[NSRCA-discussion] Judging-snap & spin

[JonLowe at aol.com]

The age old problem of what a "break" is in a snap was solved at the Don Lowe 
Masters a couple of years ago.  They defined it as a "simultaneous departure 
in all three axis".  There you saw graceful snap entries, clearly defineable 
as a snap.  At the IMAC Tuscon shootout, they had had the pitch departure 
requirement, and most were pitching what looked like 45 degrees (was probably 25 
degrees), before they entered the snap.  Break, pause, enter snap.  Ugly as 
hell.  At a pattern judging seminar I went to this year, we sat around for half an 
our trying to decide what a "pitch break" was.  We finally decided that if 
you saw anything at all, it was ok.  But beware of IMAC judges crossing over, 
unless they have been retrained.  I got some 5's this year this year, because 
they didn't see a large break.
 
As regards spin entries, there are too many spin entry nazis IMHO.  The rule 
book clearly defines downgrades for entries.  In my book, if they don't break 
any of those rules, (wing coming over before the nose passes thru horizontal, 
not stalled, weathervaning, etc.), I don't downgrade for the entry.  Too many 
people want to add their own definition to the rules about how an entry 
"should" look, and tell you they downgraded or zeroed you.  When you ask them what 
specific rule you violated, they say it "didn't look right". Some of these same 
people will coach you to "cheat" at the entry to get a pretty one, dumping up 
elevator to get the nose to fall thru, which really breaks the stall. 
Unfortunately, all airplanes do not enter the same way, and some entries are not 
pretty, but they don't break the rules.  Maybe, as well as teaching what isn't 
correct, we ought to teach what ISN'T downgradeable in some of these manuevers.
 
Jon
 
In a message dated 10/21/2007 8:50:52 AM Central Daylight Time, 
patterndude at tx.rr.com writes:

Ron,
Your idea caused me to stop and think.  I'm wondering if it would really 
help, however.  If a pilot "in the hunt" screws the landing (K=1) he's now "out of 
the hunt" on that round.  Scores are often very compressed at local contests 
so even if we reduce the KF, a bad score on any manuver is usually enough to 
do mortal damage.
--Lance

----- Original Message ----- 
From: _Ron Lockhart_ (mailto:ronlock at comcast.net)  
To: _NSRCA Mailing List_ (mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org)  
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2007 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging-snap & spin


Eliminating is one solution - a price that comes with that solution is lack 
of practice doing and judging snaps-
which is desirable for some in AMA classes, and for sure for those looking 
ahead to F3A.
 
An in between thought - reduce the K factor considerable for snap and spin 
maneuvers.
That leaves them in the schedules, provides flying and judging practice on 
them, but reduces the
impact of the imperfect judging of them on round scores.
 
Ron Lockhart

----- Original Message ----- 
From: _BUDDYonRC at aol.com_ (mailto:BUDDYonRC at aol.com)  
To: _nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org_ 
(mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org)  
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2007 11:44 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging


My cents worth on the subject.
Snaps and Spin entry seem to cause much of the problem.
Why do we continue to repeat trying to solve a problem that most agree is 
controversial at best and impossible to judge consistently on an equal basis?
Seems that the best solution is to eliminate these from the schedules and 
pick maneuvers that more suit Precision Aerobatics and their ability to be judged 
correctly by everyone not just those who have advanced to the top of the 
super judge platform.

Buddy






 
Jon Lowe




************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20071021/5f3a6243/attachment.html