[NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20

Wed Aug 16 07:19:54 AKDT 2006

I wasn't at the Nats this year.  However, probably Ryan was not flying too close.  I have seen a tendency of some pilots flying slow but too close and big.  In many cases, it is so big and close that is very hard to appreciate the geometry and precision.  Therefore, flying fast using proper techniques (good geometry and precision) is not necessarily bad on my eyes.

Vicente "Vince" Bortone

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: "Keith Black" <tkeithb at comcast.net> 

Why don't you ask Ryan McLaughlin about the slower flying pilots. Ryan just won Masters at NATS flying an Impact with an OS-160. I judged one prelim round and Ryan clearly was one of the fastest, if not the fastest, flying pilots in the round. His flying in the prelims, when wind wasn't a factor, easily earned him a spot in the finals. Then in the finals when it was blowing like crazy I'm sure this speed worked to his advantage.

My point being, in both calm and windy weather he scored very well flying fast and accurate.

Keith Black 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: twtaylor 
To: 'NSRCA Mailing List' 
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 9:39 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20

Just like my question about the speed of the aircraft, if it’s smooth and graceful in the flying, there’s no room for a down/up grade for points due to my flight being 20 mph faster than the next guys. Yet someone says that slower is more grace full so it should score better. I give up.

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Dean Pappas
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 9:34 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20

Point well made, Terry! The wordsmithing can almost always use help, and even with our best efforts, it's going to be an iterative process.
Do we have any good contract writers out there? If we take one of those, and cross him/her with an English teacher, we could breed our own race of rules writers ...
Matt is right, part of the art of wind correction is in hiding the fixes. If the judge didn't see it, then it just ain't! Everything else is details.
later Friends,
        Dean

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: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Terry Brox
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 10:26 PM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20
Actually, yes, but I was also trying to prove the point that there is a gray area in our rules that people only assume. The fact is, I cant find anything that would directly address that kind of correction. Only the the description of beginning and ending with a straight line. If I were a lawyer/argumentive type, I think there would be quite an argument that could be raised. If there is something in the rule book that does address this, tell where to look other than the normal "smooth and gracefull" section. Nice to see the list busy again. LOL 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Dean Pappas 
To: NSRCA Mailing List 
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20

You're being funny ... right?

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: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Terry Brox
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 2:14 PM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20
Would that mean that the "dead" zone between the exit line of one maneuver and the entry line of another, if there is sufficient distance, could be used to reposition the craft on a new heading. In othere words, turn 90 degrees to the flight path then back 90 degrees as to move out or in if necessary? From this, one would assume the "dead" zone should not be judged. 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: george w. kennie 
To: NSRCA Mailing List 
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 12:41 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20

<<<Calling of box entry must be done so there is a minimum of a 15 meter straight line before the first maneuver. Judging of the maneuver will begin then. (As the lines into and out of maneuvers are part of the maneuver and are always judged). Calling of exiting the box must be done after a minimum  of a 15 meter straight line after the maneuver.  Judging will cease at that point.>>>

I think what's being slightly overlooked is the word "minimum". We used to be required to call "the box" at the pole, (which is the way it should still be done, but I can't change that) but some ill informed people had that requirement altered. Why do you think that the word "minimum" is inserted at that point in the wording? It's  not because that's where the box needs to be called, ( the box can be called at any point between the pole and the 15 meter point) it's because the entry and exit lines, for every maneuver, are required to be 15 meters in length. This "minimum' requirement specifies that this is so, if not by pronouncement then by inference. To me this is quite clear, however, the thing that we can't substantiate even by inference is whether or not the exit line from one maneuver can also serve as the entry line for the upcoming maneuver, eliminating the perception of the need for 30 meters between maneuvers. I have seen instances where this requirement created a very re
al test of the box constraints and would like to see a resolution of this particular conflict. My feeling is that a superimposition should be acceptable, but that would have to appear in writing somewhere.
Georgie

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Don Ramsey 
To: NSRCA Mailing List 
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 8:51 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20

First, to be clear on the Masters 2/2 Slow Roll Opposite.  Center is defined only after the maneuver ends. Where did it start, where did it end and only then, was the entire maneuver centered?

