Snap Article and the K-Factor

[Keith Black]

I'm a bit confused by your suggested topic, but if there are things I can
share I'd be willing to. Problem is, I'm one of the ones that need the info
and subsequently don't have a great wealth of knowledge to share (yet).
However, I'll give some thought to articles I could contribute based on
building and flying experiences I've had so far, maybe the viewpoint of the
newer pattern flier.

Keith Black

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <patterndude at comcast.net>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 8:13 PM
Subject: Re: Snap Article and the K-Factor


> Keith,
> I agree.  By the powers vested in me I pronounce you consigned editor of a
> KFactor article summarizing the viewpoints of those that should know.  the
> KFactor is our publication and we are the ones that make it better.  You
are
> a good writer and can do a great job.  What do you say?
> --Lance
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Keith Black" <tkeithb at comcast.net>
> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 4:51 PM
> Subject: Re: Snap Article and the K-Factor
>
>
> > This is an awesome description. I believe that both Dave's and Earl
> > Haury's
> > posts should be included in the K-Factor. This is the type of
information
> > that I believe people really want to see in the K-Factor. Certainly I
do.
> > True that it will be a re-run for those on the mailing list, but those
not
> > on the list will benefit and it will increase the K-Factor's value for
> > recruiting new members.
> >
> > I know that others are already pushing for more content in the K-Factor,
I
> > think that's great.  This may have already been mentioned, but I feel
that
> > every K-Factor should have at least one "how-to" article, judging
article,
> > and most importantly a flying tip article (maybe one beginner and one
> > advanced). I know these flying tip articles are tough to come by, but my
> > experience in pattern thus far has been that there are extensive
> > discussions
> > and articles on equipment and building but it's very tough to find
> > discussions on flying techniques. I was disappointed when I joined the
> > NSRCA
> > that the K-Factor didn't have much in the way of flying tips that I
> > DESPERATELY needed (and still need). I'm not sure if this is because
> > people
> > hold this info close to the vest or if most are just drawn to equipment
> > aspect of the sport. Lately I've been impressed with some of our top
> > caliber
> > pilots such as Don S, Earl and Dave sharing some of their flying
"secrets"
> > with the list. And when speaking with people in person they all seem
more
> > than willing to give flying advice. So maybe it's simply that we don't
> > focus
> > on this in our discussions.
> >
> > I saw a post a while back asking Don S. about doing a monthly article.
> > Let's
> > also solicit the likes of Dave, Jason, Chip, Sean, Brian Hebert, Earl,
> > etc.
> > (not trying to leave anyone out, these are just people I know in my
> > limited
> > exposure). The info these guys can share will improve the caliber of our
> > sport overall.
> >
> > Keith Black
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "David Lockhart" <DaveL322 at comcast.net>
> > To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> > Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 10:08 AM
> > Subject: Long - Snaps, setup, technique, and "tells" (Was Re: Snap
> > Rolls.....are they legitimate/ RE: displacement during snap rolls
> > discussion)
> >
> >
> >> Chris,
> >>
> >> I think Bjorn made an extremely good point and analogy comparing the 3
pt
> >> shot to a snap.  I think snaps are precision manuevers.  I don't think
> > luck
> >> with snaps is any different that luck with spin entry/exits or stall
turn
> >> entry/exits.  All are difficult to consistently perform without
downgrade
> >> (especially the snaps), and that is generally reflected in the KFactor
> >> (oops, another can of worms).
> >>
> >> The reason stall turns are often performed conservatively is simple - a

> > zero
> >> for a flopped stall turn is death - the scoring is usually so close at
> >> the
> >> top, that a single zero will take a pilot out of the running for the
> > 1,000.
> >> I would say at the top levels, most pilots are 90+ % to complete a
tight
> >> radius stall turn (the one that appears to rotate on the CG, and is not
> >> subject to a downgrade).  The same pilots are 99.9% to complete the
> > slightly
> >> open radius stall turn that will get the minor downgrade.  If we as a
> >> pattern community want to see less conservative stall turns, all we
need
> > to
> >> do is increase the point deduction for the slightly open radius stall
> > turn -
> >> the risk has to equal the reward, so to speak.
> >>
> >> To specifically answer the 2 questions you posed (my opinions of
> >> course) -
> >> 1)  If it is indeed a true snap (and not a twinkle roll or barrel
roll),
> >> then it does add to the capabilities of the pilot.
