[NSRCA-discussion] Landings and Takeoffs

J Shu jshulman at cfl.rr.com
Tue Mar 3 09:54:14 AKST 2009


See I was thinking that a few Masters pilots should move up to FAI and help grow FAI...lol.

Regards,
Jason
www.shulmanaviation.com
www.composite-arf.com

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Budd Engineering" <jerry at buddengineering.com>
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Landings and Takeoffs


> Ok, that makes sense.  Sounds like we should consider dropping the  
> scoring of TO's & L's in Masters to save time since Masters always  
> runs long at our contests?
> 
> Hey to RVP! - What's the over/under on how long this thread will run?   
> I figure if we can get Keith H. involved we can keep it going for a  
> week or more! : )
> 
> Jerry
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Mar 3, 2009, at 10:07 AM, "J Shu" <jshulman at cfl.rr.com> wrote:
> 
>> Because it takes time to make a perfect take-off and landing, and  
>> currently the time stops after the half roll after the 45-downs. We  
>> wouldn't have enough time unless the time limit was raised.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jason
>> www.shulmanaviation.com
>> www.composite-arf.com
>>
>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>  From: Budd Engineering
>>  To: General pattern discussion
>>  Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 12:56 PM
>>  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Landings and Takeoffs
>>
>>
>>  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
>>
>>
>> --- 
>> --- 
>> --- 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  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