Take Off & Landing "Reality of a Contest"

Sun May 22 18:57:28 AKDT 2005

 Derek
You have 3 good possibilities. I am a creature of habit and would prefer to have them judged. This helps my feeble brain with consistancy.They are manouvers  just a k factor of 1, but can be the icing on the cake for a good flight. I guess we can do what the masses want to do.
Good to hear from you again.

Jim Ivey
> 
> From: "Derek Koopowitz" <derekkoopowitz at earthlink.net>
> Date: 2005/05/22 Sun PM 10:46:19 EDT
> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> Subject: RE: Re: Take Off & Landing "Reality of a Contest"
> 
> 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.
> 
> 

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