[NSRCA-discussion] Judging-snap & spin

[Lance Van Nostrand]

Interesting, Ed,
If this was discussed at length (instead of a few emails here) do you remember why they returned the KFs to the FAI cataloge numbers?  Was their rationale more complete than ours?
--Lance

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ed Alt 
  To: 'NSRCA Mailing List' 
  Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 9:14 AM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging-snap & spin


  K-factor multipliers are all about degree of difficulty and we can probably agree that it can be difficult to do good snaps every time.  They can seem like a good thing from that perspective.  However, for some perspective I thought back to a similar discussion and thought process in IMAC a few years back, where tail slides were considered problematic (correctly so I think).  That led us into a discussion of elimination of the maneuver in sequences, restricting how it was used (upwind only vs. downwind) and so forth.  They were genuinely hard to fly consistently and also somewhat hard to judge properly when presented certain ways, such as when heading downwind and far away.  That led to the idea of reducing the K-factor when the tail slide was part of a figure, which also led to us dreaming up other K-factor adjustments (rollers went higher if I remember correctly).  



  Anyway the point is that we ended up tampering with things that caused us to stray from compliance with the FAI catalogue, which was a problem in the case of IMAC. Ultimately the k-factors got corrected back and tail slides stopped appearing in sequences.  Problem solved!  Should we eliminate snaps in Pattern?  I don't much care for them, but I can live with them. I would like to at least keep their use to an absolute minimum due to the inherent mismatch with precision flying and performing and judging a true snap roll correctly.  It's based entirely too much on the opinions of the observer.  Because we've just got little models whistling about and momentarily turning into a blur, I'm afraid that it will always be thus.  It's very different than watching a full scale airplane do a snap, where there is little doubt of whether one was done for real or not.  I don't know if it would be wrong to minimize the K-factor with snaps or not, but it leaves me wondering if we're solving the right problem?



  Ed



  -----Original Message-----
  From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Lance Van Nostrand
  Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 8:51 AM
  To: NSRCA Mailing List
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging-snap & spin



  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 

    To: NSRCA Mailing List 

    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






--------------------------------------------------------------------------

      See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

      _______________________________________________
      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/20071022/1145a256/attachment.html