[NSRCA-discussion] Happy New Year

[seefo at san.rr.com]

The only thing that should matter is the published downgrades, not anyone's interpretation of the aresti diagram, maneuver description, or visions in their own head.

Is there a deduction for entry and exit altitude being different? If not, then you MUST NOT downgrade a pilot for doing so. Anything else is personal interpretation and not what the rules dictate.

I drives me nuts when people try to add their own interpretive downgrades to maneuver. I once had a judge years ago tell me I received downgrades because he thought I flew the sequence too "small" and should have flown larger.

Published downgrades (in the accepted/approved judging guide) are the ONLY things that matter.

F3A Sporting Code Section 5B.7.7 states the only criteria for cuban eights, full, half, or otherwise are as follows:

On half Cuban eights and half reverse Cuban eights, the roll, point-roll, or snap roll should be placed on the middle of the line. The radii of the part-loops must all be the same.

The later in section 5B.9 (positioning):

In general, turn-around maneuvers are positioning maneuvers. Therefore, entry and exit altitude need not be the same if the pilot wishes to make an altitude adjustment.

Anyone who adds in further downgrades is incorrect. Period.

-Doug



---- "george w. kennie" <geobet at gis.net> wrote: 
> Chuck, Jim,
> The maneuver under consideration is the 1/2 Reverse Cuban, not the Cuban and the question that Jim seems to be wrestling with is the end point of the maneuver. Aresti drawings of all maneuvers are drawn with a circle on the line of flight indicating the starting point of the maneuver and a vertical bar indicating the ending point of the maneuver. If you look at RCA-09 in the rulebook you will find an Aresti outline of the Sportsman sequence. You will also note that the 1/2 Reverse Cuban displays the end point of the maneuver as being in line with the entry point ( minus the straight entry line ).