[NSRCA-discussion] changed topic to killing Masters?
Don Ramsey
don.ramsey at suddenlink.net
Mon Feb 4 06:54:48 AKST 2008
I really don't understand all the discussion about the P pattern difficulty
and how it would cause an exodus from Masters if flown. Here it is:
1. Rev. Split S & Split S Combo, 2/4-pt. roll first,
full roll second, inv. Exit 4
This is the Double Immelman the Advanced pattern did year before last.
2. Half reverse cuban 8, two ½ rolls in opposite
direction 3
No difficulty here.
3. Three horizontal rolls in opposite direction 4
The beginning classes did 3 rolls for a number of years. These are in
opposite direction and more difficult but Masters does opposite rolls now.
4. Stall turn, 2/4-pt. roll up, ½ roll down 3
No difficulty here.
5. Top hat, 4/8-pt. roll over top, inverted exit 4
Timing is a problem here but no real difficulty.
6. Half outside loop, inverted entry 1
No difficulty here.
7. Triangle loop, with ½ rolls in each leg, inverted
exit 4
This was a Masters type maneuver not long ago.
8. Figure 9, two ½ rolls in opposite direction on
downline, inverted entry 3
Can get rushed but not difficult.
9. Stall turn, ¾ roll up, 1 ¼ snap roll down 5
OK, it's got a 1-1/4 snap on the downline.
10. Pull-push-push humpty bump, ½ rolls up and down,
inverted exit 3
No difficulty here.
11. Reverse 4-pt. roll (2/4-pt in one direction, 2/4-pt
opposite), inverted entry and exit 4
Masters maneuver.
12. Half square loop, full roll up, inverted entry 2
No difficulty here.
13. Two outside loops from top, full integrated roll over
top 90 degrees of second loop 5
Some difficulty but not dangerous and learnable.
14. Two turn spin, inverted exit 3
No difficulty here.
15. Cuban 8, 4/8-pt. roll and full roll in 45 degree
downlines, inverted entry 4
Masters type maneuver in past.
16. Half square loop on corner, ½ rolls 45 degree uplines,
inverted exit. 3
No difficulty here.
17. 45 degrees down, with negative snap roll, ½ roll on
exit
This was was an advanced class maneuver 2 years ago.
I think ever Masters model flying today will do these P pattern maneuvers
easily. There is a maneuver in P-11 that will be more difficult but we have
had similar maneuvers in Masters before. The F pattern is different.
Don
-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Ed Alt
Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 4:55 PM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] changed topic to killing Masters?
Sounds about right to me.
Ed
________________________________
> From: seefo at san.rr.com
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 13:14:10 -0800
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] changed topic to killing Masters?
>
>
> Actually, I think the solution is to just decide once and for all that
Masters will not be the training ground for FAI and make the Masters
sequence the destination difficulty. I suspect that’s actually been done
several times and people just keep trying to change it.
>
>
>
> If people want to fly FAI, then they have to just deal with the problems
that go along with it. No more complaining that the jump from Masters to FAI
is too hard or they don’t have the right airplane, because well.. too bad.
>
>
>
> Seems like this topic goes around the list AT LEAST once a year.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of
vicenterc at comcast.net
> Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 12:43 PM
> To: NSRCA Mailing List; NSRCA Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] changed topic to killing Masters?
>
>
>
> Jason,
>
>
>
> I agree. Another solution is get the Master class the level that was 8-10
years ago. It was between Advanced and FAI-F3A. It was natural for pilots
wining Masters to move to FAI and not like we see now more moving from F3A
to Masters. It is clear to me that the new Master schedule is equal or
harder than the new P schedule.
>
>
>
> --
> Vicente "Vince" Bortone
>
>
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: "JShulman"
>
> So if FAI pilots, that are flying FAI now, want to fly FAI (P and F), and
Masters pilots, that are flying Masters now, want to fly Masters, what are
we really "discussing"? Are we looking for a middle class to call Masters +
for the guys that want to fly P and not F or Masters? Sounds like the
addition of an Expert class in AMA to give the fliers in Masters, that want
a P type of sequence, a place to go?
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Jason
> www.jasonshulman.com
> www.shulmanaviation.com
> www.composite-arf.com
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: "John Fuqua"
>
> I have been following this discussion with some relutance to jump in. As
a current Masters pilot and old time F3A flyer I to once pushed to have the
Master schedule be the P schedule. But you guys need to look at what FAI
has done to the P schedule. Here is link to the F3A rules.
http://www.fai.org/aeromodelling/documents/sc4
>
> FAI has reduced the total maneuvers to 19 including a non scored takeoff
and landing. AMA Master is 23 including a scored takeoff and landing.
>
>
>
> Going to FAI would certainly speed things up (which is what FAI intended
for large contests like WC to speed up the prelims and get to the real
contest).
>
>
>
> Not sure this is what AMA/NSRCA membership wants for a destination class.
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Del Rykert
> Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 7:14 AM
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] changed topic to killing Masters?
>
>
>
> Hi Dave..
>
>
>
> I never saw anyone suggesting to do away with the Masters class.. I have
thought of another restriction/factor. Some of the FAI maneuvers require a
specific designed plane to do them well. If you don't have such an aircraft
in your stable you can be looking at a prohibitive change to switch to those
type of planes or live with the self imposed handicap. Granted, some of the
best can make a good showing in FAI type maneuvers but when needing the 1
point advantage in a high K-Factor maneuver it does drive the contestants to
seek the best sled that works for them.
>
>
>
> A good friend pointed out something I had lost sight of once. He acquired
a newer designed airplane to his stable that performed the maneuvers he was
flying so much easier. The design choice alone was raising his scores by
almost 1 point per maneuver. With only a little bit of practice with new
plane. He never appreciated the handicap he self imposed until having better
equipment. Heck.. I still have coreless servos and not a digital do I own..
How far behind am I? LOL.
>
>
>
> Del
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: Dave Burton
>
> To: 'NSRCA Mailing List'
>
> Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008 7:33 PM
>
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] F at locals?
>
>
>
> Del, I’ve never advocated doing away with the Master’s class. I only
suggested adopting the most current FAI P maneuver schedule and fly Master’s
as a separate class as we do today. Masters pilots would not be required to
advance to the FAI class unless they chose to do so. Seems to me like it
solves several problems. It allows a CD to have more flexibility in
arranging flight lines, a larger pool of knowledgeable judges, eliminates
the need for NSRCA (or others) to come up with a new schedule periodically
for the Masters Class. I don’t think there is any difference in the
difficulty level of the P schedule and the Masters schedule today and would
not require any greater skill level than Masters does today IMO.
>
> Dave Burton
_________________________________________________________________
Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail®-get your
"fix".
http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx
_______________________________________________
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/20080204/1c7bce29/attachment-0001.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list