> >> 2)  Until we can achieve a level of consistency in judging snaps, they
> >> detract from the event.
> >>
> >> Now, the long part, including some of the "secrets".
> >>
> >> Airplane design -
> >> In general, in the early/mid 1990s, most designs migrated towards
> > increased
> >> pitch stability and damping (which is often but not always synonomous
> >> with
> >> long tail moment).  This was great for groove/lock in corners and
lines,
> > but
> >> not good snaps - and perhaps not a bad bias considering the relatively
> >> low
> >> number of snaps in the pattern.  The increased pitch stability made it
> > more
> >> difficult to setup a plane to do good snaps (and spins).  The same
> >> designs
> >> also generally migrated towards increased yaw stability (actually good
> >> for
> >> snaps, bad for spins, others will not agree).  My personal setups used
as
> >> much as 35 degrees of elevator to achieve consistent stall entries to
> > snaps
> >> and spins (and all of the elevator remained during the spin, but not
> > during
> >> the snap) and 40 degrees of rudder in spins (ele/rud only spins).  In
> > recent
> >> years, the number of snaps in patterns have increased, and the newer
> > designs
> >> have shifted towards less pitch stability (and less yaw stability, but
> > that
> >> change is a response to the combined rolling/looping and rolling circle
> >> maneuvers).
> >>
> >> Airplane setup -
> >> This is critical with any design, and when a snap is attempted, a
couple
> >> things can happen -
> >> - a good snap.
> >> - a twinkle roll (not a snap).
> >> - a barrel roll (not a snap).
> >>
> >> The majority of the setups I see are not sufficient to consistently
> > perform
> >> nice snaps.  Consistently meaning the setup is not very tolerant of
> >> differing weather conditions (hot vs cold, snapping in/out of relative
> >> wind), pilot techniques, or entry airspeeds.  I have on more than one
> >> occasion been asked to check a setup for snaps when the owner of the
> >> plane
> >> was having problems with snaps.  In some instances, I've been able to
> >> consistently snap a plane with no changes to the setup, but
improvements
> > to
> >> the setup made it easier for the owner to consistently snap the plane.
> > The
> >> below descriptions are generalizations based on my experience flying a
> >> variety of planes and observing a variety of planes and pilots from a
> >> variety of perspectives (amazing how much differently snaps look from
> >> different perspectives).  And, the below does not take into acount the
> >> effects of wind on track and offer relative descriptions of control
> >> throws
> >> (exact control throws are influenced by design, weight, pilot
technique,
> >> etc).  The most critical setup element is pitch - if enough pitch
> > authority
> >> is not available, the break can not be achieved - the adjustment to
make
> > is
> >> more elevator throw, or a more rearward CG (and if neither work, the
> > design
> >> has too much stability in pitch to snap properly).
> >>
> >> - The "twinkle" roll - The plane that has too little elevator, a little
> > bit
> >> of rudder, and a boatload of aileron.  Very common.  The plane has
little
> > or
> >> no displacement from track (or the path is an extremely tight barrel)
> > during
> >> the "twinkle" and returns to the original track with zero displacement
or
> >> deviation in track.  The rotation rate is probably equivalent to a full
> >> stick deflection aileron roll (might be marginally higher due to a
slight
> >> assymetry in lift between wing panels caused by the minor amount of
> >> rudder
> >> used).  The tail follows the nose exactly and no "cone" is inscribed.
> >> The
> >> advantage of flying a "twinkle" roll is that there is very little if
any
> >> loss in track, the entry is non-critical, airspeed loss in the
"twinkle"
> > is
> >> minimal, and the only variable the pilot needs to concentrate on is
> > getting
> >> the wings level at exit.  As with the stall turn, it is a risk/reward
> >> thing - why risk doing a real snap if the "twinkle" is getting scored?
> > The
> >> other benefit of the setup for a "twinkle" is that less elevator throw
is
> >> used, and that makes the plane smoother in all other manuevers.
> >>
> >> - The "barrel" roll - this one can be easy to see, or hard to
distinguish
> >> from a snap, and the setup that yields this result is often variable.
