[NSRCA-discussion] Avoidance

Thu Oct 5 04:57:07 AKDT 2006

I know this is a little extreme, but consider pylon racing.  I know, you 
almost expect to have a few midairs in a season, but it's due to the nature 
of the event  Those guys don't back off, there's no Mulligans for re-flying 
a lap because they got them squeamish in a close call during a turn.  I 
don't think they would have an event if they allowed for do-overs.  Well, 
due to the nature of our event, there's also that possibility, though it's 
no where near as large as with racing.

For years our club has held combat tournaments with Stick 40's, which span 
over 3 or 4 weekends during the season.  They take aim at each other's 
airplanes to get a better chance of scoring a streamer cut.  It's definitely 
unsafe for the models, but it doesn't appear to be unsafe to spectators, 
because it's in a controlled region far enough away for all the crap to 
settle to the ground.  I'm not trying to establish an equivilency here 
between losing a $100 model to a $3K model, it's just an example.

I'm not trying to make fun of anyone here.  I've had that yuck feeling when 
it looks like a midair is a possibility and wanted to bail, but usually 
didn't.  Believe me, if I really thought it was inevitable without taking 
action, I would try to prevent the collision.  But I also figure that there 
is some risk to the model inherent in what we do and within reason, press 
on.

>From: "Fred Huber" <fhhuber at clearwire.net>
>Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Avoidance
>Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 02:34:58 -0500
>
>Looks like:
>
>If the pilot has a backup plane... since he is allowed to finish the 
>sequence with the backup...  an actual midair is an uncontestable reason to 
>be allowed to finish a round that was interrupted. (I haven't seen that 
>persued.)
>
>Judges and CD discretion basicly on allowing resuming or reflying after a 
>near miss...
>
>For scoring... its more clear about what happens if you do collide than if 
>you don't
>
>I do agree that the way THESE SECTIONS read... the pilot essentially has to 
>declair an unsafe conditon,  that is not an equipment failure in his model, 
>  and LAND; then request the refly of the rest of his sequence.  (going by 
>the letter of the rules quoted below)
>
>********
>
>Midairs are inherantly unsafe conditions....  You can never really be sure 
>which way any particular portion of either plane will go.  That makes a 
>potential mid-air an unsafe condition.
>
>Its going to cause quite a commotion if someone declairs "Avoiding midair! 
>Landing!" then walks directly to the CD to request reflight. (completion of 
>the sequence)  But thats the "letter of the law" proceedure if I am reading 
>it correctly...
>
>I could easilly see just letting the contestant do a maneuver off-center, 
>or outside the box, without penalty if commencement delay was to avoid 
>pulling (or pushing) into a mid-air.  So if you do that... holler. 
>"avoiding!" or something similar... It can't hurt. (especially if the 
>judges see the potential for mid-air)  That makes just as much sense as 
>offsetting center to avoid flying through the sun, which I have seen 
>allowed.  off-center downgrade isn't awful....  better than a zero.  
>Outside box though... zero IIRC.  (protestable possibly... if its for 
>mid-air avoidance)
>
>*I* would go along with avoiding, then doing a "double immelman without 
>rolls" (elongated loop) to reposition and complete the sequence, after a 
>mid-air avoidance... If I was in the judge's seat (and I agreed it was a 
>mid-air avoidance)  Holler about avoiding... announce the repositioning 
>maneuver... go on.  I'd be likely to say: "OK... thanks for flying safely!"
>
>If you do a repositioning maneuver then finish, you'll have caused less 
>interruption than landing and asking for a reflight...  You may need to 
>protest 0's on the maneuver following the reposition... (If I remember the 
>penalty for sticking an extra maneuver into the schedule)  But... you'd 
>have been zeroed for the avoidance anyway if the judges don't agree the 
>maneuver being mis-flown was for avoidance. (or potentially lost a $350 
>Sportsman to $5000+ FAI model by not avoiding.)
>
>  Making allowances in judging to prevent mid-airs just makes sense. (or to 
>prevent temproary blindness of pilot, caller and judges, in cases of offset 
>for the sun)
>
>
>We already allow an extra lap or two of the field prior to landing to give 
>time for the runway to clear when someone else is taking off or landing...  
>allowing an inserted loop, or some other offset, to avoid a mid-air makes 
>sense to me.
>
>*************
>
>(pasted from a subsequent e-mail)
>All-in-all, I think it's probably not a real effective rule to adopt.  I'm