I'm currently gathering information for the next year's judging materials so this discussion is great.  Interesting points on entry and exit lines.  The rules are not clear.  Consider this, the box entry must be called 15 meters before the first maneuver begins.  Each maneuver begins and ends with a straight line. Here's the quotes from the rules: 

Calling of box entry must be done so there is a minimum of a 15 meter straight line before the first maneuver. Judging of the maneuver will begin then. (As the lines into and out of maneuvers are part of the maneuver and are always judged). Calling of exiting the box must be done after a minimum  of a 15 meter straight line after the maneuver.  Judging will cease at that point.

Let's take that a little further.  It seems to say, since a line is part of the first maneuver in a sequence then calling the box entry should be done 30 meters before maneuvering starts.  I don't think that was the intent of the rule.
and more on lines:

Lines-All aerobatic maneuvers are started and ended by a horizontal line. When no line is flown between two (2) scored maneuvers, the upcoming maneuver should be downgraded by two (2) points. 
          All lines within a maneuver have a beginning and end which define their length. The length of a line should only be graded when a maneuver contains several lines with a given relationship, as in a square loop.

I don't think entry/exit lines have a beginning and end which define their lengths and if they don't they should not be used for centering determination.  Since the entry and exit lines to a maneuver can and are often different lengths that would imply those centered maneuvers where they are different should be downgraded.  A good example would be a turnaround of a half cuban eight, a centered maneuver then a stall turn for the other turnaround.  Should the centered maneuver be downgraded in this case since the entry and exit lines are of different lengths?  Also, the maneuver descriptions never say, "Model draws a horizontal line, (remainder of description) ...."   The rules never say the entry and exit lines must be 15 meters only that they must be there.   The implication is, entry/exit lines should not be used in determining centering.

Must there be 30 meters between maneuvers?  I disagree with Derek here.   Here are the rules on lines. 

"(As the lines into and out of maneuvers are part of the maneuver and are always judged)." 

then later 

"The judge should form an image of the forthcoming maneuver based on using the straight and level entry identified in section D, Judging Individual Maneuvers, as a reference. The absence of a definite entry into a maneuver increases the difficulty of judging its precision and competitors will recognize this as justification for downgrading. The straight and level exit from a maneuver is one of the more valuable portions of a maneuver in evaluating how well the intended course of the maneuver was followed.  Therefore, the absence of a well defined straight and level exit should also result in downgrading. In all cases, straight and level flight means flight parallel to the flightline, at a constant altitude, and with wings level."

Section D does not include any reference to entry/exit lines.  It appears there only need be a definite or well defined line into and out of maneuvers.  That length is not specified.  There is also nothing to preclude the exit line from one maneuver being the entry line into the next.  Again, the maneuver descriptions do not include the entry/exit lines in their text.

This needs to be corrected in the next rule cycle.

Sorry for the rambling,
Don

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Derek Koopowitz" <derekkoopowitz at gmail.com>
To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 1:04 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20