A
> >> very tight diameter barrel roll is hard to distinguish from a good snap
> >> because it will exhibit a pitching element on entry and the plane will
> >> displace from track in pitch and yaw during the snap, but will
generally
> >> return to track for full snaps (1, 2, 3....rotations) and generally
> >> remain
> >> displaced of the track (in pitch and yaw) by the diameter of the barrel
> > for
> >> 1/2 snaps (.5, 1.5, 2.5 ....rotations).  Very little if any cone
> > inscription
> >> is visible after the entry to the barrel.  The large diameter barrel
has
> > the
> >> same characteristics of tight diameter barrel, but easy to see, simply
> >> because of the large diameter alone.  Any change in the control inputs
> >> during the "barrel" are generally very easy to see - because the plane
is
> >> not stalled and responds readily to any change in surface deflection.
> >> Insufficient elevator to initiate the break is generally the cause of
> >> barrels.  Adding aileron usually increases the rotation rate, and often
> >> reduces the diameter.  Adding rudder may reduce the diameter of barrel,
> >> increase the rotation rate, give the appearance of the inscription of a
> > cone
> >> (but it is only in yaw, and not in pitch, and the airplane is not in a
> >> stalled condition), and may also add the look of a "cartwheel".  The
> > benefit
> >> of the "barrel" setup is that less control throw is used (smoother in
> > other
> >> maneuvers), the rotation rate is slow (easier to hit exit) and the
track
> > is
> >> unchanged (but might be dispaced).
> >>
> >> - The "good" snap - I hope we know what it is in writing by now
(actually
> >> seeing it takes practice), so just some notes.  Theoretically, the
break
> > can
> >> occur without displacement in pitch - but this never happens in
practice
> >> (angular acceleration, mass, and other physics properties are
> >> real.........blame Newton).  A good clean break (very fast elev servo
and
> >> fingers) will reduce the amount of track deviation and displacement in
> > both
> >> pitch and yaw.  The rotation rate of the snap will be marginally
effected
> >> (if at all) by low / high rate aileron - ailerons don't work very well
> > when
> >> the plane is stalled.
> >>
> >> Piloting Technique and more setup -
> >> To me, a good setup for snaps has a bigger "sweet" spot - the exact
entry
> >> airspeed and exact timing of the control inputs can vary and still
yield
> >> a
> >> good snap.  And the good setups "feel" the same whether snapping left
or
> >> right, positive or negative.  I fly with triple rates - normal flying
is
> > rud
> >> on high, elev and ail on medium.  For spins, everything is on high.
For
> >> snaps, I use a variety of rates setup to make the variety of snaps feel
> >> balanced and I attempt to get the snaps from different perspectives in
> >> different manuevers to "present" the same.  It takes a lot of time to
> > setup.
> >> The technique for all types (different rotations in different
attitudes)
> > of
> >> snaps is similar (lead with elevator, then rudder, then aileron) but
the
> >> timing of each input usually varies a bit on both the addition and
> >> removal
> >> of the inputs.  And each specific snap is usually a little different -
I
> >> "feel" the plane approaching the entry to the snap and try to gauge
exact
> >> airspeed, wind condtions, evaluate what the track is and if I want to
> > change
> >> the track, etc.....and then I make very small changes to the addition
of
> > the
> >> inputs to get the desired effect (ie, I might use more elevator lead to
> >> change the track in pitch if the plane was diving slightly in pitch
track
> >> prior to the snap, or lower than usual on airspeed).  During the snap
> >> itself, I watch the progression of the snap and decide if I got the
entry
> > I
> >> wanted (expected), and if I need to make any changes on the timing of
the
> >> removal of control inputs on the exit of the snap (ie, maybe hold the
> >> same
> >> rudder or imediately go to opposite rudder on the exit to immediately
> >> correct a deviation in yaw track).  The more I fly, the better I can
make
> >> these adjustments because I seem to see things better, the snaps seem
to
> >> take longer, my fingers seem to move faster, and I better know what the
> >> mental image of the plane should be at any instant during the snap.
> >>
> >> "Tells" and "cheats"
> >> One of the easiest snaps to judge is the 45 downline snap (airplane is
> >> upright and executing a single positive snap).  The airplane is front
and
> >> center, and the break in pitch is easy to observe - and it is actually
> > easy
> >> to confirm.  Odds are, if you don't see a break, you will see the track
> >> of
> >> the line steepen as the airplane passes through 90 degrees of
rotation -
> >> because the rudder is now "bottom" rudder (and the plane is still
flying,
> > or
> >> if snapping, the break was in yaw, not pitch), and the track of the
plane
> >> will be steeper than 45 degrees at the finish of the snap.  Kinda of
odd
> > to
> >> see a 45 downline get steeper after a positive snap??  Big tell, and
> > pretty
> >> common to see.  I see the same thing on 1.5 snaps on a 45 downline.
