Callers (was Re: AMA MASTER'S unknown?)

[David Lockhart]

The majority of my practice flights are without a caller - and without a caller, I think I can fly my best - but, I think my average flight level without a "preferred" caller (a very limited group at any point in time) is slightly less than with a preferred caller.  This is for known patterns.  For unknowns patterns, the importance of the caller increases dramatically (at least an order of magnitude).

For known patterns -
When I have a good flight with a "non-preferred" caller, I don't hear a single word they say - consciously for sure, and I don't think subconsciously either - I remember very little of what they said after the flight.  If I actually need to hear the maneuver from my caller (preferred or not), it is not a good flight, and I've consciously chosen to listen because I had a "brain fart".  When I am having a good flight with preferred caller, I am 100% concentrating on the plane for every instant from the time the engine starts to the time the engine stops.  I think nothing of the maneuver schedule, and I divert none of my conscious thought from the plane - I simply absorb information (maneuvers, centers, proximity to the ends of the box, distance from flightline, etc) from my caller and on those flights, at the end of the flight I can quote anything the caller said, while not having specifically heard any of it during the flight - and on those flights, everything the caller says (sees) is the same as I am seeing - the confirmation justs adds to the confidence in the flight.

For unknown patterns -
The best flights will only happen with a preferred caller - whether I have memorized the schedule or not (memorizing it is preferred).  The difference between the best possible flight, an average flight, and a bad flight is at least an order of magnitude different than with a known schedule.  No matter how small, the additional concentration I can put into the flying when I have a preferred caller (and I don't have to think about what maneuver is next) makes a difference when the scores are compressed at the top.  Take a look at the most successful unknown pilots - most have a preferred caller (if no dedicated), often selected long before the event.  Observe the practice regiment prior to a flight.  And then observe the precision in the flight - it is only possible because of the focus the pilot has on the plane, and the focus the caller has on calling the maneuvers with the exact elements (push, pull, shift in, shift out, roll directions, etc) at the exact times they best can be utilized by the pilot, and always before the pilot starts to question what is next.

My comments are based on 17 years of competitive pattern flying (5 in F3A), about 3 years of practicing unknowns (written by myself and others, with and with out preferred callers), and about 5 years of occasional IMAC flying (including flying a borrowed airplane with a new caller through the Unlimited sequence).

The ideal caller differs from pilot to pilot - the ideal caller adapts to the personality of the pilot and knows when to talk, when to keep quiet, and when to provide additional information beyond the actual maneuvers.  As a caller, at the practice field, I give info to the pilot, and see when and if it is best absorbed (ie, I see the appropriate response in the plane).  I keep giving more info until I think the pilot is saturated (I no longer see the plane responding to my comments), and then I back off 10%.  And in my 17 years in pattern, I've found the amount of info and time in which it works best is very different with different pilots.  For myself, there are only a couple callers I would put in the "preferred" category at any given time - it is rarely more than 1 (Dad) or 2 (Dad and whoever I've flown with the most lately) - but there are a number of guys that I know think the same way I do, and they would be in the preferred category after only a couple flights - some of these guys are good friends I only see annually at the NATs - ain't it a great group to be a part of !!!!!!!

On a related note - I've found that I can maintain my full concentration for about 4 flights back to back.  Or maybe 8 flights through the course of a long day.  As a caller, I expend much less mental energy, but the amount of mental energy I expend increases the more familar I am with the pilot.  If I am very familiar with a pilot, I expend almost as much mental energy during a flight as if I were flying myself.  On a nice summer evening, I find that after 2-3 flights for me back to back with 2-3 flights I call, my mental concentration starts to degrade just the same as if I flew 4 flights back to back by myself.

Dave

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Bob Pastorello 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 6:57 PM
  Subject: Re: AMA MASTER'S unknown?


  Archie, your comments support my position, particularly with reference to your statement ""Most pilots have the callers they generally use and that person usually knows when the person they are calling for likes to hear the next maneuver."
      Maybe it's that way in all the contests YOU go to, but in the ones I attend, there's so many folks trying to call and carry for each other that it RARELY works that I have the same caller for two flights out of 6 at a LOCAL contest.
      How much that influences things is the very issue to be avoided.

  I'm not talking about FAI, their capabilities, or their team events....(you know, sponsors, callers, helpers,  all that), but the regular guys.  No offense intended to anyone, but that's an apples and oranges comparison.

