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

Wed Oct 4 08:21:11 AKDT 2006

Clear DayI have to agree with Fred here.  I have always thought that landings and takeoff's should be scored.  It is only fair to the pilot that takes the time to practice doing it correctly.  Why shouldn't he be rewarded?  I have heard the arguments that non scored takeoff's save time during a contest.  Maybe this is true, and if it is, I think the only part that speeds things up is not having to make sure the aircraft can sit on the runway without rolling before that takeoff is started.  Well, let's just do away with that requirement.  Let the pilot's caller hold the aircraft until it's ready to takeoff.  If an aircraft can sit on the runway with the engine running and not roll then great, but if it can't oh well.  This does not mean that the pilot can not still execute a proper takeoff.  Why should a pilot that bounces down the runway get a 10, when another pilot performs a proper takeoff?  I just don't get it.  

As for eliminating landing scores due to poor field, or weather conditions, I think we should do away with that also.  They should always be scored.  Now I am guilty of doing this myself as a CD.  In fact I did it this year at my contest.  Now that I think about it, I think I made a bad decision.  I have a hard time believing that a pilot thinks a landing score is worth more than his aircraft.  If a pilot can get his plane down properly in poor conditions, the he deserves a better score than the pilot that can't...it's that simple.  

If you have ever missed first place by just a couple of points since we have not been judging takeoff's and landings, then you may feel that they should be scored also.  Especially if you believe that you would have scored better landings and takeoff's than the pilot that won the contest.

Now, as for saving time at a contest, how much time does not scoring takeoff's and landings really save?  If it's that big of a deal why don't we just use the three minute rule like we do at the Nat's?  I believe pilots not being ready is the biggest waste of time at a contest by far.  I find it very annoying when a pilot is not ready when he should be.  How many times have you sat in the judging chair waiting for the next pilot to come up, then you look over at him, and he is just talking away with his buddies because he is not paying attention to the flight orders.  That to me is a bigger waste of time that scored takeoff's.  There is no excuse for a pilot to not be ready when he should be.  When the pilot before him is on final, he should be starting his engine, and heading over to his flight station.  It is the CD's and or the line chief's job to make sure flight orders are posted, and it's the pilot's job to pay attention to them.  It's that simple. 

I would really like to see the three minute rule acknowledged at local contests, or at least have a way to make sure the pilot is in the air in a reasonable amount of time.

Mike Darr
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Fred Huber 
  To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org 
  Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 12:45 PM
  Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] If you don't score by the rules.... don'tadvertise a rulebook event

  This 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 

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

  _______________________________________________
  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/20061004/3f295a69/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5675 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20061004/3f295a69/attachment-0001.jpe 