The
> >> same thing also happens on 45 uplines when the line substantially
> >> flattens
> >> out after the snap, but with an added variable - the flattening may be
> >> partly due to reduced airspeed and gravity (but the plane will show the
> >> initial loss in track at the 90 degree point in rotation).
> >>
> >> Exits - exits are generally judged more critically than entrances - for
> >> snaps, rolls, and radii. A "cheat" to help with the exit of a snap is
to
> >> take out elev and rud before the snap is complete - such that all the
> > pilot
> >> is doing is completing a roll to level flight, and completing a roll is
> >> easier than completing a snap - the tell is a substantial change in
roll
> >> rate (rotational inertia exists and for our models, the heavy wing
> >> monster
> >> that appreciably demonstrates this is rare).  This type of cheat is
also
> >> employed on spin exists and on the exit of part and full rolls.  The
roll
> >> rate is slightly reduced as the rolling element nears completion to
make
> > it
> >> easy to nail wings level.  Most judges will downgrade for the wings not
> >> being level, fewer will catch the change in roll rate.  The same thing
> >> applies to corner radii - they are often softer close to the exit to
make
> > it
> >> easier to hit the line.  The reason the cheats are employed is because
> >> downgrades are not being applied - "no whistle, no foul".
> >>
> >> How do some guys maintain distance during the entire flight (including
> > stall
> >> manuevers) when flying in a crosswind?  They don't.  They are just
sneaky
> > at
> >> hiding the wind drift, and make corrections / allowances where they are
> > the
> >> hardest to detect.  Humans having pretty poor depth perception at 150
> > meters
> >> also helps.  This past fall, I had a trusted observer stand in the
field
> >> underneath my flight track and was told that the flight track was about
> > 145
> >> meters, +/- 3 meters (a bit more variation after spins).  And the
> >> observer
> >> was surprised to see how visible the rudder corrections were - as the
> >> same
> >> observer saw far fewer rudder corrections when viewing similar flights
as
> > my
> >> caller.
> >>
> >> Prior to spins and stall turns, you will usually see a very small
"cheat"
> >> into the wind, and then a little drift with the wind allowed
immediately
> >> after the stall manuever, followed by a small "cheat" into the wind to
> >> return to the original track.  A single 15 degree change in track is
easy
> > to
> >> see and downgrade.  Very aggressive compensation for wind (difference
> >> between attitude and track) while technically correct rarely scores
well.
> >> Three 5 degree changes in track are harder to see and harder to
> >> downgrade,
> >> and present nicer (even if not as correct technically).
> >>
> >> With snaps - to hide the lateral displacement and yaw track change in a
> >> snap, the "cheat" is normally opposite the direction of the snap prior
to
> >> the snap entry - 5 degrees nose in before a snap and 5 degrees nose out
> >> after the snap is harder to detect than simply being 10 degrees off
after
> >> the snap.  And of late, there is no doubt in my mind that being 10
> >> degrees
> >> off before the snap will earn little or no deduction if the exit of the
> > snap
> >> is nailed.  All deviations in roll, pitch, and yaw track should be
> >> equally
> >> downgraded whether before or after the snap - it is a goal that needs
to
> > be
> >> achieved.  The change in track during a snap can often be hidden (or
> >> mitigated) to a large extent by wind - this is simply smart piloting by
> >> choosing to snap into (usually) the wind.  And in the instance of a
snap
> > at
> >> the end of the box, where the displacement or loss of heading in yaw is
> >> particuarly easy to see, a more pronounced and aggresive break in pitch
> >> ca
> > n
> >> be used to minimize the deviation in yaw, as the deviation in pitch is
> >> harder to see (and thus harder to downgrade).
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Dave
> >> DaveL322 at comcast.net
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: White, Chris
> >> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> >> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 4:11 PM
> >> Subject: RE: Snap Rolls.....are they legitimate/ RE: displacement
during
> >> snap rolls discussion
> >>
> >>
> >> Consistent snap rolls.....how much skill....how much luck?
