Apocalypse -- WAS RE: Pattern Box Rules (discussion)

Thu Mar 3 06:34:40 AKST 2005

You set one of them on the flight line next to Bob Hunt's Genesis, and the universe collapses.

Dean Pappas
Sr. Design Engineer
Kodeos Communications
111 Corporate Blvd.
South Plainfield, N.J. 07080
(908) 222-7817 phone
(908) 222-2392 fax
d.pappas at kodeos.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 11:01 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Apocalypse -- WAS RE: Pattern Box Rules (discussion)

Hey Mike -- 
Apocalypse? Is that somebody's new pattern plane? All composite / carbon /
kevlar? When's it due out? Got any pictures? 

-----Original Message-----
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of Mike Hester
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 5:47 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Pattern Box Rules (discussion)

The apocalypse could be near....I just hope it waits till after Ocala =)

-Mike

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ron Van Putte" <vanputte at cox.net>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 5:36 PM
Subject: Re: Pattern Box Rules (discussion)

> 
> On Mar 2, 2005, at 4:28 PM, Joe Lachowski wrote:
> 
>> The 75 degree box is just as bad as no box at all. I flew the 75 
>> degree box in a couple of IMAC contests when they used it and thought 
>> that that big of a box was a joke and presented less of a challenge. 
>> Leave the box alone. Let's bury this absurd idea right now!!
> 
> This is getting bad.  I agreed with Bob Pastorello and Joe Lachowski on 
> the same day.
> 
> Ron Van Putte
> 
>>> From: vicenterc at comcast.net
>>> Reply-To: discussion at nsrca.org
>>> To: discussion at nsrca.org, discussion at nsrca.org
>>> Subject: Re: Pattern Box Rules (discussion)
>>> Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 22:10:27 +0000
>>>
>>> IMAC changed to 90 degree box this year.
>>>
>>> Vince
>>>
>>> -------------- Original message --------------
>>>
>>> As a member of the rules change committee I am trying to determine if 
>>> there is interest in pursuing this matter and welcome a discussion 
>>> and suggestions regarding this issue
>>> I have outlined some of the issues and suggestions pertaining to this 
>>> below and welcome your opinions.
>>>
>>> The pattern box was added to the AMA rules when the turnaround method 
>>> of
>>> Presentation and scoring was initiated. It defines the limited 
>>> scoring area where all maneuvers must be performed.
>>> The purpose of the box is to provide a uniform but somewhat flexible 
>>> area of presentation that allows the pilot the opportunity to tailor 
>>> his presentation to the requirements of the pattern being flown, and 
>>> allow judges to score his presentation on an equitable basis when 
>>> compared to the presentations of other pilots flying the sequence.
>>> The rules provide for specific score penalties for performing any 
>>> maneuver either out of the box or partially out of the box, making it 
>>> all important that all box violations are downgraded the same by all 
>>> judges to provide the correct score earned.
>>> Over the years the failure of judges to provide a uniform application 
>>> of box violations has resulted in an unfair advantage to some pilots 
>>> and a disadvantage to others.
>>> In many cases box line poles are not or cannot be provided to give 
>>> the pilot or judge the visual reference necessary which becomes the 
>>> primary reason among others that this condition continues to exist.
>>> In addition to the above the present box configuration increases the 
>>> possibility of a midair collision when two flight lines are used 
>>> because many pilots strive to utilize the same optimum distance out 
>>> in their presentation.
>>> By reconfiguring the box more area will be available for those who 
>>> wish to fly in closer with out fear of box violation downgrades, this 
>>> will also allow those who experience vision difficulties at greater 
>>> distances the possibly to be more competitive
>>>  In order to provide a method that will more nearly insure equity to 
>>> all participants and simplify the task of judges, while possibly 
>>> reducing the occurrences of midair collision, and also encourage 
>>> those with limited eyesight at the greater distances to participate, 
>>> It has been suggested that a rules change be requested to modify the 
>>> pattern box layout and redefine the box boundary infringement 
>>> penalty.
>>>
>>> One suggestion was to revise the box size by changing the box line 
>>> from Sixty (60) degrees to Seventy-five (75) degrees. And adopt a 
>>> uniform system of accessing penalties similar to the FAI rule or to 
>>> the method used in IMAC
>>>
>>> Another suggestion which may offer solutions to more of the inherent 
>>> problems experienced with the present box layout and scoring methods 
>>> would be to adopt
>>> A box layout and penalty system as described in the AMA Scale 
>>> Aerobatics Rules Item 4.1 with modifications to suit pattern.
>>>
>>> Buddy Brammer
>>>
>>
>>
>> =================================================
>> 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.
>>
> 
> =================================================
> 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.
>

=================================================
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.

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.