[NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air discussion

Tue Oct 2 06:39:59 AKDT 2007

Brian Young also had a midair at N Dallas in 2003...  

Hmmm.... Cost vs Value of running 2 flight lines?  How much does time
saving cost...?  We'd get to see a lot more flying if only one were ran
with maybe 2 ready boxes and a line chief so flights could rapidly
commence.  Start the contest at 9:00 am and use a good sunspot.  Get the
FAI guys flying first, Masters next etc.  The safety factor would
increase because there would be no carryouts during flying in session.
The pilots would know when they were going to fly way in advance with
plenty of time to mentally prepare.  There would be no fear in flight of
midairs....only intense concentration on maneuvering:-)  Would a person
fly 4 rounds if they knew they had to????   Contests would be a lot more
laid back wouldn't they?

Is the question of pattern quality, or just how many competition flights
we can get in.  Would we be better pilots with better performance if we
focused more on making each flight count????

Chris White

________________________________

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Lance Van
Nostrand
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 9:25 PM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air discussion

Most fields, including Crowley, may not handle a 10 degree cant
outwards, but an inward can't would fit.  Would this look too weird?  At
150m there is no danger in crossing the flight line, but still....

--Lance

	----- Original Message ----- 

	From: Dr. Mike Harrison <mailto:drmikedds at sbcglobal.net>  

	To: NSRCA Mailing List <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>

	Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 3:27 PM

	Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air discussion

	Keith,

	I think the 10 degree offset has merit.  I believe most fields
can accommodate that.  Make that 10'('-short for degree) for each pilot
from runway, effecting a net 20' change.  The centerline would be offset
10' each also.  

	Also, another help is to separate the lines farther so that
center manuevers do not overlap.  

	It is easy enough for the CD at some contest somewhere to try.
I would encourage it.  I don't know of any contests we(you and I) have
been to that this could not be implimented.  I can think of 4 midairs
that would have been avoided if this system were in place.  You-2
midairs, Don Ramsey -1, Glen Watson-1.  That is a loss in the last 3
years of 7 airplanes- about $14,000.  

	I am all for this concept.

	Lets try it a t Crowley.

	Mike

	ps as far as previous comments that midairs are rare and a
necessity of the sport, I disagree.  They are all too common, they
effect quality of flying, they are a stupid loss, and there has to be a
reasonable way to avoid it. 

		----- Original Message ----- 

		From: Keith Black <mailto:tkeithblack at gmail.com>  

		To: NSRCA Mailing List
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>  

		Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 1:23 PM

		Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air discussion

		The problem is that one avoidance caller can't do a good
job and would sound the alarm too often due to the depth perception
issue. A second caller (spotter) at the corner of the box would reduce
alerts to a minimum and would probably allow the spotters to anticipate
collisions much sooner. I think this is at least worth experimenting
with.

		As to the offset paths, adequite offset paths are not
possible at most fields due to fly-over issues and we're already flying
off by 10 degrees as we go in and out constantly.

		As to agreeing who flies close and who flies near, I've
tried this at practice an it's amazing how often two pilots still drift
to common ground. Plus, this often would not be agreeable to both
pilots.

		Keith 

			----- Original Message ----- 

			From: vicenterc at comcast.net 

			To: NSRCA Mailing List
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>  ; NSRCA Mailing List
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>  

			Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 6:52 AM

			Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air
discussion

			Probably the avoidance callers between both
lines makes sense.  He could be consider a third judge.  If he sound the
horn means that both pilots has the right to bail out and they can
resume the fly.  It has to be organized.  The pilots flying in line A
will be instructed to go down and cut the engine.  The pilots in line B
will be instructed to go up.  Of course if they are rolling they will
need to stop rolling.  We need to think what needs to be done when we
are flying vertical.  It could be one bail to the right and the other
bail to the left or just both cut engines.  The avoidance judges will be
the pilots that just finish their rounds.

			I don't think that the pilot's caller can pay
attention to both planes.  He is busy trying to help the pilot and
reading the next manuever. 

			Regards,

			--
			Vicente "Vince" Bortone

				-------------- Original message
-------------- 
				From: "Dave Michael"
<davidmichael1 at comcast.net> 

				No- if it's obvious that you were in no
danger of a mid-air then you get a zero.

				----- Original Message ----- 

				From: J N Hiller
<mailto:jnhiller at earthlink.net>  

				To: NSRCA Mailing List
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>  

				Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 6:17
AM

				Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air
discussion

				Thanks, now I understand. If I didn't
hit the other airplane I obviously didn't need to bail out and would
receive a zero.

