[NSRCA-discussion] Landings and Takeoffs
Jon Lowe
jonlowe at aol.com
Mon Mar 2 14:26:24 AKST 2009
Amen. I guess no one remembers the mess we had a couple of years ago
with 0 or 10 takeoffs and landings. Suddenly, everyone forgot how to
do it safely. And I disagree that it is not an aerobatic manuever.
Very hard to do perfectly, but good ones are beautiful. Is straight
and level flight "aerobatic"? We judge it in every class.
Jon Lowe
-----Original Message-----
From: J Shu <jshulman at cfl.rr.com>
To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 5:06 pm
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Landings and Takeoffs
I'd much rather see take-offs and landings
be judged. What's the incentive of having a pilot learn how to learn a
proper (and safe) take-off and landing if there is no 10 to shoot for?
And not a
0 or 10, but scored. Just because it wouldn't be scored doesn't make a
pilot try
and make a safe take-off or landing.
Regards,
Jason
www.shulmanaviation.com
www.composite-arf.com
----- Original Message -----
From:
Tim
Taylor
To: General pattern discussion
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 4:53
PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Landings
and Takeoffs
I agree, TO's and Landings shouldn't be judged. Add one turn around
and center maneuver to
the classes that score them. Exit the
box down
wind then they can make a 180 to landing.
Tim
--- On Mon, 3/2/09, George W.Kennie <geobet4 at verizon.net>
wrote:
From:
George W.Kennie <geobet4 at verizon.net>
Subject:
Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Landings and Takeoffs
To: "General pattern
discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Monday,
March 2, 2009, 4:44 PM
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
20 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,20my 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.
JM2CW0D
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
20 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.
The Professional version does not have this
message.
_______________________________________________
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
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list