>not sure that following the "If it saves just ONE airplane, it's worth it"
>line of thinking is good for competition.  Maybe it is better left to CD's
>as to whether they want to make this a standard practice at their contests.
>That would be my suggestion anyway - if the locals think this is the way to
>go and can encourage CD's to make it standard practic through a rules 
>waiver
>for the sanctioned event, then go for it.
>
>Ed
>
>*******
>
>I see Ed's point...  I hope that we don't need to change the rules to 
>encourage mid-air avoidance... and we can just try to be reasonable about 
>when a pilot declairs he's avoiding a mid-air.
>
>Avoiding a mid-air is not something that should excessively disrupt the 
>flight, or cause a scoring problem if we are reasonable.  But its very hard 
>to codify "reasonable"....
>
>******
>
>I wonder what the rules would say if a judge instructed the pilot to hold 
>level then insert a maneuver to get back in position  for mid-air 
>avoidance....  Can the judge do that?  Can a judge say "TURN LEFT NOW!"? 
>(LIke an Air traffic controller could to a full scale aicraft...)
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Jeff Hill
>   To: NSRCA Mailing List
>   Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 12:11 AM
>   Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Avoidance
>
>
>   All -
>
>
>   Below is the rule from the AMA 2005 Competition Rulebook. IMHO it 
>requires you to interrupt the maneuver and not fly any subsequent 
>maneuvers--otherwise they are scored. In this case it appears the CD would 
>have to make a ruling. In actual practice the CD would probably rely on the 
>judges' opinions for guidance. This would most likely mean that you would 
>have to bail and land and wait for the CD to rule. If you bailed and your 
>request was denied then you cannot complete the flight; whereas if you ruin 
>one maneuver and complete the flight the rest of the flight is scored but 
>you lose your right to appeal.
>
>
>   In 2007 a new rule, 6.8, might also be used as grounds for a reflight.
>
>
>   Both rules are printed below.
>
>
>   Jeff Hill
>
>
>   10.2. Each competitor is entitled to one (1)
>   attempt for each official flight. An attempt may be
>   repeated at the judges’ discretion only if, for some
>   unforeseen reason, the model fails to make a start
>   (i.e., safety delay due to other aircraft traffic, etc.).
>   Similarly, an attempt may be repeated at the discretion
>   of the Contest Director if it has been interrupted
>   due to a circumstance beyond the control of the competitor,
>   but only the maneuver affected and the
>   unscored maneuvers that follow will be scored. The
>   Contest Director shall have sole discretionary authority
>   to grant a single repeat attempt, if, in his/her opinion,
>   the competitor has encountered radio interference
>   during the course of an official attempt.
>   • 10.3. In the case of a collision during a
>   Pattern flight, the contestants must immediately
>   recover their aircraft. They may resume their flights
>   with the same aircraft if the aircraft are judged to be
>   airworthy or with a backup or repaired aircraft. They
>   will begin with the maneuver that was in progress or
>   with the next scheduled maneuver if the collision
>   occurred between maneuvers. The previously
>   defined starting times will apply for a resumed flight
>   and the contestant will be allowed no more than two
>   (2) passes in front of the judges for the purpose of
>   trimming the plane. Scores of the previous maneuvers
>   will be added to the scores of subsequent
>   maneuvers in the resumed flight. The flight must be
>   completed by the end of the round being flown, or
>   within a time frame designated by the CD.
>
>
>
>
>   6.8 The contestant may ask the CD for a flight delay or reflight due to 
>unsafe conditions; if the judges concur the delay or reflight must be 
>granted.  However, the contestant’s won aircraft cannot be the cause of the 
>unsafe condition.  A contestant’s own aircraft can only have an equipment 
>malfunction.  A flight delay or reflight shall not be granted for equipment 
>malfunctions at 4A and 5A contests.  The CD may make exceptions at other 
>contests.
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>   _______________________________________________
>   NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>   NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>   http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>   No virus found in this incoming message.
>   Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>   Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.12/462 - Release Date: 
>10/3/2006

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