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

Wed May 17 05:34:13 AKDT 2006

If you posted anything that did not draw fire then the message probably did not make the list.

John Ferrell    W8CCW
"My Competition is not my enemy"
http://DixieNC.US

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Larry 
  To: NSRCA Mailing List 
  Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 12:36 AM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Newbie question - Don't ask, don't tell.

  Oh boy, I am really being tested here! 

  There are obviously many things I "don't know yet" - beyond the details of how to fly the routines - about this group and its history and there seem to be several major issues of debate. 

  In fact, I'm beginning to wonder if there are ANY safe questions! 

  I am really really tempted to ask a few, but I'll be good!<VBG>

  One thing I'm beginning to feel sure of - your all a good bunch!

  Thanks for the warm welcome!

  Larry
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: White, Chris 
    To: NSRCA Mailing List 
    Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 12:34 PM
    Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Newbie question - Don't ask, don't tell.

    Hmmm."The Downwind Turn", it is interesting to note that Air Progress magazine did the same thing in about 1973-74.   It was a columnist battle of the downwind turn controversy hosted in articles by Mike Dillon and Barry Schiff.  Hey, another good topic is "Region of reversed command" (just try that one on the FAA)..it all has the same effect as snaps.controversy!!!!  

    Chris

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

    From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Ron Van Putte
    Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 1:24 PM
    To: NSRCA Mailing List
    Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Newbie question - Don't ask, don't tell.

    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

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

    _______________________________________________
    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/20060517/9efba777/attachment-0001.html 