[NSRCA-discussion] Landing Direction

Don Ramsey don.ramsey at suddenlink.net
Sun Apr 8 06:47:37 AKDT 2007 

Keith,

I think this answers your questions.  From the regulations:

"Each time the model passes in front of the judges, a maneuver must be 
executed, except after takeoff and before landing, where in each case a 
maximum of two (2) passes may be made. In the maneuver lists that follow (U) 
and (D) denote mandatory maneuver orientation (Upwind -Downwind). This 
orientation or Direction of Flight shall be determined by the direction of 
takeoff. The direction is the pilot's choice and shall be announced to the 
judges prior to takeoff. In all classes, entry into the maneuvering area for 
the first maneuver after takeoff shall be in the same direction as takeoff."



Don

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Keith Hoard" <khoard at gmail.com>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2007 9:53 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Landing Direction


> What does the wind direction have to do with the plane stalling or
> spinning?  (Don't make RVP explain the "downwind turn"!!)
>
> I thought that once you take off, that determines every maneuver's
> direction except landing.
>
>
> On 4/7/07, jivey61 at bellsouth.net <jivey61 at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> Keith
>> Next when the wind changes direction and the plane won't stall-spin can I
>> call "change direction"......Last time it was do not judge TO and 
>> landings.
>> Now it's which way do I want to land.
>> I think a big wind is blowing. .....and another can of worms is open.
>>
>> Jim Ivey
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Keith Hoard" <khoard at gmail.com>
>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2007 10:14 PM
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Landing Direction
>>
>>
>> > What if I'm flying at a field where obstacles or other factors cause
>> > me to be more comfortable landing in one direction and I may want to
>> > accept a slight tailwind to avoid those obstacles?
>> >
>> > Why shouldn't the PIC (Pilot In Command) of the airplane be able to
>> > freely choose takeoff and landing direction without explanation as
>> > long as it doesn't cause a conflict with other airplanes?
>> >
>> > On 4/7/07, Paul Horan <paul.horan at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> > > Lance,
>> > >    This is not a problem since Sportsman fliers some times change
>> landing
>> > > direction and land vertically rather than horicontally.
>> > > Paul
>> > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <patterndude at tx.rr.com>
>> > > To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> > > Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2007 6:15 PM
>> > > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Landing Direction
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > >I haven't seen the problem in contests I've been to.  Generally the 
>> > > >CD
>> will
>> > > > declare takeoff direction is pilots option, if the winds are
>> > > > light/variable
>> > > > and the field and contest can tolerate it.  Otherwise a direction 
>> > > > of
>> > > > takeoff
>> > > > is stated and followed.  This can happen on a calm day if the CD
>> prefers
>> > > > the
>> > > > uniformity of it.  The only time the proposed scenario would occur 
>> > > > is
>> if
>> > > > the
>> > > > permission is there to fly either direction, which is not that 
>> > > > often.
>> If
>> > > > it
>> > > > is in place, then someone could possibly change landing direction
>> > > > unecessarily, but since most contests have a defined manuver 
>> > > > direction
>> and
>> > > > there is no requirement to let someone land downwind, any pilot
>> planning
>> > > > on
>> > > > this game will find themselves burned over time.  On the other 
>> > > > hand,
>> if
>> > > > this
>> > > > helps a sportsman enjoy his day (and many sportsman are not 
>> > > > traveling
>> > > > competitors) then is this really a problem?
>> > > >
>> > > > --Lance
>> > > >
>> > > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > > From: "Jerry Stebbins" <JAStebbins at worldnet.att.net>
>> > > > To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> > > > Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 8:19 PM
>> > > > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Landing Direction
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >> Mark, interesting, and very astute observation. Now you do not 
>> > > >> need
>> to
>> > > >> guess
>> > > >> why it was initiated!!! The reasons/rationale stated were only
>> developed