> >>
> >> Do I read from the responses that the consensus is that snap rolls are
> >> precision maneuvers?   I believe that may be true in full-scale
> >> aerobatics
> >> particularly in slower snapping aircraft because you can actually see
> >> outside and judge entrance timing based on real time entry speed (ASI)
> >> and
> >> judge exit because of roll rate perceived via outside reference
directly
> >> relative to the horizon without any parallax as you would get from our
> >> ground perspective.   I'm trying to say that the pattern airplanes that
> > I've
> >> flown snap differently and usually quickly.   I've seen very good
pilots
> > who
> >> feel a real sense of accomplishment (or luck) when they hit the snap
> >> right
> >> on....however, I still believe to a degree that it might be a little
more
> >> luck than precision to hit them consistently.  It seems a shame to have
a
> >> pilot miss an exit by 5 degrees to get a 1/2 point hit....particularly
> > when
> >> the perspective of a 5 degree bank at 150 meters away could vary with
> > judges
> >> and parallax considerations. (Or that a given judge may not see enough
> >> conical rotation of the tail)
> >> Please consider that I have nothing but admiration for the FAI pilots
in
> > the
> >> finals when reading the following: Consider how conservative  stall
turns
> >> were performed during the FAI finals ( yes it was intelligent to fly
them
> >> that way)  you will notice that very few pilots flew great stall turns,
> > they
> >> were more like tight wingovers with the reason being obvious....who
wants
> > to
> >> risk a flopped zero at the level where you have very few points
> >> separating
> >> the standings.   Snap rolls seem to have more risk.
> >>
> >> I would love to see the consensus on the following questions:
> >>
> >> 1) Do snap rolls add or detract from the legitimacy of judging
precision
> >> aerobatic pilots capabilities?
> >> 2) Do snap rolls add to the credibility of precision aerobatics?
> >>
> >> Respectfully submitted by a new guy,
> >> Chris
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
> >> [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On
> >> Behalf Of Bjorn Lehnardt
> >> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 2:04 PM
> >> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> >> Subject: Re: Snap Rolls.....are they legitimate/ RE: displacement
during
> >> snap rolls discussion
> >>
> >>
> >> Bob,
> >>
> >> A good three point shooter in the NBA has mastered a maneuver that is
> >> uncontrollable except for the first part, yet few question the validity
> >> of
> >> his skill or it's part in the game.  Figuring out and mastering the
> >> requirements for proper setup-entry under many different circumstances
is
> >> what makes a three point shot or a snap roll such an interesting part
of
> > the
> >> game.
> >>
> >> I would seem a real shame to say that pattern and pattern flyers are
not
> >> capable is mastering the art and science of the stalled maneuvers.
> >>
> >> Snaps are still fairly new to pattern and so growing pains are to be
> >> expected.  Resistance is natural and will go away with practice.  That
> > both
> >> flying practice and judging practice.
> >>
> >>
> >> Bob Pastorello <rcaerobob at cox.net> wrote:
> >> That is an excellent point, Chris.  And your modesty to not add
> >> "Intermediate National Champion" to your credentials is noted.
> >>     The issue of a virtually-uncontrollable maneuver EXCEPT for entry
and
> >> exit, does bring a valid question about it's place in our game.  I
think
> > Ed
> >> Miller mentioned (sorry if wrong) that longer-duration maneuvers with
> >> more
> >> easily-visible segments have their OWN level of difficulty.
> >>     In '99, when I was working on the Rules Committee, and we were
> > designing
> >> new sequences one of the suggestions in Masters was a Center maneuver,
a
> >> square loop with 2/4 on U/D, 1/2 on horizontal legs.  We were TRASHED
for
> >> even suggesting such a thing!!!
> >>     The reason I mention that is to consider difficulty and pilot
> > challenge,
> >> wouldn't most of us agree that the square loop I describe would be more
> >> easily judged, and more challenging for the majority of pilots than the
> >> downline SINGLE snap we have in '05 ???
> >>
> >> Since we're in a rules cycle year, maybe this is a good time to rethink
> > the
> >> "required elements" of every class, and look more for "what do guys
WANT
> > to
> >> have in the sequence?"
> >>
> >> Great thread starter, Chris.
