Landing Direction

[Atwood, Mark]

Personally Jerry,  I'd like to see us score landings and take offs for Sportsman and Intermediate.  Given the k-factor of their total schedule it's a meaningful part, and the ability to land well in a high crosswind is something they'll need to be comfortable with, so it's worth rewarding ann motivating the practice required to do it well.

Given that, I think those two classes should go back to what we had...  Take off's from 0-2 meters, Landings starting at 2m.  Forget all the sequence and box issues.

For the higher classes...all pilot's option with a simple guideline for getting into the box in an efficient manner (no practice or hotdogging).  

Here's my suggestion for you...  Take Ron's approach.  Write it up...and submit it!!  

-M

-----Original Message-----
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Budd
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 1:30 AM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: RE: Landing Direction

Hi Mark,

I think you've pretty well captured my point of 
view on this topic.  I don't consider takeoffs 
and landings to be aerobatic maneuvers, in fact 
we're pretty much the only aerobatics 
organization that does.

Lets look at it another way.  In the old "B" 
pattern there used to be a touch-and-go, which is 
a lot like a takeoff and landing rolled up into 
one.  Does anyone think a touch-and-go is an 
aerobatic maneuver?  I don't.  Does it take skill 
to do well?  Yes, a lot like the skill required 
to do a well executed takeoff and a proper 
landing.  But the fact that it takes a lot of 
practice and skill to execute them well doesn't 
make them aerobatic maneuvers.

>My question is if no one considers Landing a 
>"aerobatic maneuver"ŠAn argument I'll save for 
>another dayŠ  Then why do we even score it at 
>all??  Let's face itŠthe Zero or 10 rule 
>basically takes it out of the contest.  

I (and it appears that I'm not alone in this opinion) don't think we should.

I've always felt that the reward for a good 
takeoff was that you got to fly that flight, and 
that the reward for a good landing was that you 
got to fly the next flight.

>Buddy makes a good point here.  IF we're not 
>going to make a change back to truly scoring the 
>T/O and landing, then just simply get rid of ALL 
>the crap, no scores except for maneuvers in the 
>air, and T/O's and Landings are completely 
>pilot's option.  Get the thing up and down 
>safelyŠwe'll score what's in the air.

That's pretty much the idea.  The interesting 
part is how many people will be willing to 
honestly consider it.

Thx, Jerry
-- 
___________
Jerry Budd
Budd Engineering
(661) 722-5669 Voice/Fax
(661) 435-0358 Cell Phone
mailto:jerry at buddengineering.com
http://www.buddengineering.com
================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.

List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the list.

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.

List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the list.