[NSRCA-discussion] Masters 2007 Figure "M" question -- nowjudgeing the M

Tue Oct 17 12:00:53 AKDT 2006

To downgrade a technically correct manuever due to a pilot's option 
choice.... not appropriate.  So the question is basicly asking who's going 
to ignore the rules.

I can see the downgrade due to lack of S&G due to picking a bad direction 
for the stall turns (and the probably downgrade for it looking like a 
wingover would potentially be severe)  a slight fuselage angle into the wind 
is typical of a stall turn, and ttrying to go the other way is ASKING for 
the turn to flop if you don't turn early, which rotates around the wingtip 
(or some distance further from the fuselage than the wingtip) instead of 
near/on the CG.

S&G usually goes hand in hand with doing the maneuvers well.... and choosing 
your optional directions appropriately.

I find it easier FOR ME to compare roll rate if all the rolls are the same 
direction... thus the presentation of canopy one time and belly the other 
would make it easier for me to judge. (If I get to doing any judging at that 
level...)

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Glen Watson" <gwatson11 at houston.rr.com>
To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 2:38 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters 2007 Figure "M" question --  
nowjudgeing the M

> Understood subjectivity will always be part pattern...
>
> Let's see a show of hands of those who would apply a downgrade to an M 
> flown
> technically correct according to the AMA judging criteria although the 
> belly
> was seen during 1 or both of the stall turns.
>
> Glen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Mark Atwood
> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 2:19 PM
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters 2007 Figure "M" question
>
> I would disagree...it IS defined.  Figure M with 3/4 rolls.  Roll 
> direction
> is optional, stall direction is optional.  That's always been the case
> unless it's specified otherwise.  There's no "implied" roll direction, 
> just
> one that some think looks better.  That will always be the case.
>
> Some people do their four points in different directions so as to show the
> canopy first, or last, which ever they feel presents better...Not sure I
> personally care, but for those that do...go for it.   I know I'll catch
> flack for say this, but this IS a subjective sport.  Presentation DOES
> matter... Always will.  It's shouldn't outweigh the objective criteria, 
> but
> it's not worthless either.
>
>
> On 10/17/06 3:11 PM, "jivey61 at bellsouth.net" <jivey61 at bellsouth.net> 
> wrote:
>
>> G
>> Yes you agree ..but you also see we have to define it now or everybody
> will
>> be flying and judging it differently. What a mess that will be.
>>
>> Jim Ivey
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "george w. kennie" <geobet at gis.net>
>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 1:50 PM
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters 2007 Figure "M" question
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Jim,
>>> It certainly will work this way, but your original method will present
>>> better. With the roll direction being pilots option your original
>>> ll/rr-rr/ll is a much prettier maneuver. There's something to be said 
>>> for
>>> presenting the canopy to the judges on rolling maneuvers. I apply this
>>> technique on all maneuvers with rolling elements unless the specified
>>> requirement forces otherwise, like reverse K.E.'s.  IMHO, you had it
> right
>>> the first time!
>>> G.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: <jivey61 at bellsouth.net>
>>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 1:17 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters 2007 Figure "M" question
>>>
>>>
>>>> Bob
>>>> If I read the Aresti correct the rolls on both vertical lines are the
>> same
>>>> direction.This makes it lt-lt and lt-lt coming from the left and rt-rt
>> and
>>>> rt-rt coming from the right.Like Jerry  said look at top of plane one
>> time
>>>> and bottom of the plane next time.
>>>>
>>>> Jim Ivey
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Bob Kane" <getterflash at yahoo.com>
>>>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 1:01 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters 2007 Figure "M" question
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Wow, this is more complicated than I anticipated. Do you have to roll
>> the
>>>> same way for each stall turn?  Or can you reverse directions to show 
>>>> the
>>>> canopy during each stall?
>>>>>
>>>>> For example, flying left to right as shown on the aresti, pull 1/4
>> loop,
>>>> short line, roll 3/4 left (canopy toward flightline), short line, stall
>>>> toward the right, short line, roll 3/4 left, short line, push 1/2
>> outside
>>>> loop, short line, roll 3/4 right (canopy faces flight line), short 
>>>> line,
>>>> stall towerd the right, short line, 3/4 roll right, short line, pull 
>>>> 1/4
>>>> loop.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bob Kane
>>>>> getterflash at yahoo.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>>> From: "jivey61 at bellsouth.net" <jivey61 at bellsouth.net>
>>>>> To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 12:45:56 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters 2007 Figure "M" question
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Jerry
>>>>> I looked again at the aresti and I think you are right.The aresti 
>>>>> shows
>>>>> both upline rolls in the same direction.That would let you see the top
>>>>> one
>>>>> time and bottom the other time.
>>>>> My mistake Bob so much for crutches.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.4/478 - Release Date: 10/17/2006
>
> 