> >>
> >> Bob Pastorello
> >> NSRCA 199  AMA 46373
> >> rcaerobob at cox.net
> >> www.rcaerobats.net
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: White, Chris
> >> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> >> Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 8:49 AM
> >> Subject: Snap Rolls.....are they legitimate/ RE: displacement during
snap
> >> rolls discussion
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Please excuse me if I'm repeating, or committing a "faux pas" ( I think
I
> >> spelled that right:) ) ....but I am really interested in hearing
opinions
> > to
> >> the following:
> >>
> >> 1) Do snap rolls add or detract from the legitimacy of judging
precision
> >> aerobatic pilots capabilities?
> >> 2) Do snap rolls add to the credibility of precision aerobatics?
> >>
> >> I'm new to the game, but a "stalled" maneuver is a maneuver that is not
> >> "flown on the wing" .  An overwhelming percentage of the other maneuver
> >> segments in our patterns are flown on the wing and are able to be
judged
> >> accurately and with a minimum of "impression" influence.  Since the
Snap
> >> Roll it is not "flown" through it is not fully controlled....lack of
> > control
> >> indicates somewhat of a wildcard that penalizes capable pilots
> > experiencing
> >> a "bad" maneuver.
> >>
> >> I have seen many good snap rolls in competition, some done by great
> > pilots,
> >> some by new guys.....my question is: Should there be a "wild card"
> >> allowance?  Is anyone capable of flying consistent snap rolls that are
> >> consistently judgeable to clear and concise requirements?   I believe
I'm
> >> hearing an overwhelming "NO".  If the answer is no, then maybe they
> >> should
> >> be removed.
> >>
> >> I fly RC pattern because in my opinion it is more graceful and precise
in
> >> appearance as compared to IMAC.... not that I don't respect IMAC pilots
> >> capabilities and enjoy the show.  But, I sometimes I wonder how "Snap
> > Rolls"
> >> fit into RC Pattern....and it sounds as if I'm not the only one.   (I
> >> like
> >> to see snaps....I just feel there are variables beyond the pilots
control
> >> which penalize inconsistently)  I think a pilot should be judged on
> >> control....not inertial physics. (is that a real term????:) )
> >>
> >> Just my thoughts and question to the group....respectfully submitted,
> >> Chris
> >>
> >> (as a CFII, airshow nut and pattern guy and whatever other credibility
I
> > can
> >> throw in:) )
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
> >> [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On
> >> Behalf Of Ed Miller
> >> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 7:11 PM
> >> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> >> Subject: Re: Displacement during snap rolls (was Why is it so quiet?)
> >>
> >>
> >> Seems the never ending snap discussion was beat to death here last year
> > too.
> >> This will be long but hear me out. No doubt what I'm about to say will
at
> >> the very least be controversial. That's fine with me as I think we need
> >> to
> >> think outside the box more often. My wife enjoys watching figure
skating.
> >> Being the "supportive spouse", on occasion I will watch for a bit with
> > her.
> >> It seems in figure skating, the multiple rotation jumps, triples and
even
> >> quadruple rotation variations is where all the judging ( and viewing )
> >> emphasis is placed in a skaters routine. It also seems the judging is
> >> focused on 2 things, the entry to the jump and "sticking" the landing.
