[NSRCA-discussion] If you don't score by the rules.... don'tadvertise a rulebook event

Mon Oct 2 16:57:56 AKDT 2006

Fred: 

I hope that by now you have been advised that the TO and LDG scores were
NOT changed "on the spot", but were in fact the rules for the past 3
years! You did not read the rules yourself or this would have been
obvious to you prior to attending your first contest. Next year the rules
change, I think for everyone but FAI. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

If you are following this list, you may have seen a lot of discussion
concerning, Judging for wind, the center of maneuvers, when does a
maneuver start, etc. This is all because some competitors are already
reading next year's rules, and trying to be prepared, both to judge them
and to fly them. One of the BEST things a new competitor can do is to
read the rules, and be very familiar with them. If there is ANYTHING you
do not fully understand. put your question on this list and I guarantee
that you WILL get an answer, maybe many answers.

I sinerely hope you hit the trail again next year, and remember: It is a
sport, not life and death, so relax, have fun, and make some new friends.
In the end, the flying becomes just a added bonus to a great weekend with
friends.

Terry T.

On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 16:07:13 -0700 "Rex LESHER" <trexlesh at msn.com> writes:
Wow, that's the first negative response I've heard about flying twice
through the sequence...   I'd like to add that here in D8, we actually
ask the Sportsman pilots if they would like to fly through twice, or
once.   There really isn't any pressure placed on the pilot to go along
with it... It's up to them.  
I didn't start out flying in Masters...  I worked my way up through the
ranks...  If I only knew then, what I know now...  What's really amazing
is the fact that the pilots in the upper classes really did have my best
interests at heart!!!!   Imagine that....

Rex
----- Original Message ----- 
From: John Konneker 
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org 
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 3:00 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] If you don't score by the rules....
don'tadvertise a rulebook event

Hey Fred!
If I may...
I flew Sportsman this year.
The -0- or 10 for the takeoff and landing maneuver is by the current 
rulebook which you can download from the AMA website.
The "takeoff sequence" is covered on page 87 and the "landing sequence" 
begins on page 82.  Both end with the words "Only two scores a 10 or 0
may 
be awarded for the take-off sequence".
What you observed was per the current rules.
Flying two Sportsman sequences per flight...
This is also per the rulebook.
Page 72 rule 14.8.
It is called the "Sportsman option".
"Use of this optioin is not a deviation to the rules..."
I flew it this way in a couple contests this year.
It does get long when you are first starting but since rule 14.8 states
that 
the "highest scoring sequence of each two (2) sequence flights shall be 
counted" you could land after the first sequence without real penalty. 
You 
would be depriving yourself of the oppourtunity to better the first
flight 
but there would be no penalty.
The way I looked at it was I was there to fly.  The more I could fly the 
more I liked it!  Endurance was never an issue, my plane was a stock ARF
and 
could make the two sequences no problem.
I hope you decide to continue in pattern.
If you had half the fun I did this year you will be hooked!
The peopel you meet aren't bad either!
;-)
John L. Konneker

>From: "Fred Huber" <fhhuber at clearwire.com>
>Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>To: <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] If you don't score by the rules.... 
>don'tadvertise a rulebook event
>Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 11:45:42 -0500
>
>Clear DayThis has been annoying me for a long time....
>
>At Sportsman level the K=1 takeoff and landing scores can significantly
>affect the contest results.
>
>The all too common practice of changing the rules at the last minute, to
>give Sportsman 0 or 10 on take-off and landing,  is inappropriate.
>(Inappropriate to chane the scoring system for any maneuver at ANY
level!)
>Of course all the higher level pilots will agree to it... it does not 
>affect
>them.  ANY ONE PILOT in Sportsman (or whatever other class is affected)
>contesting the change without it having been advertised as a rule
>modification in advance should prevent the change.
>
>Yes, the takeoff and landing scoring is something that I think has
affected
>my outcome at contests.  I flew a plane that had a large problem with
stall
>turns... with a 6 being a good result for that maneuver.  Full opposed
>aileron wasn't enough to prevent the plane from rolling when rudder was
>applied.  But I figured my quality of takeoff and landing would more
than
>make up for the poor stall turns, so I showed up for the contests.  And
>every contest I showed up at... they on the spot said "Sportsman gets 0
or
>10 takeoff and landing"  When all the marginal takeoffs of the other
pilots
>in my class got 10's (Many deserved 5's... or 2's...  and I was 
>consistantly
>getting complimented on the smoothness of my takeoffs and landings.) it 
>took
>away the ability for me to make up for my known problem with the stall 
>turn.
>
>Next contest I go to... if they decide to change the rules on the
spot... I
>want my entry fee back. (applies to some other events I have been to
>also...)
>If they advertise in advance that the scoring won't be by rulebook... I
>won't show up.
>
>I kept quiet about it (except discussing it with a couple of local
flyers)
>when it occured.  Too many much more accompished pilots were in favor of

