Landing Direction

[Steven Maxwell]

 Although I didn't like seeing the scored t/o and landing go away I think
what your saying Mark is the only alternative for a solid building block,
on the other hand I would hate to see t/o and landing get sloppy just
because they aren't scored, the way it is now is a joke.
 Steve Maxwell


> [Original Message]
> From: Atwood, Mark <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>
> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> Date: 6/13/2005 7:12:08 AM
> Subject: RE: Landing Direction
>
> 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"©An argument I'll save for 
> >another day©  Then why do we even score it at 
> >all??  Let's face it©the 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 
> >safely©we'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.