Landing Direction; Spins, and Snaps. . .

[Derek Koopowitz]

Even with the old TO and Landing rules one couldn't relax from the time of
takeoff until landing.  One had to ensure that the pilot did not do any
"hot-dogging" on the downwind legs after takeoff and prior to landing... so
I don't see what the difference is between then and now.

  _____  

From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of MargueriteVG at aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2005 10:51 AM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Landing Direction; Spins, and Snaps. . .


 
Hi Eric    Score T/o and landings ;-)    Get some rest and judge less in one
day.
 
IT is a lot to sit out  in the Judges chair all day I know that is true.
However  we should not forget about the scores for landing because we think
its a waste of time.Landing is important to the pilot and all the pilots
standing on the field.
Marguerite
   
 
In a message dated 6/14/2005 12:56:00 AM Eastern Standard Time,
pattern4u at comcast.net writes:

An angle from the judges chair based upon being "in the chair' at the last 
ten Nat's

1. I never liked judging FAI's  TO's and Landings because you have to watch 
the plane ALL the way around into the box, then all the way back to the 
ground after the last maneuver. I'm usually distracted and busy sorting out 
scribes in difficulty etc.

2. AMA classes were great. I could relax my eyes after the take-off and perk

up just before the pilot came back into and called the box. Now I have to do

FAI duty in all classes.

Multiply this by 20 plus pilots and 4 days and your eyes will creak 
audibly - no joke

Regards,

Eric.





----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jerry Budd" <jerry at buddengineering.com>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 11:55 PM
Subject: Re: Landing Direction; Spins, and Snaps. . .


> Uhmm, Jerry -
>
> What are using for your reference point in saying that you "never saw a 15

> sec. difference that could have been saved"?  Stated another way, a 
> difference of 15 sec. from what?  If at least one of the contest(s) you've

> observed didn't score TO&L's (meaning other than 0 or 10) then what are 
> you comparing the measured times too?  Did you have timed data from before

> when TO&L's were scored from 0 to 10 to difference your measurements from?

> Without that data to establish a baseline you can't make a quantitative 
> comparison, only a qualitative assessment (which is a fancy way of saying 
> "a person's opinion").
>
> Please don't take my questions as an attack, they're NOT meant that way. 
> But collecting invalid data can be as bad, if not worse, than having no 
> data at all.  And I'm not saying that the data you've collected is 
> invalid, just that one can't tell from what you wrote below.  Since your 
> stated objective is to use the data to show the "rationale used to support

> the current proposal was false and it never was backed up by real data", 
> then the legitimacy of your data becomes relevant.
>
> Maybe I'm missing something here, can you help me understand how you were 
> collecting your data?
>
> Jerry (the other one, out on the left coast)
>
>
>>Terry, you are being generous. I actually timed and recorded a bunch of 
>>them at the last contest and never saw a 15 sec. difference that could 
>>have been saved. I intend to do this at every contest this year, and send 
>>a data file to all the Contest Board members during the next rules cycle. 
>>I think the rationale used to support the current proposal was false and 
>>it never was backed up by real data. Actually when you factored in the 
>>currently required maneuvers at TO, and at Landing, the overall total has 
>>to be longer. I guess they were allocating a large amount of time saved by

>>the Gun and Go approach now being advocated/accepted.
>>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.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050615/1e33bf4f/attachment.html