  The pilot with the best caller will make the manuevers look the best, overall, period, end of story.  If you've ever had someone calling for you when you really NEEDED a maneuever, and they were a heartbeat or two behind, you blew the manuever!!!!
      In NATS FINALS language, that means the ONE thing that the caller burped on is the maneuver that knocks you out.

  NO THANK YOU!!!!

  Bob Pastorello
  NSRCA 199  AMA 46373
  rcaerobob at cox.net
  www.rcaerobats.net


    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Archie Stafford 
    To: discussion at nsrca.org 
    Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 5:47 PM
    Subject: RE: AMA MASTER'S unknown?


    I think you can fly unknowns and also make them very precise and smooth.  Look at the FAI finals.  Other than the roller I think the sequence flowed very well and the top pilots made it look like they had been flying it for a long time.  Even if you used past sequences or rearranged the current sequence.  

     

    I do not think this makes it a "team" event with the caller.  Most pilots have the callers they generally use and that person usually knows when the person they are calling for likes to hear the next maneuver.  Also if you use maneuvers that have been previously used or maneuvers that are reasonably well known then you shouldn't have a judging problem.  If this is going to be used at the NATS finals, then the judging is usually reasonably good anyway.  I'm sure there will be varying opinions on that, but for the most part judging in the finals is overall very good.  

     

    The better pilots are going to make an unknown sequence look smooth and precise no matter how many times they have flown it.  I think unknowns definitely help you determine who the best pilot is.  

     


----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Bob Pastorello
    Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 6:40 PM
    To: discussion at nsrca.org
    Subject: Re: AMA MASTER'S unknown?

     

    I guess since I never take a position on anything, I should probably do so on this -- so -- here 'tis.

     

    1.  This is a genuine yes/no POLL question of the MASTERS pilots only....and needs to be carefully administered, IF the Board is interested in opening this one.

    2.  If the POLL has at least 2/3 majority, then the next question should be designed to find out how crazy we (Masters) pilots are about having our scores judged by JUDGES WHO HAVE NEVER SEEN THE SEQUENCE  and 

    3.  How crazy we are about the totally-impossible-to-fairly-administer influence of the "team".  At this level of competitions (you guys are talking about the NATS FINALS, for G---s sake!!!) I would be hard pressed to say it will be "fair" to have the outcome determined by who had the best caller (or the most effective team).  Not everyone can do that...  and finally ....

    4.  MASTERS is supposed to be the Top AMA class....as such, philosophically, I think it should be the best - the VERY best - of precision, smoothness, and gracefulness....

     

    AND implementing an Unknown turns all that back into "IMPRESSION" judging....

     

    I'm not in favor of it;  won't be; won't try to persuade others to be; and believe wholeheartedly that if a pilot is strongly committed to flying Unknowns that he go play IMAC.  Then fly "Pattern" for precision, practiced, smooth and skillfully-executed "routines".


    Bob Pastorello
    NSRCA 199  AMA 46373
    rcaerobob at cox.net
    www.rcaerobats.net

     

     

      ----- Original Message ----- 

      From: Ed Deaver 

      To: discussion at nsrca.org 

      Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 3:54 PM

      Subject: Re: AMA MASTER'S unknown?

       

      Flying an Unknown truely does make it a 2 person flight.  I would still welcome the opportunity as the challange and thrill(flying well or goofing up and trying to collect yourself to fly the next manuever) is really great.  

       

      I don't know if it really identifies the callers ability, as much as the teams ability.  Another thought depends on how much time is allowed to prepare also.

       

      ed

      rcaerobob at cox.net wrote:

        Before I'd answer whether I wanted one or not, I'd like to have an understanding of what, specifically, the unknown in Masters would "reveal". If pattern is about precision piloting that could be a different thing than an ability to have a good caller....

        Just my ignorant opinion.

        Bob P.
        > 
        > From: "Grow Pattern" 
        > Date: 2005/01/06 Thu AM 11:25:48 EST
        > To: , 
        > 
        > Subject: AMA MASTER'S unknown?
        > 
        > How does this list feel about a Masters Nat's final that was different to 
        > the regular schedule. OR, even an unknown in the final to make it more than 
        > just three more of the same flown in the heats.
        > 
        > Regards,
        > 
        > Eric.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050107/78ec1269/attachment.html