[NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI

[Keith Hoard]

I thought a Shoulder Roll was something Captain Kirk did to escape danger?

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 8:29 AM, JShulman <jshulman at cfl.rr.com> wrote:

>  A Lomcevak (and it's multiple spellings) is almost like a shoulder roll.
> The inputs are best done with left aileron, left rudder and down elevator.
> If this is done high enough, and long enough, it becomes a KE spin with some
> input massaging. It's actually slower than a snap roll cause the plane
> (model) takes a couple of rotations to fully stall. And a pattern plane,
> with it's long tail, won't. The KE maneuver FAI is doing is a positive 1 1/2
> snaps, from KE to KE. I don't think it's even an option to do it negative.
> Even if someone wanted to do it that way, they would probably crash. The
> snap must be opposite direction of the 1/4 roll to KE and that would mean a
> negative snap... at the ground... ouch
>
>
> 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 *
> vicenterc at comcast.net
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 17, 2008 7:25 AM
> *To:* General pattern discussion
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI
>
> Isn't the snap from KE is called Loncevac (sp?)?  I agree, it is a lot
> faster than the standard snap.  I don't know why.
>
> --
> Vicente "Vince" Bortone
>
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: "JShulman" <jshulman at cfl.rr.com>
> and a really fast one at that
>
>
> 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 *Mike Hester
> *Sent:* Monday, June 16, 2008 8:20 PM
> *To:* General pattern discussion
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI
>
> Yep....there's a 1 1/2 snap from KE in F-09.
>
> Really cool looking manuever too.
>
> -Mike
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* vicenterc at comcast.net
> *To:* General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> *Sent:* Monday, June 16, 2008 7:55 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI
>
> Do we have KE snaps in the catalog?  I never seen it.
>
> --
> Vicente "Vince" Bortone
>
>
> -------------- Original message --------------
> From: "george w. kennie" <geobet at gis.net>
> John,
> We often think that the wing is producing zero effect when we go K.E., but
> the AOA of the wing is still positive to the datum line and as long as we
> have forward movement of the airframe a force will be generated away from
> the gear. That's why you have down elevator mixed to rudder in order to
> nullify this effect. I hear many people state that in K.E. the wing is not
> producing any lift, but it sure is reacting to the airflow and decalage.
>
> For the K.E. Snap the airframe still needs to be in a stalled condition and
> it's still elevator that's necessary to produce the effect of the stall. Due
> to the visual perspective the increased AOA required to stall the wing will
> be undectable to the pilot as well as the judges because in K.E. the
> pitch-up will take place horizontally instead of vertically.
>
> But then this is just my understanding and I'm sure there are others who
> will straighten me out.
>
> G.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* John Pavlick <jpavlick at idseng.com>
> *To:* General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> *Sent:* Monday, June 16, 2008 4:57 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI
>
> Which axis do you need to show a "break" in for a knife edge snap? The wing
> isn't really "lifting", the fuse is.
>
> John Pavlick
>
> *"george w. kennie" <geobet at gis.net>* wrote:
>
>  My lip is becoming too painful from biting it, so I think I'm going to
> stick my nose in here somewhere.
>
> I think I'm with Jon on this one.
>
> My logic, however flawed, tells me that if I am flying my plane straight
> and level and I input rudder, no matter how much, there is no way that this
> input will induce a stall to the airframe. Therefore, it seems to me, that
> the necessary force required to stall the main lifting surface must come
> from the elevator. It would further seem to me that this input must, by it's
> very nature produce a pitching attitude to the fuselage whether positive or
> negative. So I would have to conclude that the attitude "break" referenced
> by the rule can only refer to a "pitch" break and would be impossible to
> confuse with an attitude change induced by the rudder seeing that the
> required result is to stall the main wing.
>
> And yes Jon, I agree that it would be necessary to lead with the elevator
> in order to bring about this attitude change before rotation is started,
> however miniscule the interval might be.
>
> Of course I'm still open to hearing other interpretations and their
> validations as these observations are strictly opinions.
>
> G.
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Jon Lowe <jonlowe at aol.com>
> *To:* nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> *Sent:* Monday, June 16, 2008 2:10 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI
>
> Jim,
>
> I have no clue how you think all three axes can be initiated at the same
> time.  You keep forgetting the part of the RULE, quoted verbatim below,
>  that says the "fuselage break and separation from the flight path" must
> happen "BEFORE THE ROTATION IS STARTED".  I'm NOT equating fueselage break
> to pitch break, it could break in  pitch and/or yaw, if it doesn't start
> rotation at the same time.  If you initiate all three axis at the same time,
> rotation WILL start at the same instant, and that is specifically NOT
> permitted.  READ THE RULE!  The judge MUST determine if the fuselage broke
> and separated from the flight path first, BEFORE the rotation started.  If
> it didn't, he MUST severely downgrade.
>
>
> Jon Lowe
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Woodward, Jim (US SSA) <jim.woodward at baesystems.com>
> To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 12:37 pm
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI
>
>  Jon,
>
> I’m shocked - you are totally wrong here.  Do not equate “fuselage”
> to “pitch” in the reading of this definition.  As a judge you should NOT
> apply a “pitch-assessment” pass/fail criteria to judging FAI snap
> rolls.  It is completely rejected.  The plane and therefore “fuselage”
> must autorotate about the flight axis, which means that the nose and tail of
> the plane will move in a conical fashion.  The pilot can initiate with all 3
> axis at one time.
>
> It is the responsibility of the judge to determine if autorotation
> occurred, and not determine how or in what order the pilot did it.
>
>  Thanks,
> Jim
>  ------------------------------
>  *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [
> mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org<nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org?>]
> *On Behalf Of *Jon Lowe
> *Sent:* Monday, June 16, 2008 1:21 PM
> *To:* nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI
>
> You are correct, as long as there is no roll induced at the same instant.
> I overlooked that possibility.  Not sure how rudder alone will induce the