				Jim Hiller

				-----Original Message-----
				From:
nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Dave
Michael
				Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 7:39
PM
				To: NSRCA Mailing List
				Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air
discussion

				No- you can't bail in this situation.
It would be obvious to the judges and you'd receive a 0 on the manuever-
and the next as well if you were to exit in the wrong direction or
orientation for the next manuever.

				----- Original Message ----- 

				From: J N Hiller
<mailto:jnhiller at earthlink.net>  

				To: NSRCA Mailing List
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>  

				Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 9:39
PM

				Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air
discussion

				If I am in the process of hosing a
maneuver can I bail out claming mid-air avoidance and re-fly it?

				I have only had one mid-air in pattern
competition and that was pre-turnaround, on a turnaround over a quarter
mile out. I had a close one this year I saw the other airplane go by and
heard the gasps from behind without flinching. I flew in a Scale Masters
finals competition once in LasVegas with five flight lines. I have
gotten so I don't pay any attention to other airplanes when I am flying.

				I guess I would flinch plenty, maybe
even crash if we were using that 140 DB air horn to warn of potential
midairs.

				Jim Hiller

				-----Original Message-----
				From:
nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Dave
Michael
				Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 4:45
PM
				To: NSRCA Mailing List
				Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air
discussion

				I recall a discussion on this subject
earlier in the year.  My background is heavy IMAC but I am wanting to
fly some more pattern soon.  Part of the earlier discussion was about
the issue that calling avoidance and breaking from the sequence if you
think you might mid-air is allowed in IMAC but not in pattern.

				In 10+ years of IMAC competition- maybe
40-50 contests - I can only think of a few mid-airs, maybe three or so.
Believe me when I say that calling avoidance and breaking the sequence
is not something that you want to do in the heat of competition- it can
really throw off a good sequence.  Having said that, with fewer mid-airs
in IMAC perhaps we can conclude that allowing sequence breaks to avoid
potential mid-airs makes sense for pattern too.  

				Dave Michael

				----- Original Message ----- 

				From: Keith Black
<mailto:tkeithblack at gmail.com>  

				To: NSRCA Mailing List
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>  

				Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 5:47
PM

				Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air
discussion

				Following my mid-air at the N. Dallas
contest this weekend there's been an RCU thread started on the subject.
>From this discussion an interesting idea has evolved. For those who
would like to read the thread here's the link:
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_6409493/anchors_6413018/mpage_1/key_/a
nchor/tm.htm#6413018

				If you'd just like to hear the idea I'll
paste my RCU posting below:

				This is my third mid-air in four
seasons. My first may have been avoided, but the last two were a
complete shock to both me and my caller. In fact, in mid-air #2 my
caller said "you're good" (meaning we were not going to hit). The other
pilot's caller walked up to me and apologized saying that he told the
other pilot that he was in the clear. Therefore, I don't know how
effective a third "spotter" sitting between the lines could be.

				That being said, two recent events have
given me an idea of how we might be able to greatly improve this
problem. The first light bulb was Vicente's suggestion of the spotter
that warns the pilots. The second event was my walk out to pick up the
fragments of my beloved Brio. As I was walking back I stood for a bit to
observe the planes looking down the flight path. It was amazing how
clearly you can see each plane as it moves in and out from the flight
line. 

				So here's the idea: What if we sat a
spotter at the corner of the box to watch plane separation in the
distance out dimension and then had the other spotter sitting between
the judges (or even back under the cover) watching in the right to left
dimension. These two spotters could use radios with headsets and
continually talk to each other. There are many times that planes appear
to be close to a mid-air from the flight line viewpoint, however, the
number of times that both spotters would be alarmed should be! fairly
minimal. When this occurs the spotter could sound an alarm (this
deserves discussion as to the details) and each pilot could peel off of
their course. If one pilot froze the collision may still be avoided by
just one pilot taking action. Sure, this could cause a mid-air, but
viewing from two dimensions should help in alerting only when an impact
is probable.

				Some have stated that they've seen very
few mid-airs, but my experience in D6 and NATS is that at least 70% (if
not more) of the contests I've attended have had mid-airs. I'm not going
to run away crying and quit the hobby due to this mid-air, but reducing
such losses would be a benefit to us all!

				Keith Black

________________________________

_______________________________________________
				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/20071002/270a32e7/attachment-0001.html 