Pattern Box Rules (discussion)

[Ken Thompson III]

Ya' mean I'm supposed to fly "in" the box?  No wonder my scores sucked last year.

Ken
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: John Pavlick 
  To: discussion at nsrca.org 
  Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 12:39 AM
  Subject: RE: Pattern Box Rules (discussion)


  Right on. I think Tom Hanks said: "The 'hard' is what makes it good". For the record, at my first contest / pattern primer last year, I was actually told to "stretch out" my maneuvers. "The box is way bigger than that" I was told. Wow, that made life easier. I did a lot better in my second contest, even while flying 70's style (ballistic) without a megabuck 2-meter airplane. I got everything done "in the box" without it being rushed like at the first contest (you guys should have seen the Immelman / roll / split "S" sequence - it looked like 2 rolls stretched out slightly). If I can do it, anyone can. It only took 4 gallons of fuel to fix the problem I had with "the box"... 
  John Pavlick
  http://www.idseng.com



    -----Original Message-----
    From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of rick wallace
    Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 11:06 PM
    To: discussion at nsrca.org
    Subject: RE: Pattern Box Rules (discussion)


    Matt – 

    Ya nailed this one! Great! 



    Let’s go burn fuel and quit inventing things to try and fix! 



    If it was easy, it wouldn’t be fun! 



    Rick 



    -----Original Message-----
    From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Rcmaster199 at aol.com
    Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 10:43 PM
    To: discussion at nsrca.org
    Subject: Re: Pattern Box Rules (discussion)



    In Pattern:

    There's nothing wrong with the +/-60 degree stage rule and the 150 meter out distance is fine also. 

    There's nothing wrong with the 5 kilo max rule. 

    There is nothing wrong with the 2x2 meter max rule

    There's nothing wrong with the unlimited engine power rule



    What's the next complaint du jur that ""needs fixing"""? The 42 volt nominal voltage when an electric is involved? Or possibly argue that real radio programmability with rate functions is desirable? Or autopilots and gyros? Or maybe putting an upper limit on prop size because a X" prop on an engine is dangerous? 



    Interestingly, one could argue that pattern has some similarity to golf in that it's an individual's sport. Many may play golf but a small percentage is good at it and extremely few are pros. C'mon fellas, pattern should be challenging to do well. Actually, more accurately, pattern is just plain tough to do, period. I find that fun. Don't you?



    MattK




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050303/0a1dce7f/attachment-0001.html