[NSRCA-discussion] 2008 FAI F3A Maneuvers
Earl Haury
ejhaury at comcast.net
Fri Sep 7 18:16:46 AKDT 2007
Morten
You raise an interesting question from a couple of perspectives. We consider the "box" rectangular, defined by the ground on the bottom, verticals at the 60 deg lines on the ends, and with a horizontal 60 deg top. Logically, the 60 deg top is determined at center and will be about 300m (~1000 ft) @ 175m distant. However, the rules state "vertical height shall not exceed 60 deg" with no mention of center. So - 60 deg at the corner poles will be a great deal higher. It's very difficult for either the pilot or judge to extrapolate the center height to the end poles, and using the 60 deg guideline will result in a "top of box" line that's vee shaped.
The rules don't require that the top of high maneuvers reach the top of the box - only that they stay within the box. It's the pilots choice to establish a maneuver size that fits the flight position (distance) in the box, with no penalty for flying somewhat smaller than the box allows. Of course, figuring out just how to present a new sequence is part of the fun. As you suggest, maintaining a consistent base, middle, top line will generally score best, as this concept is long engrained (but not well defined). The rules state "when appropriate, entry and exit of center maneuvers shall be at the same altitude", it seems this refers to the same maneuver - not necessarily all center maneuvers (but some see it this way). It also seems reasonable that a pilot should be able to choose a low base line for a very tall maneuver to best utilize the box and then choose a higher base line to best present a complex rolling maneuver, for example. This allowance seems inferred by the phrase "positioning adjustments in altitude are allowed in turn-around maneuvers". (However - some consider these "adjustment" only as "corrections".)
Like I said - good questions. I have my opinion on each and know the conventions, yet the wording of the rules isn't specific enough to support a strong argument either way.
>From a practical viewpoint, I reviewed altitude measurements I've recorded flying the triangle in F07 and find they averaged around 225m (~740 ft) - I haven't gathered data, but I think I'm sizing the triangles in P/F-09 similarly. This allows a diameter of around 90m (~300 ft) for the top of the 9 without pushing the top of the box too much - certainly within the limits of being able to judge height at a turn-around position.
A very good question regarding the penalty for running out of time between the last maneuver and landing - I see nothing to address this in the last version of the 2008 Sporting Code that I have (may not the the latest).
Earl
----- Original Message -----
From: Morten Laugesen
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 4:11 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2008 FAI F3A Maneuvers
Hi Don,
Thanks for the feed back, and I guess that is how it will be flown anyway. It's just unusual to go higher than the normal top-line, I'm not aware that this has been done before in the FAI schedules. Anyway it would be nice with a more comprehensive manoeuvre description to clear things up a bit. As has also been mentioned before the text description of manoeuvre #13 is simply wrong. In my opinion it should say "full integrated roll in the transition between loop no. 1 and no. 2" instead.
Also another question. Say you run out of time (8 minutes) before touching down, will they then give you a zero for manoeuvre #17 since the landing is not scored anymore? Usually the judge will have given his score for the final manoeuvre before the landing...
Thanks.
Kind regards,
Morten Laugesen
e-mail: morten at laugesen.nu
URL: http://morten.laugesen.nu
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Ramsey
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 8:08 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2008 FAI F3A Maneuvers
Morten,
I don't think there is a higher line on maneuver 8. The figure 9 (maneuver 8) does start on a high line and does go higher but that higher point is never flown, it is only touched. Since it is a turn around maneuver the high box is not going to be a factor. The maneuver will get very high but should not affect the judging (I think).
Don
----- Original Message -----
From: Morten Laugesen
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 12:37 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2008 FAI F3A Maneuvers
Hi,
Now that the discussion about the new schedules has come up I thought that I would ask about your opinion regarding a sequence of manoeuvres in P-09. In Denmark we have been discussing how to interpret manoeuvres 6, 7 and 8.
They are:
6: Half outside loop, inverted entry
7: Triangle loop, with ½ rolls in each leg, inverted exit
8: Figure 9, two ½ rolls in opposite direction on downline, inverted entry
What we are thinking is that if done this way, and if the exit of the half outside loop and the entry to the triangle loop are done at the normal upper flight line (top-line) a second even higher top-line will be introduced when performing the Figure 9? My understanding of the rules is that you have a bottom-, a middle- and a top-line in the box, but now it seems we have introduced a second top-line?
If the triangle loop is actually the bottom half of an hour-glass, and hence entered at half height things make better sense, however then it could possibly be difficult to get time to perform the half rolls on each leg of the triangle loop.? It can be done, but it wouldn't look very graceful?
Any ideas or opinions on this matter?
Kind regards,
Morten Laugesen
e-mail: morten at laugesen.nu
URL: http://morten.laugesen.nu
----- Original Message -----
From: george w. kennie
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 7:22 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2008 FAI F3A Maneuvers
Yeah John,
I got thinking about this yesterday after I mailed the question and came up with the only way it would make sense and yes you're right, the Aresti shows it as you state.
Thanks for enlightening me.
G.
----- Original Message -----
From: John Gayer
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 12:03 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2008 FAI F3A Maneuvers
The only way the maneuver makes sense is if the roll is the last 45 degrees of the first loop and the first 45 degrees of the second loop. It is clearer in the Arresti diagram.
John
Steven Maxwell wrote:
Ok what am I missing #13 P-09 "2 outside loops from the top full integrated roll over top 90 degrees of second loop" wouldn't the second loop be completed before the 90 degrees of the roll?
Steve Maxwell
Earl Haury <ejhaury at comcast.net> wrote:
Karl
My fault - not Don's, the magic of PC copying.
Earl
----- Original Message -----
From: Karl G. Mueller
To: Don Ramsey ; NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 8:47 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2008 FAI F3A Maneuvers
Don,
The scoresheet for the finals schedule 09 reads P0-9
instead of F-09.
Karl G. Mueller
kgamueller at rogers.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Don Ramsey
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 12:46 PM
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] 2008 FAI F3A Maneuvers
The 2008-2009 F3A maneuvers are posted on the judging section of the NSRCA site. Score sheets are also there.
http://www.nsrca.org/competition/judging/judging.htm
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
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Got a little couch potato?
Check out fun summer activities for kids.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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/20070908/193a9fab/attachment.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list