[NSRCA-discussion] Newbie question - Don't ask, don't tell.

[Ron Van Putte]

On May 16, 2006, at 12:06 PM, george w. kennie wrote:

> Or better yet, Larry, the notorious down-wind turn which I have  
> been wondering about for the last 8 years. With sombody like me on  
> the list, noone has even dared to mention that debacle (and I don't  
> blame them.....BG.).

I wrote the aerobatics column for Model Aviation for 20 years and,  
whenever I ran dry on things to say, would mention the downwind  
turn.  Then, from the letters I got from readers, I had column  
material for several months.   The best analysis of the problem was  
by a writer, named Len Salter, in South Africa, who wrote an article  
entitled "All You Need Is An Aircraft Carrier".  He described a  
fictional flight of an R/C airplane from the flight deck of an  
aircraft carrier, which was steaming downwind at the speed of the  
wind.  He described the flight of his airplane, flying in the "calm"  
conditions the wind and aircraft carrier provided.  No sign of the  
dreaded "downwind turn problem".  He went on to ask how the airplane  
would know the difference if the pilot was instantaneously teleported  
to an adjacent island, because the airplane would then exhibit the  
"downwind turn problem".  His conclusion was that the problem is the  
pilot's perception of what the airplane is doing, not the fault of  
the wind.  BTW, I agree with him.

Ron Van Putte
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Keith Black
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 2:27 AM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Newbie question - Don't ask, don't  
> tell.
>
> That would probably be best.
>
> Now just PLEASE, don't ask about snaps!!!!
>
> VBG.
>
> Keith Black
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Larry
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 11:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Newbie question - landing and approach
>
> Thanks Keith and Matt. I think I have it now .
>
> I was going to ask how could "landing" possibly be a controversial  
> issue, but I think it would be best if I just go to the contest,  
> keep my eyes open and my mouth shut! LOL
>
> Thanks to all!
>
> Larry
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Keith Black
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 8:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Newbie question - landing and approach
>
> OK Larry, I'm starting to think you're a "mole" just posing as a  
> newbie to try and stir up trouble! VBG.
>
> You've just touched on another highly charged topic. (DON'T PEE ON  
> THAT THIRD.... ZZZAP!)
>
> That's pretty good for a "newbie" (I'm starting to wonder ;-) ),  
> two fire storms in just two questions.
>
> LOL.
>
> The short answer, make two 180 degree turns and land on the runway  
> without rolling off the side or pieces flying off your airplane and  
> you'll get a ten.  Notice, that I didn't say you couldn't crash on  
> the runway, to do so is entirely legal and you'll still get a ten  
> as long as all parts stay in tack.
>
> This is up for a vote by the Contest Board this summer and "should"  
> be changed back to scoring from 1 to 10, but you never know.
>
> Keith Black
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Larry
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 9:24 PM
> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Newbie question - landing and approach
>
> I have another few newbie Sportsman questions if I may - hopefully  
> not as controversial as the "electric weight" issue :)
>
> After the Double Immelman without rolls (U) I will be flying upwind  
> and then exit the box if I am understanding this correctly.
>
> How should I get from there to landing?
>
> I am assuming a simple flat 180 deg turn (away from the flight  
> line) from the upwind leg to down wind followed by a normal landing  
> approach?
>
> What parts of that entire procedure are judged?
>
> On the actual landing - the rules talk about two lines 100 meters  
> apart. Do I need to touch the ground inside those two lines and/or  
> roll to a stop within those two lines?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Larry
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20060516/5fd765fe/attachment-0001.html