>> > > >> to
>> > > >> sell it. Same thing happened once before--"no scores for Takeoff 
>> > > >> and
>> > > >> Landings".It now has gone full circle and the purported rationale 
>> > > >> has
>> > > >> finally been overcome by common sense and "facts".
>> > > >> Jerry
>> > > >> Jerry
>> > > >> ----- Original Message -----
>> > > >> From: "Mark Atwood" <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>
>> > > >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> > > >> Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 1:47 PM
>> > > >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Landing Direction
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>>I think my only annoyance with all of this is number of times I 
>> > > >>>have
>> > > >>>watched
>> > > >>> pilots purposely take off down wind in a "mild" wind because it
>> allowed
>> > > >>> them
>> > > >>> to fly their preferred direction only to cry "SAFETY" when the 
>> > > >>> wind
>> > > >>> picked
>> > > >>> up and suddenly their choice of direction isn't so desirable.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> I don't think anyone questions a major wind shift during a flight
>> should
>> > > >>> be
>> > > >>> allowed some variance in making a landing.  But let's face
>> it...those
>> > > >>> times
>> > > >>> are few and far between. The real issue is the quartering cross 
>> > > >>> wind
>> > > >>> that's
>> > > >>> shifting slightly from upwind to downwind, where the pilot picks 
>> > > >>> his
>> > > >>> preference for take off and his pattern, rather than thinking 
>> > > >>> about
>> the
>> > > >>> landing.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> -M
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> On 4/6/07 2:39 PM, "Del K. Rykert" <drykert2 at rochester.rr.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>> As a pilot I always feel the ultimate decision rests with the
>> pilot.  I
>> > > >>>> would ask permission to land the opposite way but if not given 
>> > > >>>> and
>> felt
>> > > >>>> it
>> > > >>>> was a safety issue to land downwind I would take the zero and 
>> > > >>>> land
>> the
>> > > >>>> reverse direction. Smarter to be safe and go home with an intact
>> > > >>>> airplane
>> > > >>>> then to land and force a mishap. Having said that, it also 
>> > > >>>> forces
>> > > >>>> greater
>> > > >>>> responsibility on the pilot to make sure he isn't conflicting 
>> > > >>>> with
>> > > >>>> opposing
>> > > >>>> traffic if he so chooses to land into the wind and causes a 
>> > > >>>> mishap
>> by
>> > > >>>> reversing direction. So the decision is not to be taken lightly.
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>>     Del
>> > > >>>> ----- Original Message -----
>> > > >>>> From: <randy9004 at comcast.net>
>> > > >>>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> > > >>>> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 2:35 PM
>> > > >>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Landing Direction
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>>> Does the pilot/caller get to decide if the wind has changed
>> > > >>>>> directions?
>> > > >>>>> Does a judge need to agree?
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> Randy
>> > > >>>>> -------------- Original message ----------------------
>> > > >>>>> From: "Don Ramsey" <donramsey at gmail.com>
>> > > >>>>>> To those who read my March Kfactor article, I seem to have
>> mistated
>> > > >>>>>> the
>> > > >>>>>> intent
>> > > >>>>>> of the new landing direction rule.  After re-reading the 
>> > > >>>>>> intent
>> of
>> > > >>>>>> the
>> > > >>>>>> rule, it
>> > > >>>>>> seems the rule was put in to allow a change of landing 
>> > > >>>>>> direction
>> only
>> > > >>>>>> for
>> > > >>>>>> a wind
>> > > >>>>>> change.  This is implied in the new rule.  The landing 
>> > > >>>>>> direction
>> > > >>>>>> should
>> > > >>>>>> always
>> > > >>>>>> be in the direciton of takeoff unless the wind changes to a
>> direction
>> > > >>>>>> that would
>> > > >>>>>> cause a downwind landing.
>> > > >>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>> Thanks to all who brought this to my attention.
>> > > >>>>>> Don
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>> _______________________________________________
>> > > >>>> 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
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > Keith Hoard
>> > Collierville, TN
>> > khoard at gmail.com
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
>>
>
>
> -- 
>
> Keith Hoard
> Collierville, TN
> khoard at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list