> Straight from the rule book on all counts.  The 15 meter rule for straight
> line applies to entering and leaving the box as well.  Refer to page 72. 
> 
> http://www.modelaircraft.org/compreg.asp
> 
> Calling of box entry must be done so there is a minimum of a 15 meter
> straight line before the first maneuver. Judging of the maneuver will begin
> then. (As the lines into and out of maneuvers are part of the maneuver and
> are always judged).  Calling of exiting the box must be done after a minimum
> of a 15 meter straight line after the maneuver. Judging will cease at that
> point.
> 
> If there isn't a defined straight line between maneuvers then the upcoming
> maneuver is downgraded 2 points (see my comment below).  The length of that
> line should be 30+ meters in order to receive no downgrade.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Fred Huber
> Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 10:53 PM
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20
> 
> you didn't read the whole thing I posted.... Looks like you responded to the
> part before "sorry"
> 
> You have a 15 meter straight line definition... I'm not sure if thats from
> the rulebook or not...  That would be appx 7 fuselage lengths.
> 
> But.... does that just apply to the enter and leave box?  or does there have
> to be a 30 meter (or 2 X 15 meter segments with the un-judged corrections
> between them...  there's not much room for track corrections this way) 
> straight line between consecutive maneuvers?   Or is the way I have thought 
> it was correct... no defined straight line lenght between maneuvers, just a
> definite straight line established?
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Derek Koopowitz" <derekkoopowitz at gmail.com>
> To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 11:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20
> 
> 
>> Fred,
>>
>> If what you say is the case then every maneuver would be impossible to 
>> judge
>> and that is why we have the the following:
>>
>> Page 72:
>>
>> Calling of box entry must be done so there is a minimum of a 15 meter
>> straight line before the first maneuver. Judging of the maneuver will 
>> begin
>> then. (As the lines into and out of maneuvers are part of the maneuver and
>> are always judged). Calling of exiting the box must be done after a 
>> minimum
>> of a 15 meter straight line after the maneuver.
>>
>> Page 77:
>>
>> . Lines-All aerobatic maneuvers are started and ended by a horizontal 
>> line.
>> When no line is flown
>> between two (2) scored maneuvers, the upcoming maneuver should be 
>> downgraded
>> by two (2) points.
>>
>>
>> The generally accepted length of that line is 15 meters.
>>
>> So add 15 meters to the beginning of, and end of, each maneuver and you 
>> can
>> figure out the center for those maneuvers that have different rolling
>> elements such as 2/2 point roll followed by an opposite slow roll.
>>
>>
>> ---Original Message-----
>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Fred Huber
>> Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 8:57 PM
>> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20
>>
>> OK.. then its impossible to downgrade THIS maneuver for centering if the
>> straight lines are part of it....  Because there is no definite attitude 
>> of
>> the model that can be associated with center, and the line start and end
>> can't be defined, since there's also straight line exit from the previous
>> maneuver and entry to the following.
>>
>> Sorry.
>>
>> Has to be start of rolling and end of rolling for centering reference and
>> assumed same length straight at each end. (which can be just one fuselage
>> length... maybe less since the length is not defined...)
>>
>> If you don't assume same length straight lines... you can't judge center 
>> on
>> anything.... even a simple loop.
>>
>> You can purposely shoot for roll rates that center the inverted....  but 
>> as
>> noted... a slow roll probably SHOULD be slower roll rate than the rate for
>> the 2/2.  which would be likely put put you somewhere in the slow roll
>> portion at center.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Derek Koopowitz" <derekkoopowitz at gmail.com>
>> To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 10:10 PM
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20
>>
>>
>>> The entire maneuver is judged including the straight lines.  Each 
>>> maneuver
>>> as defined in our rules starts and ends with a straight line.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Earl Haury
>>> Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 7:55 PM
>>> To: NSRCA Mailing List
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20
>>>
>>> Actually, while the straight line "before" and "after" the maneuver is
>>> required the names (of the lines) themselves define that they are not
>>> "included" in the maneuver. Rolls start when the aircraft begins to roll
>>> (for the first element) and end when it stops rolling (the final 
>>> element).
>>>
>>> Earl
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Derek Koopowitz" <derekkoopowitz at gmail.com>
>>> To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>> Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 9:19 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20
>>>
>>>
>>>> Not necessarily - since the maneuver is made up of two different rolling
>>>> elements the center of the maneuver is the center of the two components
>>>> including the straight line before and after the maneuver.  Since the 
>>>> 2/2
>>>> point roll will be done a lot faster than the slow roll the maneuver 
>>>> will
>>>> start early and the 2 point roll will finish long before center prior to
>>>> the
>>>> slow roll beginning.  What the pilot/judge needs to do is visualize 
>>>> where
>>>> the maneuver starts including the straight flight portion and where it
>>>> will
>>>> end after the slow roll including the straight flight portion and
>>>> position
>>>> the maneuver accordingly.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of
>>>> jivey61 at bellsouth.net
>>>> Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 5:18 PM
>>>> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>>> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20
>>>>
>>>> I am directing this to Don Ramsey.
>>>> Where is the center of the 2/2pt roll,slow roll opposite. It seems it
>>>> would
>>>> be between  the 2/2pt and the slow roll opposite.
>>>>
>>>> TIA
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>> Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.10.10/418 - Release Date: 
>>> 8/14/2006
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.10.10/418 - Release Date: 8/14/2006
>>
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion 

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.10.10/419 - Release Date: 8/15/2006

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion 

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.10.10/419 - Release Date: 8/15/2006

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20060816/103dfb0d/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: "Keith Black" <tkeithb at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Masters... clarify on Item20
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:59:34 +0000
Size: 723
Url: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20060816/103dfb0d/attachment-0001.mht 