[NSRCA-discussion] Have we lost our way? (Sorry, George, but your question inspired this)
Matthew Frederick
mjfrederick at cox.net
Tue Aug 5 19:19:05 AKDT 2008
Call me crazy if you want, but I'm getting sick of all these "conditions"
being allowed in pattern. The whole point of what we do puts emphasis on the
pilot being in control of the model at all times. It's one thing to flip a
switch to enable higher rates for a snap, stall, slow roll, whatever. I
think we're going too far with just pulling the stick past 90 degrees to
instill a snap "condition" that will automatically perform a snap roll with
the programmed inputs. In the rules it states that you can't have a "timed"
switch, witch basically was put in to avoid people from programming a snap
switch that gave the elevator a slight lead on all the other inputs.
Allowing the elevator (or any other) stick to provide this same advantage is
tantamount to cheating, it just happens to pass the current rules test. The
more I hear about people putting these types of conditions that are merely
contingent on stick position, the more I think it's coming time for a rules
change to stop it. We're supposed to be better than this. I'm probably
waaaay out on a limb by myself here, but from where I sit having started in
pattern back in the late 80's, I think we're losing our way by allowing
computers to perform operations that should be required by the pilots. I
don't even believe in programmed mixes and avoid them like the plague.
Matt
P.S. Before anyone who knows me asks, yes, I did fly a Genesis, and yes I
did have elevator to rudder mix on that... hopefully my next plane won't
suck like that...
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list