[NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8
jivey61 at bellsouth.net
jivey61 at bellsouth.net
Tue Nov 14 05:33:20 AKST 2006
We have worn out this thread..... It needs a name change..... Retire "masters Square 8",... I still don't know where it starts,and has nothing to do with lines between maneuvers or S & G.
Jim Ivey
----- Original Message -----
From: vicenterc at comcast.net
To: NSRCA Mailing List ; NSRCA Mailing List
Cc: DaveL322 at comcast.net
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 9:24 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8
I remember a Don's article in K-Factor. He was recominding to write the scores in a separate piece of paper so we DON'T take our eyes off the plane to write the score. I have been doing this since I read the article. Now, it is easy for me to deduct points in the "no man"s land". I do to all so there is not problem. It is very common to see pilots adjusting in the "no man's land" for cross winds by rolling the plane. It is clear in the rule book that the wings have to be level. This is another example of "no man's land" judging.
Vicente "Vince" Bortone
-------------- Original message --------------
From: DaveL322 at comcast.net
In practice, I think the "no mans" land is being judged....maybe subconsciously to an extent....just like high quality take offs and landings, clean procedure turns and trim passes, etc, all "add to the show".
If "no mans" land needs to be specifically addressed, then I agree it should be done along the lines of what Ed has described.
I think the last thing pattern needs is a place for a subjective score, or a category which can largely be subjectively scored - ie, any kind of presentation score, overall flight score, style, appearance, etc.
Regards,
Dave Lockhart
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Ed Deaver <divesplat at yahoo.com>
I am curious about this also. It is almost guaranteed if a pilot makes a radical heading change in "no mans land" to be given a fairly stiff downgrade. If the pilots "sneaks" it in (we all do it ya know) but gets caught what downgrade to give.
My understanding in Pre-turnaround, a pilot was judged only while in the box or while performing the maneuver show center. However, we are flying turnaround now.
Maybe we need a rules proposal to incorporate something along the lines of: Once in the box, there is no dead zone and after the 15M straight line is drawn to end the previous manuever, the next manuever begins. Or something else, maybe 1/2 way between maneuvers establishes when the last maneuver ends and the next begins. In this manner, all flight in the box is judged and assigned a specific downgrade to a specific maneuver.
Just a thought.
Ed
Keith Black <tkeithblack at gmail.com> wrote:
Looks like we're leaving the discussion regarding what happens in 'no man's
land' as your example has nothing to do with lines between two consecutive
maneuvers. My deja vu was intended to switch to something that could be
related to more readily to provoke thought and illustrate my point, it was
supposed to be similar.
My guess is that you're trying to bring smoothness and gracefulness into
play with your question. I for one would give both maneuvers 10 and would
not deduct for the height difference. Since the end maneuver is a height
adjusting maneuver it seems perfectly acceptable to adjust the height of the
centered maneuver.
I understand that there's an objective to fly all maneuvers a similar size
and ideally position, but I've never heard anything concrete as to how to
credit or debit for this. For me if someone flies the tri! ! angle p erfect and
the square perfect but at a 50' different base line they're still both
getting 10's.
That being said, a few weeks back I was posting arguments in favor of S&G.
Unfortunately I'm not sure it's well enough defined for pilots to get all
the credit they may deserve. The only way to truly credit for overall
matched size, speed and positioning may be to have a separate score/judge
viewing the sequence as a whole.
Keith Black
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lance Van Nostrand"
To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 11:41 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8
> Let me call the example, because yours is really just deja vu all over
> again.
>
> The pilot performs two perfect center manuvers in a row. What they are
> doesn't matter but let's say they are the new triangle and then! th! e< BR>&g t; golfball. The only thing is, the base altitude for each is 50ft
different.
> Should this get a lower score than another pilot that also flies the same
> manuvers also perfect but their base altitude is the same?
>
> --Lance
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Keith Black"
> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
> Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 10:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8
>
>
> >I completely disagree with you, this is not a S&G issue. In my example I
> > never said the drop in altitude wasn't smooth and graceful. In fact, it
> > may
> > well have been the most graceful and smooth loss of altitude ever, but
it
> > still gets a downgrade based on geometry.
> >
> > New example:
> >
> > A pilot gets blown way too far in, s! o on th e l! ong lin e from the end of
the
> > humpty to the square eight the pilot very smoothly and gracefully blends
> > in
> > rudder and moves the plane out about 75 yards. Fifteen meters prior to
> > center this crafty flier adjusts his track and straightens the track
out.
> > You, however, being the attentive judge that you are notice this sneaky
> > adjustment and judge it how? And on what grounds?
> >
> > For me it's easy, you can't both fly a parallel track to the flight line
> > and
> > adjust your distance from the flight line by 75 meters, that's bad
> > geometry.
