[NSRCA-discussion] Judging Questions
Ronald Van Putte
vanputte at cox.net
Tue Mar 3 09:27:21 AKST 2009
Keith's tongue was so far in his cheek when he wrote that last e-
mail, I'm afraid he must have hurt himself.
Ron
On Mar 3, 2009, at 10:22 AM, billglaze wrote:
> Keith:
> With all due respect, (and I have an idea that lots of folks may do
> it your way, occasionally,) for years we have been trying to get
> around the "impression" aspect of judging, It's hard to do, but
> that's why, (I believe) we have such detailed maneuver descriptions
> in the rules. (Again, my idea.) If this impression judging is
> extended, it could, in theory, be used for all judged maneuvers by
> some folks. Or so it seems to me. I understand the difficulty,
> and perhaps impossibility, of absolutely tying down each and every
> little thing. I doubt, in fact, that it's possible. But I feel
> that we should still try; each attempt brings us a little closer to
> the absolute.
> The above is purely my opinion, and is subject to being revoked
> without notice!<G>
> Bill Glaze
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Keith Hoard
> To: General pattern discussion
> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 11:06 AM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging Questions
>
> I would just give a score based on my IMPRESSION of the
> landing. . . it it looks good, then a 9 - 9.5 - or 10 depending on
> how I felt the pilots flight went prior to the landing and other
> previous flights I have judged.
>
> If anyone presses me afterward, I will just claim the "smooth and
> graceful" clause in the AMA rulebook. . . that covers everything!!!
>
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 9:36 AM, billglaze <billglaze at bellsouth.net>
> wrote:
> Don:
> There are times when for one reason or another, the field is
> unmarked with a landing zone, and the CD announces that the LZ is
> the entire runway, making the LZ and the LA the same. That's what
> leads to doubt in judging landings. At least in my case, and,
> apparently, other folks also. And, like Georgie, I've also seen
> the 2 meter requirement mentioned; can't put my finger on it right
> now, but I've seen it in some official document.
> Bill Glaze
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Don Ramsey
> To: 'General pattern discussion'
> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 9:44 AM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging Questions
>
> I just check all the PowerPoint presentations on the website and
> they all say the same thing. LANDING AREA: the entire defined
> runway. LANDING ZONE is 30 m long and normally the width of the
> runway BUT not more than 30 M wide.
>
>
> Georgie, the landing never has been required to be within 2 meters
> of center for maximum points. As long as I was judging chairman
> (and before) it was 30 meters centered on the judges. Landing in
> that area could score max points. (The takeoff should lift off
> within 2 meters of center for max points).
>
>
> There is a lot of times when the aircraft may stop within 10 meters
> after landing and there are many times when it may not. For
> instance, grass runway with high grass or a smooth cement runway
> and no wind. The intent of the rule was to allow max points for
> either case. I’ve flown in some contests where if you landed in the
> landing zone (for max points) it was almost impossible to keep the
> plane from exiting the end of the runway. Solution: land about 10
> meters before center, roll 10 meters and be finished, then don’t
> worry about running off the end.
>
>
> Don
>
>
>
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-
> discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of George W.Kennie
> Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 11:23 AM
> To: General pattern discussion
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging Questions
>
>
> # 2 screw-up !!!! It's not "roll to a stop within 15 meters",
> it's 10 meters, but the "stop" is still the elementle crux, I
> think. If it says " no downgrade if the model rolls to a stop
> within 10 meters" doesn't that infer that if the model continues
> to roll beyond that distance it becomews a downgradeable offence
> (1/2pt +)?
>
>
> And if it's not a centered maneuver, where'd we come up with the
> axiom " for maximum landing points, touchdown should occur < 2
> meters either side of the centerline"? Is that FAI ? Did I make it
> up? Am I totally losing it? How the heck is anyone expected to keep
> all this stuff straight?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: John Konneker
>
> To: Discussion List
>
> Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 11:32 AM
>
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging Questions
>
>
> Cut and pasted from the AMA website this morning:
> Landing: The landing maneuver will be scored in half point
> increments from 10 to 0. The maneuver will start two (2) meters
> from the ground. The model flares smoothly to a nose high altitude,
> dissipating flying speed, and then smoothly touches the ground,
> within the landing zone. The maneuver should be considered complete
> once the plane has slowed below flying speed and rolled 10 meters
> or comes to a stop and no further downgrades shall be applied after
> that point.
