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

[jivey61 at bellsouth.net]

Don
 Thanks for the clarification about aresti. It has been a confusing day.
Jim Ivey
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Don Ramsey" <don.ramsey at cox.net>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 6:01 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters 2007 Figure "M" question


> Interesting, aresti is not in the regs and therefore has no bearing on the
> maneuver.  Use the description.  Roll direction is optional and stall turn
> direction is optional.
>
> Aresti was posted for those who would like to use it but in pattern is not
> the defining criteria.  The slow roll depicted in aresti does not usually
> show an option to roll the other direction so must you roll in the
direction
> of the arrow?  Neither does it show any differently than a roll on an
> immelmann.
>
> Don
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "dwaynenancy" <dwaynenancy at cox.net>
> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 3:37 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters 2007 Figure "M" question
>
>
> > Dr. Ralph Brooke (world champion) said always to do your rolls away from
> > the flight line.  This makes any directional heading movement less
> > noticeable.  Dwayne
> >
> > Mark Atwood wrote:
> >
> >>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
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion