Landing Direction

[BUDDYonRC at aol.com]

In a message dated 6/10/2005 7:03:40 PM Central Daylight Time,  
tkeithb at comcast.net writes:

OK, so you're saying if the wind doesn't shift  then the pilot can't land in 
the opposite direction. What if there is just a  breath of wind at take-off 
and the pilot flies with the wind, but at landing  the wind has picked up 
significantly? Do you stand by the rule and insist that  the wind direction didn't 
change and now the pilot must land with the wind or  get a zero?
 
BTW, I'm not trying to be difficult, just trying  to anticipate the arguments 
and problems that may raise their heads once this  rule is passed. Let's 
cover all the bases before putting any language in  place. And let's also be sure 
we are comfortable with all possible  consequences.
 
Keith

----- Original Message ----- 
From:  _Ron Van  Putte_ (mailto:vanputte at cox.net)  
To: _discussion at nsrca.org_ (mailto:discussion at nsrca.org)  
Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 2:46  PM
Subject: Re: Landing Direction



On Jun 10, 2005, at 1:35 PM, Keith Black wrote:


I'm in favor of the  proposal for safety in the case the wind direction 
changes, but I'd like  to bring something up that I've seen occur. Some pilots are 
much more  comfortable flying one direction than the other and therefore will  
sometimes choose to take-off in the same direction as the wind, especially  
in a light wind.

Is  the spirit of this rule change to allow someone who took off with the 
wind  to reverse landing direction? If not I think we could get into a lot of  
"hair splitting" when the pilot asks the judges if he can land in the  reverse 
direction. Will the judges remember what way the wind was blowing  (especially 
if the winds were light when the pilot took off)? Will other  competitors 
observer the situation and be upset? If the judges refuse for  any reason how 
upset will the pilot be if he dorks his $2500 plane? Will  this rule lead to 
pilots not practicing the pattern both directions as  much, especially in the lower 
classes where wind direction doesn't matter  as much?

Currently  if a pilot has a weak flight direction and chooses to fly with the 
wind  their "penalty" and incentive for not doing so is having to make a hot  
down wind landing (which I've seen  plenty).

Over  all I like the idea but want to avoid any unexpected side-effects of 
the  rules change.


If the wind  doesn't shift, the rule wouldn't apply. I think having the 
judges give  permission is important; it precludes someone trying to finesse the  
situation. We trust judges to score flights, so I think it's reasonable to  
expect they will know which way a pilot took off and which way the wind was  
blowing when he did.


Ron Van Putte




----- Original  Message -----
From:  Ron Van  Putte 
To:  discussion at nsrca.org  
Sent:  Friday, June 10, 2005 10:08 AM
Subject:  Landing Direction

Based on the  positive response on the proposed change to landing direction, 
I sent my  draft landing direction rule change proposal to John Fuqua, the 
Contest  Board chairman, and he replied:

"How about this.  Suggest  you put this as para 6.7 which is the 'Safety 
Requirements"  section. 

"Normally landing would be as per paragraph 14.1  regarding Direction of 
Flight.  However, when a wind shift results  in a downwind landing that creates a 
hazard to people or  the aircraft, subject to the approval of the judges, the 
landing  direction may be reversed.

(or maybe)

"Normally landing  would be as per paragraph 14.1 regarding Direction of 
Flight.   However, subject to the approval of the judges, the landing direction  
may be reversed when a wind shift results in a downwind  landing that creates a 
hazard to people or the  aircraft."

I prefer the second one and will make an Emergency  Proposal as soon as I can 
put it together.

Ron Van  Putte





How about Take off and landing pilots choice.Pure and simple.
Buddy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050611/6a2be784/attachment.html