> >> Frankly, those that say they can see every element of the skaters
> >> rotation
> >> are, IMHO, full of blank. It plain happens too fast. I have better
> > eyesight
> >> than most, in my younger days I could pick up the stitching and
rotation
> > of
> >> a baseball thrown at 90mph. I'll admit, some of that sharpness is gone
> > but,
> >> I honestly cannot pick up all the rotation elements in a figure skaters
> > jump
> >> in real time ( we all can when they replay it in slow-mo ). Ever since
> >> the
> >> snap roll was introduced into precision aerobatics, an oxymoron IMHO,
we
> >> have had the same problems judging snaps as professional figure skating
> >> judges have judging triple toe loops. I have watched ( and learned
some )
> >> from the real snap masters, aka Lockhart and Pappas, yet, when in the
> > judges
> >> chair I look for departure in pitch ( entry ) and "the landing " of the
> >> maneuver ( exit ) . So, to me, we've introduced snaps into precision
> >> aerobatics to separate the wanna be pattern jockey hackers like me from
> > the
> >> gifted, talented folks like Lockhart, Pappas, Hyde, etc. but in fact
what
> >> we've done is actually dumbed down our judging criteria. These talented
> >> flyers will find the setup and stick movements to present a maneuver
such
> >> that it defies the laws of gravity. However, most of us are only humans
> > and
> >> as judges, only judge what can we realistically see and honestly assess
> >> in
> > a
> >> snap roll. Most all snap rolls I've seen done and performed rotate at
> >> such
> > a
> >> speed that again, the exit is the focus. Once in awhile you can pick up
> > the
> >> obvious aileron roll exit. There are many more elements of a snap roll
> >> besides entry and exit yet as I read/delete/read/delete, etc. the
> > discussion
> >> we are having here, it boils down to entry and exit positions. The
> >> ex-masters maneuver of 2 rolls in opposite directions. It is a thing of
> >> beauty when done properly  takes a lot of time to perform, especially
> >> compared to our beloved snap rolls, has many more places for the pilot
to
> >> screw up that are EASILY VISIBLE to the judges besides the entry and
exit
> >> points. That's precision aerobatics IMHO. AMA pattern was always smooth
> > and
> >> graceful until someone decided as the FAI does, so must the AMA. Some
> >> will
> >> say it's progress, new maneuvers, it's just raising the bar to let the
> > cream
> >> rise to the top. I'm on the side that the bar has sunk into the cream.
> > Maybe
> >> the some of the lost NSRCA members felt similarly.
> >> Ed M.
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: Doug Cronkhite
> >> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> >> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 4:33 PM
> >> Subject: RE: Displacement during snap rolls (was Why is it so quiet?)
> >>
> >>
> >> The rules for family 9.9 are as follows:
> >>
> >> "Snap rolls represent one of the greatest challenges to judge. This is
> >> primarily due to two factors: (1) the "snapping" characteristics of
> >> different types of aircraft are unique; and (2), snap rolls are a high
> >> energy maneuver that occur very quickly. Snaps happen so fast, in fact,
> > that
> >> is is virtually impossible for a judge to determine the exact order in
> > which
> >> events occur, especially at the beginning of the snap. There are no
> >> criteria, therefore, for seeing nose and wing movement initiated at the
> > same
> >> time as with the other autorotation family, Spins."
> >>
> >> The rest of the paragraphs deal with snaps not autorotating through the
> >> complete revolutions and so forth but there is no criteria whatsoever
for
> >> line displacement. This would be impossible to deal with actually since
> >> aircraft snap so differently from one type to another. A top level
> > unlimited
> >> airplane like an Edge, Cap, or Sukhoi displaces very little, but people
> >> flying lower classes in Decathlons, Clipped Wing Cubs and so forth
> > displace
> >> a great deal in a snap. There's just no way to fairly judge with a
single
> >> standard across all aircraft types.
> >>
> >> -Doug
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
[mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]
> > On
> >> Behalf Of Dean Pappas
> >> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 1:15 PM
> >> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> >> Subject: RE: Displacement during snap rolls (was Why is it so quiet?)
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks Doug,
> >> You don't happen to have the piece of text in a form that could be
pasted
> >> into this forum, do ya'?
> >>
> >> Dean Pappas
> >> Sr. Design Engineer
> >> Kodeos Communications
> >> 111 Corporate Blvd.
> >> South Plainfield, N.J. 07080
> >> (908) 222-7817 phone
> >> (908) 222-2392 fax
> >> d.pappas at kodeos.com
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
> >> [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On
> >> Behalf Of Doug Cronkhite
> >> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 4:14 PM
> >> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> >> Subject: RE: Displacement during snap rolls (was Why is it so quiet?)
> >>
> >>
> >> No track downgrade Dean. Since a snap roll is a yaw induced maneuver
(or
> >> should be at least) it's nigh-impossible to actually snap the airplane
> >> and
> >> not displace the line a little. Especially when you consider the low
> > weight
> >> and inertia of our airplanes as compared to full scale.
> >>
> >> -Doug
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Do you Yahoo!?
> >> Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
> >>
> >> =================================================
> >> To access the email archives for this list, go to
> >> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
> >> To be removed from this list, go to
http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
> >> and follow the instructions.
> >>
> >
> > =================================================
> > To access the email archives for this list, go to
> > http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
> > To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
> > and follow the instructions.
> >
>
> =================================================
> To access the email archives for this list, go to
> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
> To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
> and follow the instructions.
>

=================================================
To access the email archives for this list, go to
http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.