to have the same advantage, meaning that if we would use distance judges it would have to be an auditable so everyone would know, it wouldn't be fair to give the judges something and not the pilots.
   Steve Maxwell

  Jerry Stebbins <JAStebbins at worldnet.att.net> wrote:
    Earl, seems like there are three ways to get the distance:1 Judge guessing based on experience/visibility,2 Setting someone off each of the box boundies at 180M, or 3 Measuring, in real time what it really is.
    Most of the FAI judges are older,more experienced, may be able to guess accurately, but also eysight problems can creep in.Trying to see what is going on ,due to distance, really adds to the load of evaluating all the other things that are more "judgeable ".
    Putting a couple folks out of the box like we do in pylon racing is fairly easy to do, logistically, and reporting wise. Would also need a "distance judge" seated with the others to provide them guidance on where the plane was.(hard to do real time). Could also be done post flight as an added downgrade column for each maneuver that is imposed across the board against the "judged" value, where the pilot violates the "distance box". 
    Then there is the "hi-tech" answer of a "two distance judges" that have range finder lasers that track and report/record the distance out. Two to give added credibility/ consistency to what is "seen".ORRR-install a transponder in the planes that would automatically give you position data -related to the box "limits". I have no doubt that there is a tiny device /system that is capable of this already available somewhere.Then there would be no doubt on ALL box violations,only the "degree" of the violation.
    This would require software to accommodate the "end of box " distances ,versus centered distances, but that would not be too tough. Also could be more sophisticated to add triggers for "over distance" reporting only, recording of data in real time on a comparable judging form, or some form of input to the judges in real time (beeper) or post flight for added downgrades.
    All this is somewhat academic, since it behooves the pilot to "present" to the judges his best , and observable performance, to get the best scores. But maybe helping the judges have a better/prcise observation data base might be a step forward to him getting more exactly "what he deserves".
    Ain't this more fun than sitting out in the sun and baking, while trying to do the best you can to observe, evaluate, and score?
    Jerry
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20040729/77522e46/attachment.html