Take Off & Landing "Reality of a Contest"

Sun May 22 18:48:08 AKDT 2005

Jim,

This is what I've proposed...

I don't think TO/landing are maneuvers that should be scored at all.  These
are legacy maneuvers that at one point in time needed to be scored but in
todays proficiency age I feel that the maneuvers shouldn't even be in the
sequence, let alone scored.  Scoring well on TO/landing does not a good
pilot make (grammar purposely phrased that way) and I think precision
aerobatics should be about aerobatic maneuvers not TO and landing.

I know some incredibly talented race car drivers that can lap a track faster
than anyone else but have a hard time backing up a car into a parking spot -
is the point of being a race car driver seeing how well one can park a car
or how fast one can go around a track?

I would much rather see a great aerobatic flight with a crappy TO/landing
than see a crappy aerobatic flight with great TO/landing.  To me... call the
box, scoring starts- fly the sequence, call the exit and scoring stops.
Period.  We wouldn't have to worry about wording on rules for TO/landing.

So how do we fix the current problem?  I think we really have 3 choices:

1.  Go back to the old rules and score the TO/landing
2.  Spend an inordinate amount of time rewording/rehashing the new rules to
fix the problem
3.  Remove TO/landing completely and not worry about it at all.

My preference is for #3 - followed by #1 - both are simple and quick fixes.
Will #3 happen - probably not - but I guess I can dream/hope.

-----Original Message-----
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of Jim Ivey
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 7:45 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Re: Take Off & Landing "Reality of a Contest"

 Jerry
 I watched some IMAC nats last year and these guys takeoff while the other
guy is on his final.Some of the planes were just pointed at the runway and
turned loose across runway. Maybe that's what we need to do. We don't score
skills at takeoff  or landing anymore.Why not? Did I put a idea in someones
head?

Jim Ivey
> 
> From: "Jerry Stebbins" <JAStebbins at worldnet.att.net>
> Date: 2005/05/22 Sun PM 09:46:36 EDT
> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> Subject: Re: Take Off & Landing "Reality of a Contest"
> 
> Maybe so, but someone done writ it wrong and now we got rules that are 
> incomplete, unsafe, and conflicting.
> Same ol simple "ifn it ain't broke don't fix it" but some thought it 
> was broke, had there own version of a "better way", and rammed it thru.
> Jerry
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bob Pastorello" <rcaerobob at cox.net>
> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 6:26 PM
> Subject: Re: Take Off & Landing "Reality of a Contest"
> 
> 
> > The idea was SUPPOSED to be "Takeoff - no aerobatic manuevers, 
> > doesn't
> break
> > safety line = 10".  "Landing - finish sequence in whatever 
> > direction, make turns necessary to land, no aerobatic maneuvers, no 
> > breaking the safety
> line
> > = 10".....
> >
> > Wasn't it ?
> >
> > Bob Pastorello
> > www.rcaerobats.net
> > rcaerobob at cox.net
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Larry Diamond" <lld613 at psci.net>
> > To: "NSRCA" <discussion at nsrca.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 4:57 PM
> > Subject: Take Off & Landing "Reality of a Contest"
> >
> >
> > >I know there has been much discussion on this, but after CDing a 
> > >contest  this weekend, I believe there needs to be a clear 
> > >understanding of what
> is
> > > expected in two areas.
> > >
> > > 1) When to call "Take-Off complete / Landing commencing". When 
> > > does it need to be called? After exiting the Box for the last 
> > > maneuver for Landing.
> > > Prior to entering the box for the trim pass on Take-Off. This is 
> > > what makes sense to me from CDing a contest.
> > >
> > > 2) Is a Dead-Stick Landing a "Zero Landing"? At the beginning of 
> > > our contest I stated that we would not zero TO / L for calling. So 
> > > we scored all landings. However, if a dead-stick prevents 
> > > completing the prescribed maneuver, then a zero is really the most 
> > > likely result at the NATS. I don't believe this was intended.
> > >
> > > The Judging committee should really jump on this and get 
> > > clarification
> out
> > > as quickly as possible for the "Official Judge Ruling" People are 
> > > trying to practice this and although seemingly easy on paper, the 
> > > execution of calling and judging properly does get a bit 
> > > confusing...We need to make sure everyone is practicing this 
> > > correctly before the NATS or it will be a potential area of 
> > > concern for the CD's...
> > >
> > > Larry Diamond
> > > NSRCA 3083
> > >
> >
> > =================================================
> > 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.