> "supposed to be in a stalled condition" though!!  There are many attitudes
> (e.g. 45 down on center) where a judge could not likely see a rudder
> departure alone first, and thus conclude that departure did not occur before
> the roll departure started.  And a judge might also not see a pitch
> departure first on a end box upline snap, but he could see rudder first.  It
> is VERY clear that simultaneous roll with either or both of the other axes
> departures is NOT allowed as others have tried to state here.    I did say
> that pitch and yaw departure could happen simutaneously, in my original
> post, as long as roll doesn't occur at the same t ime.
>  Jon Lowe
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: JShulman <jshulman at cfl.rr.com>
> To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 11:22 am
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI
>  Jon,
>
>  I don't see where it says pitch break? Rudder first will show attitude
> break and separation from the flight path. So if one uses rudder and
> elevator first this is also correct.
>
>  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<nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org?>
> ]*On Behalf Of *Jon Lowe
> *Sent:* Monday, June 16, 2008 12:11 PM
> *To:* nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI
> I suggest people re-read the definition ofsnap-rolls from the FAI sporting
> code.  I did a few minutes ago.  Here it is:
> "5B.7.5. *SNAP-ROLLS*
> A snap-roll (or flick roll/rudder roll) is a rapid autorotative roll where
> the model aircraft is in a stalled
> attitude, with a continuous high angle of attack
> Snap-rolls have the same judging criteria as axial rolls as far as start
> and stop of the rotation, and
> constant flight path through the manoeuvre is concerned.
> At the start of a snap-roll, the fuselage attitude must show a definite
> break and separation from the
> flight path, before the rotation is started, since the model aircraft is
> supposed to be in a stalled
> condition throughout the manoeuvre, If the stall/break does not occur and
> the model aircraft barrelrolls
> around, the manoeuvre must be severely downgraded (more than 5 points).
> Similarly, axial
> rolls disguised as snap-rolls must be severely downgraded (more than 5
> points).
> Snap-rolls can be flown both positive and negative, and the same criteria
> apply. The attitude
> (positive or negative) is at the competitor’s discretion. If the model
> aircraft returns to an unstalled
> condition during the snap-roll, the manoeuvre is severely downgraded using
> the 1 point/15 degree
> rule."
>
> Note that "the fuselage attitude must show a definite break and separation
> from the flight path, before the rotation is started..."   That means that
> simultaneous pitch and rotation is specifically NOT permitted.  I would
> interpret it as meaning that pitch and yaw could theoretically happen
> simultaneously, as long as no roll is involved.  Sorry Matt, the rules as
> written do NOT allow actuation in all three axes simultaneously.  The rule
> also states that a constant flight path has to be maintained.
>
> Let's face it, the only way to prevent severe downgrading from EVERY judge,
> not just some judges, is to have a pitch break first.  Takes any question
> away.
>  Jon Lowe
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rcmaster199 at aol.com
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Sent: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 10:46 am
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI
>  A "Flick" and a "Snap" roll are the same roll in full scale aerobatics
> parlance and reference material.
>
> Do these mean the same thing in model aerobatics? In my view, they do
>
> The latest FAI regs allow actuation of the three main axes
> simultaneously...that is, the regs don't specifically differentiate "Pitch
> Break" from other deviations. I don't think they specifically require that
> the model must rotate about it's flight path either, I don't believe
> (.....plane must rotate in a conical fashion about the fight axis....). The
> model would probably present the best if that's done, so pilots may want to
> consider that when executing the maneuver.
>
> In my take, a rapid Pitch is desired to preload the wing. Contrary to
> popular belief, both panels dot not have to stall for a snap to occu r. Qu i
> te the opposite. Upon rudder deflection, the port panel will practically
> stall (lift much much less than the other panel) but the starboard panel
> must be lifting to create the autorotation. If both panels stall, the model
> will fall out of the sky for a distance and a snap would not occur at the
> correct moment in time
>
> MattK
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Woodward, Jim (US SSA) <jim.woodward at baesystems.com>
> To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 8:47 am
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap entry in FAI
>
> 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 d oe s 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <NSRCA-di+scu+ssion at lists.nsrca.org>
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion *
>  ------------------------------
>  Get the Moviefone Toolbar<http://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=aolcmp00050000000011>.
> Showtimes, theaters, movie news, & more!
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
> < SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">
> ------------------------------
>  Get the Moviefone Toolbar<http://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=aolcmp00050000000011>.
> Showtimes, theaters, movie news, & more!
>
> _______________________________________________  NSRCA-discussion mailing list  NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org  http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>  ------------------------------
> Get the Moviefone Toolbar<http://toolbar.aol.com/moviefone/download.html?ncid=aolcmp00050000000011>.
> Showtimes, theaters, movie news, & more!
>  ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
> ------------------------------
> I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
> It has removed 9842 spam emails to date.
> Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
> Try SPAMfighter <http://www.spamfighter.com/len> for free now!
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> *
>
> E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (5.5.1.322)
> Database version: 5.10040e
> http://www.pctools.com/spyware-doctor/<http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor/>
> *
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
>
>
> E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (5.5.1.322)
> Database version: 5.10040e
> http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor/
>
>
>
> *
>
> E-mail message checked by Spyware Doctor (5.5.1.322)
> Database version: 5.10040e
> http://www.pctools.com/spyware-doctor/<http://www.pctools.com/en/spyware-doctor/>
> *
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>



-- 

Keith Hoard
Collierville, TN
khoard at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20080617/3310e2eb/attachment-0001.html>