[NSRCA-discussion] Landings and Takeoffs

Budd Engineering jerry at buddengineering.com
Tue Mar 3 08:57:38 AKST 2009 

Why would FAI have less time for scored TO's/L's than any other  
class?  With the exception of Sportsman (and possibly Intermediate),  
FAI flys the shortest sequence.  Masters in particular takes way longer.

Jerry

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 3, 2009, at 8:25 AM, "J Shu" <jshulman at cfl.rr.com> wrote:

> I'm certainly not THE expert... I'm just going by my observations of  
> pattern now to pattern when I was a kid. Like Stuart said, nothing  
> beat a nose high take-off or landing down the centerline... and not  
> many could do it. At least back then the only planes I remember  
> running from weren't pattern planes, but scale planes!
>
> I used to always lose bets with my brother for the best take-off and  
> landings cause his Ugly Stick was the perfect plane for that. He  
> would line it up on the center line and roll down the runway, lift  
> the nose just before the judges and break ground just after... 10.  
> And then do the same thing for landing and get 10's there too. But  
> his loops always ended up in the next county so I won the flying bets.
>
> FAI doesn't need to have scored take-offs and landings... we don't  
> have time for it. But I don't see why AMA shouldn't be scored (and  
> taught) on take-offs and landings. If you're a good pilot, then  
> these should be freebie points for the taking.
>
> Regards,
> Jason
> www.shulmanaviation.com
> www.composite-arf.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: George W.Kennie
> To: General pattern discussion
> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:46 AM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Landings and Takeoffs
>
> There you have it from THE  expert !!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: J Shu
> To: General pattern discussion
> Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 6:06 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 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.
> 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
>
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20090303/89f14e19/attachment.html>

More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list