[NSRCA-discussion] Pattern Longitevity

Mon Feb 27 05:22:14 AKST 2006

Comments below...
John Ferrell    
http://DixieNC.US

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ed Deaver 
  To: NSRCA Mailing List 
  Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 5:27 AM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Pattern Longitevity

  I agree with both of you. 

   If we really wanted to open a can of worms here, how about flying style, smooth and slow on rolls versus, fast and precise, both hitting the points, and both functionally correct??  Both can be graceful if done well.  There shouldn't be a score difference but!!!!

  ***This is a problem with a lengthy rules cycle. There should be an ammendment that says speed is not a scoring issue.
  *** We won't remember this one when we finally get to the ext opportunity.

  How about the size of maneuvers.  I once saw an Intermediate pilot with a 40 size plane make 3 very small, but on track-same size-same heading-and ROUND loops that warranted a very high score but, you know the story.

  *** The video says we are not to grade on airplane performance. The rule book refers to "filling the presentation area" (I think). The ambiguity needs to be addressed. Same issue for stall turns. A long vertical line performed by a high performance airplane should not out score a shorter vertical line by a less powerful airplane.

  How about speed of the plane.  THe current thinking is to fly very slowly.  Of course the current schedules are much busier than previous patterns and slow does add more time to think and helps to stay in the box, but I have been told for the past 4 years, slow down you'll score better.  To which I always said, judge the manu! ever and quality, not the speed as its not in the rules. 

  *** Speed is NOT a criteria in judging the maneuvers. HOWEVER, as long as we allow AMA rules to mimic the unwritten FAI practices, we will be victims to their whims.

  Of course there is the complete opposite to this.  In Lubbock, I have zeroed 2 turnaround top hats because the pilot pushed the top and wasn't inverted.  The pilot both times said, I've done that at other contests and no one said anything bad about it!!  The rules are, regardless of other topics of interest, crystal clear on this one.  

  *** The rule book is clear, it must be applied unless there a special local rules in Lubbock!

  The list can go on and on.  Education, fun and trying to fly the best we know how is probably the most important aspect.
  *** I fly for fun and it shows. My scores have not mattered much to me for several years. I understand the problem for those who are serious competitors. They spend a lot of resources to compete and good judging is essiential to keep them on board. Otherwise it is a fly-in, not a competition...
  ed

  Lance Van Nostrand <patterndude at comcast.net> wrote:
    Bob,
    Talk about confused.  Neither you! nor I mentioned the Nats so I have no idea where that connection was made.  I really didn't think you had the answer to my question because in essence you were asking the same thing.  Sure, some planes draw nicer lines and appear more stable and paced than others, and I agree that you can get this without spending a lot of $$ or buying the plane of the season.  I am agreeing that when judges begin docking a pilot points because he didn't bring the "right" plane then they are being impressionist judges.  When a guy that usually finishes middle of the pack gets a 2 point downgrade and the leader does the same thing for a 1 point downgrade, that's impressionist judging.  At my last contest I got a 10 and a 5 from two FAI judges on a humptybump.  At least one, maybe both were impressionist judging.  
      I think your post about pattern longevity is about promoting the attitude that we should be encouragi! ng to others and to curtail frustrating new pilots by giving them false rules to follow.
    Hope that makes it clear as mud :)
    -Lance

      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Bob Richards 
      To: NSRCA Mailing List 
      Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 2:47 PM
      Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Pattern Longitevity

      Lance,

      I'm not sure what you meant by your reply, I was not complaining about the judging at the Nats. I was just saying that there are pattern fliers out there with the attitude that you have to have xyz equipment to be competitive. Thats fine if they want to have that attitude, the problem lies in the fact that they really believe it and spread it to others as gospel. That, I am sure, puts some people off and keeps them from trying pattern.

      I always tell people that you don't need an expensive plane to be competitve. Sure, a lot of people may say that to prospective pattern flyers, but it doesn't look good when that person is flying very expensive equipment.  I'm proud of the fact that I practiced what I preached, did very well while doing it, and had a lot of fun at the same time.

      I don't think a $1000 composite airframe will be in my future any time soon.

      Bob R.

      Lance Van Nostrand <patterndude at comcast.net> wrote:
        so how do you get an "impressionist" affected judge to be more objective?  Seems that kind of person is just the sort not interested in those pesky little things called "rules".  
        --Lance

          ----- Original Message ----- 
          From: Bob Richards 
          To! : NSRCA Mailing List 
          Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 8:03 AM
          Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Pattern Longitevity

          You say "the enemy is us". I agree. I feel compelled to share a couple of my own experiences.

          When I got started (seriously) in pattern, I did so with a Cap 21. I had several of the local pattern flyers (well meaning) tell me that I would never get the scores I deserved flying a non-pattern plane. If I had ever felt that was true, I would have dropped out of pattern. I flew that plane for two years, in Advanced and Masters. I did well, I won just over half the contests in which I flew, and managed to win the district points championship in '92.

          I decided to! fly a pattern plane in '93, and ended! up with a Hansen Runaround. 
          For me, it was a big step up. However, it did not have a pipe tunnel, and I decided to use a standard OS 1.20 with stock stubby muffler for most of the season. I went to the '93 Nats with this plane.  I had problems in the early rounds, but for the fifth round I flew t! he absolute best flight I have ever flown. I was feeling great! About 30 minutes after I flew, a rain started that cut short the flying that day. I had a large tent just behind the flight line, so most of the judges and scribes ended up under my tent. One of the scribes, a well known FAI flyer (that probably subscribes to this list) looked at my plane and told me that I would never get the scores I deserve, "flying an outdated design". I told him that I was very pleased with the flight I just had, and he said "you did not get good scores on that flight". I did not show it, but it just ticked me off. I know it sounds like sour ! grapes, but I decided that if I did no! t get good scores that round, I would quit pattern. I ended up winning that round by 65 normalized points. Looking at the tare sheets, I got great scores from all the judges that round. Now, I don't like to use the phrase "pattern snob", but to this day that is the opinion I have of that FAI flyer. 

          Now I know that a very small percentage of the pattern flyers are snobs, but they typically are the ones that are more vocal and more in the limelight than others, unfortunately.

          (climbing down off my soapbox).

          Bob R.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

      _______________________________________________
      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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20060227/d8828e5e/attachment-0001.html 