[NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Advanced Schedule

[jonlowe at aol.com]

Troy,
Thanks for the reply.  While I agree that the manuevers are more or 
less equivalent, the inverted exits and entrances add a certain 
intimidation factor and skill set that is not captured by the new 
advanced sequence, and only to a very limited extent in the new 
intermediate schedule.  One look at some of the current intermediate 
contestants (sometimes me!) short inverted flight and the top of the 
current triangle loop and square loop will show the need for more 
inverted flight in general.  Straight line segments on entry and exit 
to manuevers is a key part of pattern flying, inverted or upright, and 
given the emphasis on inverted exits and entrances in Masters and FAI,  
I'm surprised we don't see more of it in the new patterns.  I'm 
disappointed we lost the push-pull-pull humpty bump in favor of an 
optional humpty bump, because I've already been doing that (optional 
h-b) in intermediate for two years. I'm also disappointed we lost the 
45 down negative snap as it does use a different skill set than inside 
snaps, and adds the challenge of an inverted entrance and exit.   We 
already have an inside snap in the avalanche.  I've judged advanced 
this year and have seen some pretty poor (and pretty good) inverted 
entrances and exits.  What are we going to see in masters in a few 
years with no practice before we get there?

As it stands right now, assuming I get to masters, I will never have 
seen an inverted entrance or exit until I get there.   I just think 
this is a mistake.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Troy A. Newman <troy_newman at msn.com>
To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Tue, 9 May 2006 09:26:27 -0700
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2007 Advanced Schedule

Yes Jon,
There are no inverted exits. The committee felt that inverted exits 
were not
the criteria for an advanced pilot. To really say it another way just
because the model doesn't exit inverted doesn't mean the sequence is 
not a
challenge. I will agree the proposal is a hair less challenging that 
the
current version. However the current version has many problems.
Let us look at the challenge aspect.

There is no bigger gap in the KF number on the proposals than now with
present Advanced to the Masters of today. My point is in looking at 
KF's
alone the 48 to KF of 67...The current schedules we have now is a jump 
from
50 to 68 so the difference is at worse 1 pt in the KF...

The opinion of the group was that if you can master the skills in the
proposed 403 then you are ready for the 404 class. Notice I said master 
the
skills not can you do the figures. Advanced is not intended to be a 
Masters
with less figures in it.

Pattern flying is about mastering and perfecting the skills at various
level. When asked why people fly pattern the number one answer is they 
got
started to learn how to fly better. What would you rather do....go up 
and
survive an inverted to inverted 8pt roll and get a 5 or 6 on it every
time...Or would you rather build the skill to do a upright 4pt roll at 
the
score of a 9 every single time and sometimes get a 10. Once you have 
the
skill of the 4pt roll then you can do one from inverted to inverted the
skills are still there.

We developed what we thought would teach skills...The current jump from 
402
to 403 is large and yet the 403-404 jump is fairly small in the skill 
set
department. This is a fact of life that we are living with today. 
Remember
skills, not orientation of the model.


What is so different in the current to the proposals other than 
inverted
exits? Does having an inverted exit make you a better pilot? Does it 
teach
you to do a better 4pt roll or slow roll....If you can't do one upright 
and
score a 9 on it every time then why should we ask you to do one 
inverted to
inverted? The Advanced class is an intro to finesse type rudder, slow 
rolls
4pts, little fixes in looping elements like the 6 sided and triangle.

Lets look at the current schedules skills and compare skills.

Stall turn with and without rolls in current. The Proposal has stall 
turns
with 1/2s and a center stall turn component easy to see center on that
one...and must learn to think about roll direction. The current Adv 
doesn't
have this element.

Reverse Cuban both

1/2 square loop 2/4pt both

Slow roll both

Bunt 1/2 roll out both

Double I 1/2 on top full roll on btm.  In current but look at its
components...the triangle with full roll from inverted at the top takes 
the
full roll at the btm of the Double I..Then you have Immelman turn to 
take
the first part of this figure, and bunts to take the second half of the
figure...So all the skills are still used. Just you are not exiting 
anything
inverted.
Outside Immelman turn.....Bunt skills and Immelamnn skills in proposal

45 down negative snap...so proposal has a 45 down positive snap so does 
the
current Masters schedule..and that is a direct preparation figure 
right? How
does a 45 down negative snap help you prepare for a Masters with a 
positive
any more than or less than a reversed orientation?

Top Hat with 1/4's Both

Triangle loop with 2/4pt...Triangle with full roll, The 2/4pt roll 
element
is in the 4pt roll and also in 1/2 sq with 2/4pts

Push Pull humpty no rolls. This is a good rudder figure as there are no
places to hide the corrections...This skill of shapes can be seen in 
the 6
sided as it has no rolls and several radii that must match

Avalanche in Both

4pt roll in Both

1/2 sq with 1/2 roll in vertical in Both

Six sided loop in current FAI P-07 by the way and the proposed Masters 
07

2.5 turn spin in current and 3 turn spins in proposal. Very similar 
skills
the major missing element is a 1/2 roll on the exit and I think that is
covered in the Bunt, Immelman, 1/2 sq with 1/2 roll up, Reverse Cuban 
with
1/2's,  and so on...

So the reality is I think the proposal cover all the bases the current
schedule does except one inverted exits....but yet adds in a  center 
stall
turn similar to the current masters to make it harder.

So Jon...in a first look the figures seem a little mundane...But the 
skills
are there and its things a pilot can build on and master not just 
survive
the figure. I ask this question. What good does it do a Advanced pilot 
to go
up and do a figure that he scores a 6 on every single time he flies it,
because he has not mastered the rudder skills needed to roll from 
inverted
to inverted. The current Double I with the full roll at the bottom 
because
its down low and the speed changes and pucker increases and other 
things
means he is not going to go out and work really hard on the roll with
rudder. Instead we see the guys blasting through it because they are 
afraid
to touch the rudder incase they give it wrong rudder.

What does an advanced guy do a bunch...?  Give it the wrong rudder! We 
have
all been through or are going through it. Rudder rolls like the bottom 
of
the Double I  are a very finesse rudder input. This is a skill that is
needed in Advanced and the group felt that Finesse rudder was one of 
the
main criteria in Advanced. Plus you are going to see this skill in the 
bunt
with 1/2 roll out...But instead its a 1/2 roll not a full roll. So the
advanced pilot can master the 1/2 roll then go on to use that later in 
the
sequence in the triangle while the model is up high and it can be seen.

So how do you teach your kid to ride a bike? Do you take them in the 
grass
so that when they fall its softer than the pavement? Do you add 
training
wheels to the bike so that when they fall to the side the wheels catch 
them?
Do you run behind and hold the seat, hoping that when you let go its 
not a
trip to the ER.

Well Finesse Rudder inputs are the same type of thing. We setup the 
proposal
to help an advanced pilot succeed. He is not being given anything. The
skills are still there and demanding, just not in the same place you 
would
expect them.

The current Advanced has 3 figures in a roll that are Immelman based. 
They
are teaching the same skills. All at the same time. The proposal tries 
to
link these skills and come back to them without doing the repeat thing
figure after figure.


This has been long enough...but I think you see where we tried to go 
with
the proposal.

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