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

Mark Atwood atwoodm at paragon-inc.com
Tue Oct 17 18:10:43 AKDT 2006 

He prefers electric sharpeners now...


On 10/17/06 10:09 PM, "Dean Pappas" <d.pappas at kodeos.com> wrote:

> Well I for one know that it would be a beautifully sharpened pencil: the job
> done with a sharpener of his own design.
> Dean
>>  
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From:  nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org on behalf of Verne Koester
>> Sent: Tue 10/17/2006 9:32 PM
>> To: NSRCA Mailing List
>> Cc: 
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters 2007  Figure"M" question --
>> nowjudgeing the M
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> No, the pen would've flown into  me.....
>> 
>> Verne
>> 
>> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Archie  Stafford" <rcpattern at stx.rr.com>
>> To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'"  <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006  5:20 PM
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters 2007 Figure "M" question  --
>> nowjudgeing the M
>> 
>> 
>>> >I can't help but wonder if Verne  had the pencil if it would've already
>>> >flown
>>> > into a pen by  now?
>>> >
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> > From:  nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>> > [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]  On Behalf Of Verne
>>> > Koester
>>> > Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006  4:15 PM
>>> > To: NSRCA Mailing List
>>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion]  Masters 2007 Figure "M" question --
>>> > nowjudgeing the M
>>> >
>>> >  I can't help but wonder if Kane broke the damned pencil  yet.....
>>> >
>>> > Verne
>>> >
>>> > ----- 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 4:35 PM
>>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion]  Masters 2007 Figure "M" question --
>>> > nowjudgeing the  M
>>> >
>>> >
>>>> >> Mark,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> The majority of  the names I recognize responding to this thread are
>>>> >>  Masters
>>>> >> pilots. Great discussion by the way.  However I am  hopeful the
>>>> >> individuals
>>>> >> from other classes who judge  Masters get this information as well.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Continued  awareness and education is what I am after.  I take personal
>>>> >>  pride
>>>> >> in understanding the appropriate criteria and application  there of when
>>>> >> it's
>>>> >> my turn to judge no matter who the  pilot is or the class flown.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>  Glen
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> -----Original  Message-----
>>>> >> From:  nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>>> >> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]  On Behalf Of Atwood,
>>>> >> Mark
>>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, October 17,  2006 2:53 PM
>>>> >> To: NSRCA Mailing List
>>>> >> Subject: Re:  [NSRCA-discussion] Masters 2007 Figure "M" question --
>>>> >> nowjudgeing  the M
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Hey Glen,
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On this  maneuver, I have a hard time believing that anyone would
>>>> >> downgrade  a good M based on which side of the canopy they see.  Of
>>>> >>  course...I've never really understood the "show the canopy first"  idea
>>>> >> to begin with, but especially here, there are SOOOOOO many  things to go
>>>> >> wrong, that a good M is a good M...period.  Draw  the lines, wind
>>>> >> correct, hit the radius...and BHAM!!  Good  maneuver.  There's so much
to
>>>> >> screw up that showing the wrong  side is irrelevant.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Now...like I said...stalling the  opposite way...short of a dead
>>>> >> calm...is more likely to get you a  downgrade.  Be it right or wrong...
>>>> >>
>>>> >> -----Original  Message-----
>>>> >> From:  nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>>> >> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]  On Behalf Of Glen
>>>> >> Watson
>>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, October 17,  2006 3:38 PM
>>>> >> To: 'NSRCA Mailing List'
>>>> >> 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
>>>> >>
>>>> >>  _______________________________________________
>>>> >> 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
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20061018/7cb51221/attachment.html

More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list