> > Seems we teach the Sportsman this lesson in the two straight flight
> > segments. For a 75 meter adjustment I'd probably take 1 point, maybe
more
> > depending on how dramatic the adjustment in distance looked.
> >
> > "But he straightened out 15 meters be! fore th e star! t of th e square", you
> > say,
> > "what about the 'no man's land'.
> >
> > "Don't care", I say, "we fly a sequence, not a lot of individual
> > maneuvers.
> > There is no 'no man's land'."
> >
> > Again I'm more than willing to change the way I judge if Don or the
> > judging
> > committee explain that I'm wrong, after all, what do I know.
> >
> > Keith Black
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Lance Van Nostrand"
> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
> > Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 6:43 PM
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8
> >
> >
> >> 1/2 pt S&G
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Keith Black"
! > &g t;> To! : "NSRC A Mailing List"
> >> Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 11:32 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8
> >>
> >>
> >> >I agree that the downgrade is lenient, this didn't escape my
attention.
> >> > However, I'm not sure by what other criteria/rule one would downgrade
a
> >> > loss
> >> > of altitude. Perhaps Don could help here.
> >> >
> >> > Keep in mind that the 15 foot drop you mention may not appear as much
> >> > of
> > a
> >> > drop depending on the height of the plane and box positioning during
> >> > the
> >> > drop. I'll be honest, right or wrong, if I'm in the chair and I see a
> >> > noticeable drop I'll take 1/2 point, if it's really obvious drop I'd
> > take
&g! t; > > > 1> >> > pt. Maybe I'm wrong, this is a good time to set me straight and level
> > ;-)
> >> > .
> >> >
> >> > OK Lance, so if you're judging Sportsman and you see the plane drop
20
> >> > feet
> >> > on the straight flight out as it flies from one end of the box to the
> >> > other,
> >> > how would you score it. By your definition seems like you have to
give
> > it
> >> > a
> >> > 10 since the error would only be around 3 to 4 degrees.
> >> >
> >> > Keith Black
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> > From: "Lance Van Nostrand"
> >> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
> >> > Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 10:32 PM
! > &g t;! ;> & gt; Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> I don't think the rules support your claim that the 15m entry/exit
is
> >> >> a
> >> >> minimum. I think you have just made up your own rule to downgrade
at
> >> >> 1
> >> >> point per 15. However, this is very lenient downgrading because to
> >> >> get
> > a
> >> > 1
> >> >> point downgrade by descending or ascending at 15 degrees, over a
100m
> >> >> distance, the plane would change altitude by 77 ft. A pilot
changing
> >> >> altitude by 15 ft or so would only be making a 3 degree error.
(note:
> >> >> the
> >> >> box width at 150 meters is 600 meters).
> >> >>
> >> >> Therefore, if I l! ose 15 ft of alt! itude a s I fly from the end of the
> >> > reverse
> >> >> cuban into the stall turn (manuvers 1 and 2) this should hardly
> > register
> >> > as
> >> >> a downgrade.
> >> >>
> >> >> --Lance
> >> >>
> >> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> >> From: "Keith Black"
> >> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
> >> >> Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 7:40 PM
> >> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> >I agree with Don's description on the maneuver, this makes perfect
> > sense
> >> > to
> >> >> > me. However, I really don't think it matters if you visualize the
>! >&g t; >> ! > ce nter
> >> >> > or
> >> >> > the first corner as the start because IMO any deviation in track,
> >> > altitude
> >> >> > change or wing bobble approaching the eight, whether 15 m or
greater
> >> > from
> >> >> > the theoretical start of the eight is grounds for downgrade.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > This thinking goes to what Lance was discussing as "no man's
land".
> > I'm
> >> >> > not
> >> >> > sure there is such a thing, I've always thought of the 15 m entry
> > line
> >> > as
> >> >> > a
> >> >> > minimum.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Let's take an example. A pilot comes out of the Humpty Bump prior
to
> >> >> > the
> >! ;> & gt;> > fi! gure ei ght and draws a 15 m straight line. Then they start
loosing
> >> >> > altitude and continue dropping until 15 m before center (Lance's
> >> >> > theoretical
> >> >> > no man's land). I for one would deduct points from the eight based
> >> >> > on
> >> > the
> >> >> > 15
> >> >> > degree rule. I don't think the spirit of the rules is "anything
> > goes",
> >> > or
> >> >> > "it's not so bad" as long as it's not 15 m before a maneuver
starts.
> > If
> >> >> > one
> >> >> > does score this way then the pilot that keeps a perfect line
between
> >> > these
> >> >> > two maneuvers will not be rewarded for doing a better job.
