[NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI

[Woodward, Jim (US SSA)]

Guys,

I thought the FAI changes explicitly allowed flick rolls?  The rule
reads, "... fuselage attitude must show a definite break and separation
from the flight path."  

It does not say, "MUST SHOW PITCH BREAK."   Please DO NOT ERROUNIOUSLY
APPLY A PASS/FAIL MAJOR DEDUCTION initial assessment to the snap roll.
Watch the whole maneuver then render your score.  

A break and separation from the flight path simply means that the nose
and tail of the plane must rotate in a conical fashion about the fight
axis.  Yaw, roll, and pitch can all break at the same moment if that is
how the pilot does it.  

Hey :) some really handsome smart guy wrote some stuff at this link
below about snap rolls to help clarify how they are done in IMAC.  

http://www.mini-iac.com/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=77

thanks,
Jim


-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Ken
Thompson
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 10:47 PM
To: Ken Thompson; General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI

How'd I do?
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ken Thompson" <KTHOMPSON56 at satx.rr.com>
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 7:39 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI


> That would be the first part...after that better be the tail forming a

> cone, or else...no it wouldn't be a snap;-)
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "JShulman" <jshulman at cfl.rr.com>
> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 6:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI
>
>
>> Ken,
>>
>> Would you say that if the plane breaks in pitch it is a snap?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jason
>> www.jasonshulman.com
>> www.shulmanaviation.com
>> www.composite-arf.com
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org 
>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Ken 
>> Thompson
>> Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 7:36 PM
>> To: General pattern discussion
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI
>>
>>
>> LOL!!!  I'll be waiting in the wings to read the comments :-)
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "JShulman" <jshulman at cfl.rr.com>
>> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 6:22 PM
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI
>>
>>
>>> Must be even closer to the Nats... after this is Spins...lol.
>>>
>>> Are we talking shoulder rolling or straight rolling?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Jason
>>> www.jasonshulman.com
>>> www.shulmanaviation.com
>>> www.composite-arf.com
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Ken 
>>> Thompson
>>> Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 7:24 PM
>>> To: johnfuqua at embarqmail.com; General pattern discussion
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI
>>>
>>>
>>> How can it be a snap if no pitch or break is shown?
>>>
>>> And yes...I know this comment is setting up a serious discussion :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: "John Fuqua" <johnfuqua at embarqmail.com>
>>> To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>> Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 6:18 PM
>>> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI
>>>
>>>
>>>> For those FAI pilots at the Harvest contest this weekend who took
the
>>>> position that the airplane need no longer show pitch or break to
enter
>>>> the
>>>> snap I invite you to para 5B.7.5 of the FAI rule book.  Looks to me

>>>> like
>>>> the
>>>> only change is that a zero is no longer appropriate but a mandatory
>>>> downgrade of more than 5 points is.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG.
>>> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.3.0/1503 - Release Date: 
>>> 6/14/2008
>>> 6:02 PM
>>>
>>> No virus found in this outgoing message.
>>> Checked by AVG.
>>> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.3.0/1503 - Release Date: 
>>> 6/14/2008
>>> 6:02 PM
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG.
>> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.3.0/1503 - Release Date:
6/14/2008 
>> 6:02 PM
>>
>> No virus found in this outgoing message.
>> Checked by AVG.
>> Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.3.0/1503 - Release Date:
6/14/2008 
>> 6:02 PM
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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