[NSRCA-discussion] Landings and Takeoffs

[George W.Kennie]

I think that dropping the scoring of  TOs and LGs with the intent of reducing risk will be only minimally effective. There are always going to be individuals who will experience difficulty with crossing winds, turbulance, ineptitude, whatever, no matter how many times they go around. I can think of individuals who would include me in the group.

G. 




  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: J N Hiller 
  To: bob at toprudder.com ; General pattern discussion 
  Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 3:13 PM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Landings and Takeoffs


  You make a good argument for dropping takeoff and landing scoring. I have aborted landings more than once.

  Jim

   

  -----Original Message-----
  From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Bob Richards
  Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 10:28 AM
  To: General pattern discussion
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Landings and Takeoffs

   

        I'll say it here, JMHO. I personally don't think takeoffs and landings should be judged. These are the maneuvers that put the plane closest to the pilots/judges/spectators. I've seen some bad takeoffs and landing approaches pushed to dangerous situations when they would probably have been aborted had they not been scored maneuvers. At the very least, the airplane is at risk. At the most, people are at risk. I've had one plane fly behind my head at the Nats (between myself, my caller, and the judges) during a landing when the plane got away from the pilot during one such occurance. I've also seen a plane slam into a person in the pits at full throttle, just after lifting off the ground, when the plane first veered away from the pits and the pilot forced the takeoff by kicking rudder to get it back on the runway. At no point did he back off the throttle. In most situations such as this, anyone would have aborted and started over, but because they are being judged they keep on pushing a bad situation.

         

        And, no, niether situation involved someone in the Sportsman or Intermediate classes. These were both contestants that had flown pattern for several years. 

         

        I thank god they don't judge takeoffs and landings in IMAC.

         

        JM2CW

         

        Bob R.



        --- On Mon, 3/2/09, George W.Kennie <geobet4 at verizon.net> wrote:


        I don't feel the same way as John on the landing maneuver being relegated to a non-skill element. 

         

        All aerobatic maneuvers that we perform competitively require that we demonstrate to a judge that we have developed some precise degree of control over the airframe under our command. To achieve this control further requires intense concentration on the part of the pilot. I would offer that there are many airborne maneuvers where the degree of concentration required by the pilot are significantly lower than that required to bring the airframe back into contact with terra firma and demonstrate complete and confident control. This is a skill that is worthy of reward in my viewpoint.

         

        G.  

         

         
       

   



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  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.
We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 25177 of my spam emails to date.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len

The Professional version does not have this message
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20090302/f5941b49/attachment.html>