> >> >> >
> >> >>! ; > Keith Black
>! ; >& gt; >> >
> >> >> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> >> > From: "Lance Van Nostrand"
> >> >> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
> >> >> > Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 8:07 AM
> >> >> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Don,
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Since it is the point of this list to be nitpicky, let me say
that
> >> >> >> when
> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> plane is inverted at center it is at a point that it will never
> > return
> >> >> >> to,
> >> >> >> therefore the actual center can not be th! e start of the manuver.
> &! gt;> >> >> Granted,
> >> >> >> the center is part of the straight line that begins and ends all
> >> >> >> manuvers,
> >> >> >> but it is not part of the actual figure 8. So to be complete,
> > judging
> >> >> >> starts 15m before the exit of the final radius and ends 15m after
> > this
> >> >> >> point. This encompases the center but is not the actual beginning
> > and
> >> >> >> ending.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> As for Stuart's comment, I think any downgrade applied to what
the
> >> >> > airplane
> >> >> >> does when it is in "no man's land" falls in the smoothness and
> >> >> > Gracefulness
> >> >> >> category and should be! minima l. ("no man's land" exists betwe! en
& gt; > some
> >> >> >> manuvers that are far apart where the prior manuver and its 15m
> >> >> >> exit
> >> > line
> >> >> >> end, but there is a long space before the 15m entry line of the
> >> >> >> next
> >> >> >> manuver.)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --Lance
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> >> >> From: "Don Ramsey (CoxNet)"
> >> >> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
> >> >> >> Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 7:40 PM
> >> >> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8
> >> >> >>
> >> >> ! >> ;
> >> >> >> &g! t; Lanc e,
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > I believe it starts at center. Straight line before center and
> > start
> >> > at
> >> >> >> > center. The reason I say that is rule 14.1 which says "Each
time
> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> > model
> >> >> >> > passes before the judges, a maneuver is executed, except after
> >> > takeoff
> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> > landing." Of course, some maneuvers start before center as the
> > slow
> >> >> > roll,
> >> >> >> > etc. As for scoring, I'm not entirely sure it matters.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Don
> >> >> >> >
! > &g t;> >> >> > ----- Original M! essage -----
> >> >> >> > From:
> >> >> >> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
> >> >> >> > Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 7:16 PM
> >> >> >> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> Lance
> >> >> >> >> You will have to have a entry line before the push to vertical
> > past
> >> >> >> >> center.This is where I think it starts... at the start of the
> > entry
> >> >> > line.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Jim Ivey
> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message -----!
&g t; >> >> >> >> From: "La! nce Van Nostrand"
> >> >> >> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
> >> >> >> >> Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 7:51 PM
> >> >> >> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>> OK,so where does the manuver begin and end? At center, the
> > radius
> >> >> > after
> >> >> >> >>> center, at the first corner initiation?
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> --Lance
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >> >> >> >>! ;> F rom:
> >> >! > &g t;> >>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
> >> >> >> >>> Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 4:06 PM
> >> >> >> >>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> > Jason
> >> >> >> >>> > The way we are flying the 8 is enter inverted and 1st loop
> >> >> >> >>> > (outside)
> >> >> >> >>> > to
> >> >> >> >>> > the
> >> >> >> >>> > right of center and next (inside) loop to the left of
> > center.The
> >> >> > first
> >> >> >> >>>! > l oop
> >> >> >> >>> > ! is outs ide loop and 1st vertical segment starts past
> >> >> >> >>> > center.Of
> >> >> > course
> >> >> >> >> swap
> >> >> >> >>> > left and right for opposite flying direction.
> >> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >> >>> > Jim Ivey
> >> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >> >>> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> >> >> >>> > From: "JShulman"
> >> >> >> >>> > To: "NSRCA"
> >> >> >> >>> > Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 4:08 PM
> >> >> >> &! gt;> > > Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8
&g! t; > > >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >> >>> >> Hi All,
> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >>> >> Does the Square horizontal 8 start at center or just past
> >> > center?
> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >>> >> Regards,
> >> >> >> >>> >> Jason
> >> >> >> >>> >> www.jasonshulman.com
> >> >> >> >>> >> www.shulmanaviation.com
> >> >> >> >>> >> www.composite-arf.com
> >> >> >> >>> >> --
> >> >> >> >>> >> No virus fou! nd in t his outgoing message.
> >> >> >> >>&g! t; > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> >> >> >> >>> >> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.2/528 - Release
> > Date:
> >> >> >> >>> >> 11/10/2006
> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> >> >>> >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> >> >> >> >>> >> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> >> >> >> >>> >> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> >> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >> >>> > _______________________________________________
> ! >> ; >> >> >>> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>! ; >& gt; >> >> >>> > 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
> >> >&! gt; > ;> >> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> &g! t;> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> >> >> > 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/mailma! n/listi nfo/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-dis! cussion @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/20061114/08593923/attachment-0001.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list