> The landing zone shall be marked by lines placed perpendicular
> across the runway and spaced 30 meters apart. The width of the
> landing zone is normally the width of the runway but in no case
> shall exceed 30 meters. Landing is not a centered maneuver and
> there is no downgrade for displacement of the touchdown point left
> or right from center as long as the landing is in the landing zone.
> If the touchdown is within the runway but not in the landing zone
> it should be downgraded proportionate to the distance outside the
> landing zone. The Contest Director may designate any landing zone
> appropriate to the field if safety considerations dictate. If the
> landing zone is anything other than standard it should be
> thoroughly discussed with the pilots and judges before flying is
> started and no downgrade shall be applied due to the touchdown in
> the non-standard landing zone.
> Emphasis added by me. This of course for AMA classes.
> JLK
>
>
>
> From: geobet4 at verizon.net
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:15:23 -0500
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging Questions
>
>
> Bill,
>
>
> This is probably inaccurate, but I notice that noone else has
> responded to your inquiry so just to prove that I have not learned
> my lesson, here goes.
>
>
> In the landing descriptor it states, " there is no down grade if
> the model rolls to a stop within 15 meters". I think the crucial
> word is STOP ! What does this mean to proper execution? How
> many times have you seen a plane touch down perfectly within one
> meter of the center line and then proceed to roll perfectly
> straight down the center of the runway without a single bounce for
> a distance of 150 feet? A little hot maybe, but to most observers,
> a beautiful landing. In light of the "Stop within 15 meters"
> stipulation, it would appear that this becomes a downgradeable
> offence. Sounds, to me, like maybe it's the pilot's responsibility
> to also control the approach airspeed so that touchdown occurs just
> above stall speed controlling the rollout distance, but maybe
> somebody will correct me on this. I think this would also cover
> stuff like flipovers after the 15 meter rollout.
>
>
> If the pilot performs a landing and meets all the above
> requirements and then encounters an obstacle, whether that be a
> hole or a hummock or whatever, I would deem the execution faultless
> and rule "beyond the pilot's control" and score a 10. Flipovers
> usually occur as a result of either the plane being outside the
> landing zone or equipment malfunction ( stuck wheel e.t.c.) and
> would require discretionary judgement on the part of the scorer.
>
>
> And yup, I agree, It's got to be a physical impossibility to enter
> and exit a Split Esse at the same altitude. I think that needs
> correcting.
>
>
> Of course, all this is my opinionated interpretation of matters and
> should be so received.
>
>
> G.
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: billglaze
>
> To: nsrca- discussion
>
> Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 4:30 PM
>
> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging Questions
>
>
> At the risk of starting another downwind turn discussion:
>
>
> I've been reading over the excellent PowerPoint presentation, and
> I'd like a question answered that I've had for a long time.
>
> On landing, if the plane overturns AT ANY TIME is it an automatic
> zero? I've felt for a long time that it should be, yet I've had
> people tell me "after 50 ft. landing roll, we've completely lost
> interest in the airplane." It can roll anywhere, do anything, and
> it doesn't affect the score, is their idea.
>
> Also, if it TOUCHES DOWN in the landing zone, and then rolls
> immediately into what awaits, (in some cases, a small canyon) is
> the landing zeroed? I've been called for doing so once.
>
> Secondly, in reading the presentation for Intermediate, it states
> for the Split S: A downgrade if the entry and exit are not at the
> same altitude. Seems to me to be an error that slipped by, but
> I've been wrong before. (Honest; yes, it's happened!)<G> I've been
> known to incorrectly read/interpret also. Standing by for the more
> knowledgeable brains on the list!
>
> thanks
>
> Bill Glaze
>
> NSRCA 2388
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
> --
>
> Keith Hoard
> Collierville, TN
> khoard at gmail.com
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/e808b9ee/attachment.html>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list