>the
>change.  IT HAD NO EFFECT ON THEM!  They shouldn't have been part of the
>discussion at all.
>
>You want to change a rule that affects only one class at the pilots' 
>meeting
>before the first flight... ANY ONE PILOT in that class opposing the
change
>prevents it.  And pilots in other classes have no vote.
>
>If the wind is too much for the pilot to think he wants to risk getting
a
>bad score on takeoff and landing... maybe its too much wind for that
pilot
>to bother making a takeoff.  All of the other pilots in the class will
be
>dealing with the same wind.  It has just as much chance of preventing
them
>from getting a 10.
>
>Any contest that decides to give Sportsman 0 or 10 for takeoff or
landing
>should list it as non-rulebook in advance.  If you are going to do the
>2-passes through the sequence without the full stop landing and another
>takeoff... you need to advertise that too.
>
>I oppose the flying of 2 "flights" of Sportsman with one takeoff and one
>landing...  The takeoff and landing are scored maneuvers, suppposed to
be
>able to get a score other than 0 or 10, therefore cutting half of the
>opportunities to do well or poorly on them is changing the scoring vs
the
>rulebook. (see above... I  moved this paragraph due to changes in the
below
>from the original version)
>
>Also... the Sportsman sequence is relatively short for a reason.  This
is 
>an
>introductory class.  The contestants are not used to competing... not
used
>to getting judged.  They need the ability to do one competition round...
go
>back and talk with others about what they did right, what they did wrong

>and
>how to improve.  They also need a bit of timne to RELAX between the
scored
>flights.
>
>Considering how nervous some people are in thier early competition 
>rounds...
>its a wonder to me that a first time Sportsman level competitor ends up 
>with
>thier airplane in the air by the end of a second sequence within one 
>flight.
>
>The first contest someone flys in, they typically fly too close in, and
>because of this ALL maneuvers are extremely rushed.  By the end of the
>flight some contestants are so frazzled that they have severe problems 
>doing
>the double-immelman AT ALL.  Then you want them to immedately turn
around
>and run the sequence again?  Why not just tell them to land at the
judges
>feet so the judges can stomp on the model?
>
>Thats not a formula to promote  more participation... its a formula to 
>scare
>off beginners.  If the pilot is ready to run the sequence twice in a row

>FOR
>THE JUDGES.. they are probably ready to start working on Inermediate.
>
>Most people I have seen move up from Sportsman, its been due to seeking
the
>higher challenge of Intermediate... not due to getting the points
forcing
>the move up.  "Sandbagging" Sportsman is rare.
>
>Also... it is justifiable for someone competing at Sportsman to set up 
>thier
>plane for one round flight durration.  If they average 4 minutes to do a
>round... and put in a tank which gives 6 minute fuel supply, then the
>2-rounds in one flight is a guaranteed dead-stick before completion of
the
>second round.  Do you force Master's level pilots to carry enough fuel
for 
>2
>passes through the sequence?  Would they tollerate that?
>
>Forcing a competitor to carry the DEAD WEIGHT of the fuel for a second 
>round
>through the first round is inappropriate.  At Sportsman level... the
type
>models which are competitive include models which would have severe CG
>change with the fuel depletion...
>
>If you think a Sportsman competitor needs to be able to run 2 times
through
>the sequence nonstop, you probably also think everyone needs to buy a
$3000
>plane, capable of flying the Masters sequence, in order to try out
>Sportsman.  Its totaly unnecessary, inappropriate and shuts out
beginners.
>
>FHH
><< ClearDayBkgrd.JPG >>

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

_________________________________________________________________
Be seen and heard with Windows Live Messenger and Microsoft LifeCams 
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://
www.microsoft.com/hardware/digitalcommunication/default.mspx?locale=en-us
&source=hmtagline

_______________________________________________
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/20061003/bf5c5f27/attachment.html 