calling complete for new takeoff

Sun May 15 05:50:32 AKDT 2005

The only way anything can be done "immediate" is at the CD level. I am 
adding this to my notes for the rules survey. Hopefully, I can get some of 
this stuff in a form for submission before the deadline.

Of course, the ugly part is that even if a change is embraced it will be 
nearly three years before you see it in the rule book.

John Ferrell
http://DixieNC.US

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Pritchett" <phelps15 at comcast.net>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 9:54 PM
Subject: Re: calling complete for new takeoff

> What is all of this???  At one time, I thought I could fly at a pattern 
> contest........ am I missing something?  Are we actually talking about why 
> people aren't getting into pattern??  Last season I had a takeoff zero'd 
> because I didn't call it's start.  At first it upset me, but then I 
> realized that this is the rule and the judge has every right to impose 
> that rule.  As the 2005 flying season is upon us, this needs to be cleared 
> up ASAP.....   I was absolutely against the removal of judged takeoffs and 
> landings - now we are exposed to even more "interpretation"???    Didn't 
> this new rule regarding takeoff and landing come as a result of wanting 
> less "interpretation"???  Don?  Lamar?  The judging committee needs to 
> address this immediately.
> There, I feel better. (and, when it stops raining and I can go flying, I 
> will REALLY feel better)
> Bill
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Keith Black" <tkeithb at comcast.net>
> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 6:05 PM
> Subject: Re: calling complete for new takeoff
>
>
>> Two items that confused issues at the first contest here in D6 where the
>> turns after take-off and prior to the landing.
>>
>> Takeoff: "Model takes off within the landing zone then turns 90 degrees
>> towards the line defined by the box end poles. When approximately over 
>> the
>> line the model turns either 90 degrees or 270 degrees..."
>>
>> The question here was what if a pilot takes off, turns 90 degrees then
>> immediately turns the second 90 without a straight line (a 180 degree 
>> turn).
>> Based on the rules this is incorrect and since the maneuver is scored 
>> only 0
>> or 10 having no straight line before the second 90 deg. turn would be a
>> zero. It's hard to believe this is what was really intended. One side 
>> note,
>> we found that following this procedure seems to increase the potential 
>> for
>> mid-airs. There were several times pilots had to cross the path of the 
>> other
>> plane in order to fulfill the straight line between the two 90 degree 
>> turns.
>>
>> Landing: "Execute a 180 degree turn to downwind (or optional 360 degree 
>> turn
>> if flight is completed on a downwind maneuver). Fly a downwind leg and 
>> then
>> turn 180 degrees into the wind for final approach to the runway..."
>>
>> Does this mean that if the 180 degree turn has a straight segment in 
>> order
>> to line up for the runway the landing is a zero?  Certainly this wasn't 
>> the
>> intent, but according to the new rule any straight segment in any of the
>> prescribed turns would be a zero.
>>
>> Seems to me that this new rule has actually complicated things. 
>> Previously
>> the contestant and judge didn't have to worry about anything above two
>> meters, now a landing (supposedly) can be zeroed by the presents, or lack
>> of, a straight line when turning around for landing.
>>
>> Keith Black
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Lewis, Richard" <richard.lewis at idmcontrols.com>
>> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 12:18 PM
>> Subject: RE: calling complete for new takeoff
>>
>>
>> When to call the takeoff/landing and the required downgrade is a good
>> question ...I think you have to call it as described by Scott below...
>>
>> The new takeoff/landing sequences are a poor manifestation of the what I
>> think was intended.  I think the intent was to simply eliminate scoring
>> takeoffs and landings, but in the process of writing the rules, a whole
>> other problem was created.  It could be very difficult for sportsman
>> pilot and even many higher ranking pilots to get scored on these
>> maneuvers if they are judged by the book.  These are strictly defined
>> maneuvers with NO room for any error at all...If judged per the written
>> rule, some pretty subtle, otherwise benign deviations should yield a
>> zero scores since any downgrade at all must result in a zero.  If you
>> think the new landing procedure is weird, try the intermediate sequence
>> where the last maneuver is downwind, it opens even more points for
>> discussion and even seems to contradict the rule allowing a maximum of
>> two passes after takeoff and before landing.
>>
>> This was discussed at our judging seminar taught in Houston, and all he
>> could do is read the rule as written and agree that it needed
>> clarification.  At our first contest this year, judging these maneuvers
>> came up at the pilots meeting.  After considerable discussion with no
>> concensus with regard to the clarification of the rule and how it should
>> be judged, the CD decided that for his meet, a landing in the zone was a
>> 10 and landing outside the zone was a zero without regard for the
>> published landing sequence.
>>
>> IMO - There urgently needs to an amendment to the rules doing one of
>> these three things...
>>
>> 1-Put it back the way it was.
>> 2-Keep the landing/takeoff sequence but allow it to be scored normally.
>> 3-Eliminate the landing and takeoff as a scored maneuver entirely.
>>
>> IMHO I like option 2 above best, option 1 second, and option 3 is worst.
>> If you are in favor of option 3, you should go to an IMAC event and
>> watch those guys takeoff and land, you'll see what an unscored
>> takeoff/landing looks like..:)
>>
>> The current push toward certifying and ranking judges, and the doctrine
>> being preached to the newcomers to judge per the rules and only per the
>> rules has the potential to make pattern flying into a premier class of
>> competition for fair judging that acccurately asseses the quality of
>> pilots skills relative to the standard.  Having poorly thought out rules
>> such as this new landing/takeoff that requires a CD to modify them at a
>> contest because they cannot be clarified to a point where accurate
>> judging can be done goes against all that is good about pattern.
>>
>> Richard
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]
>> On Behalf Of Scott Smith
>> Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 10:18 AM
>> To: discussion
>> Subject: RE: calling complete for new takeoff
>>
>> Good question Steve!  I believe you do have to call it, but when exactly
>> does the takeoff finish, and the landing begin?
>>
>> According to 14.6:
>>
>> "14.6. In all classes, the contestant or helper must call out the
>> initiation and completion of the takeoff and landing maneuvers and all
>> maneuvering area entries and exits."
>>
>> So I guess after completing the downwind turn (last maneuver described
>> in takeoff sequence) you call "takeoff complete", then a moment later
>> "entering the box"?
>>
>> Same with landing..."exiting the box...begin landing"...start the upwind
>> turn?
>>
>> Should we also assume that failure to call box exit prior to landing
>> would result in a 0 landing?
>>
>> "Failure to correctly call an entry or exit of the maneuvering area
>> should result in a major downgrade of the maneuver immediately following
>> the failure to call."
>>
>> And since it's 0 or 10....
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
>> [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Steven Maxwell
>> Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 10:31 AM
>> To: discussion
>> Subject: calling complete for new takeoff
>>
>>
>> So I take it that under the new rules calling complete for takeoff
>> isn't needed now because it would have to be done on the trim pass, same
>> for starting the landing because of the procedure that has to be done
>> now on both?
>>
>>
>> Steven Maxwell
>> patternrules at earthlink.net
>> EarthLink Revolves Around You.
>>
>>
>>
>> =================================================
>> 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.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ================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.
>>
>>
>
>
> =================================================
> 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.