Take Off & Landing "Reality of a Contest"

[George Kennie]

You're absolutely right, Bill !!!  It was never broken to begin
with, but some individuals in positions of authority don't
understand the English language. We HAD a descriptive that was
detailed and precise and all you had to do was follow it and things
were O.K., but the rules committee reviewed it and came to the
conclusion that, (and I quote) "We realized that we were not doing
it THAT way" ( that is, not the way the rulebook described the
execution ), so what did they do??  Instead of changing THEIR
execution to conform to the rulebook specs, they decided to change
the rulebook so that it would conform to THEIR execution practices (
i.e., make it the way WE do it!). WRONG!!!
Don't get me wrong, I really love all these guys, I just can't help
feel that there are some deficiencies regarding interpretive skills
when it comes to the original intent of the rule under discussion
here.
Additionally, I'm at a loss for understanding how the new TO ruling,
with it's included procedure turn, free pass, and turn-around is a
time saver over the old TO which was complete at 2 meters of
altitude, as prescribed by RVP. I've got splinters in my fingers
from scratching my head over this one. There's got to be more to
this than I'm aware of!
Georgie
PS. Jim Ivey has this one right on the money!

Bill Glaze wrote:

>  Jim:
> It seems to me it got confusing when they blurred the line between
> AMA classes, and FAI.  Mixing oil and water, so to speak.  Now
> everybody is floundering, trying to get a satisfactory compromise
> for something  that came out of a fix, for something that wasn't
> broken to begin with.  Or so I see it.
>
> Bill Glaze
>
> Jim Ivey wrote:
>
>> Larry
>>  I don't see what is wrong or needs to be changed from the old
>> way of ---- calling take-off complete at the altitude of 6 ft or
>> 2 meters. Or calling landing beginning at  6ft or 2 meters. Why
>> confuse everybody with something to do between takeoff complete
>> and entry to the box and the exit box call and landing. It is
>> the FAI procedure that requires the takeoff sequence.. We don't
>> need a sequence.It wastes time and gives the judges more
>> work,when it has no function.
>> It is simple, takeoff complete at 2 meters or 6ft and enter the
>> box.  Exit box and landing beginning at 2 meters or 6ft.
>> I don't understand how this got so confusing when it was so
>> simple.
>>
>> Jim Ivey
>>
>> > From: "Larry Diamond" <lld613 at psci.net>
>> > Date: 2005/05/22 Sun PM 05:57:06 EDT
>> > To: "NSRCA" <discussion at nsrca.org>
>> > 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.
>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050523/156a7a80/attachment.html