[NSRCA-discussion] Judging-snap & spin

Sun Oct 21 12:32:18 AKDT 2007

The rules of the CD have to be the rules of the AMA unless they put in an
appropriate waiver ahead of time.  A CD does not have the authority to break
out a sudden announcement about his set of rules governing snaps.  It is
unfair to contestants to abide by someone else's version of the rules,
unless all contestants had reasonable notice in advance through a waiver.

Ed

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of John Ford
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 1:02 PM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging-snap & spin

Jon,

Hear, hear.

Couldn't have said it better!

I also share the opinion that in the case of the snap (or the spin entry for
that matter), our judging standards don't judge actual flight
characteristics of the particular plane, and we are asking pilots to
exagerate the break because that is what we agreed we wanted to see all the
time, not because every plane should show it naturally.

Maybe we are sitting on this bed of nails because for many people, the
mystery and controversy of the break is more attractive than aerodynamic
reality?

I've done lots of snaps in full-sized planes and there are as many break
styles as there are airplane designs. Some older/larger planes require that
you slow up and reef back almost to the buffet before mashing the rudder,
others are so touchy that a modest tap on the rudder with only a hint of
pitchup will send the beast thru 150 degrees of autorotation before you can
think about it. In both cases, believe me, it was a true snap roll, but in
the first case, you may have seen some break, but in the latter, it would
have looked like everything happened at the same time around all 3 axes. I'm
sitting in the thing, and I can't tell! 

Essentially the same comments for spin entry, in agreement with Jon's
comments.

I'll judge by the rules of the CD, but I do it with a bit of a shoulder
shrug, I suppose.

John

JonLowe at aol.com wrote:

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 <mailto:ronlock at comcast.net>  Lockhart 

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 

To: 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 AOL.com <http://www.aol.com/?NCID=AOLCMP00300000001170>
and Make AOL Your
<http://www.aol.com/mksplash.adp?NCID=AOLCMP00300000001169>  Homepage.

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20071021/2a188fdf/attachment.html 