[NSRCA-discussion] basic judging question

[Bob Richards]

Jim,
 
What you said is exactly how I remember the judging discussion presented at the Youth Masters re: IMAC stall turns. And I remember thinking to myself that this is not the way we did it in pattern in the '90s. Oh, well, I did not want this to turn into a pattern vs IMAC discussion again. :-\
 
Getting back to my original question, I think the stall turn should be wind corrected as much as possible through the stall turn itself. However, that is not how the maneuver description is written for the Figure M or the Double Stall Turn. The language used for the regular Stall Turn w/ or w/o Rolls should be duplicated, IMHO.
 
Bob R.


--- On Wed, 10/7/09, Woodward, Jim (US SSA) <jim.woodward at baesystems.com> wrote:


From: Woodward, Jim (US SSA) <jim.woodward at baesystems.com>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] basic judging question
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2009, 11:02 AM








Bill – I can see where the confusion is -  as I perfectly relayed the information as taught in the SE judging seminar and confirmed in the practical judging practice held on Sundays.  The IMAC judging committee interprets the definition to mean that the attitude (fuselage) must be in the vertical plane during the rotation.  They further back this up by stating that if the plane were to be in the “wind-corrected” attitude (not perfectly vertical) during the rotation, that it would be subject to the 0.5 pt per 5 degree rule.  I’ve been in the room 3 times when Wayne M. has explained this and answered many questions from it.
 
Lots of discussion took place over this in the judging seminar.  Basically they are teaching that for “yaw” you can remain wind corrected, but for the pitch axis, you must be in the vertical plane.  Sorry if this seems to contradict the rule, but this is what is being taught and practiced in the South East.  
 
I think it looks funny, and I would prefer for the interpretation to allow “wind-correction” for any time, but I must fly what they teach as the scoring criteria SE.  On the other hand, I would love to know if this has changed as well.
Thanks,
Jim
 

 
 


From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Bill's Email
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:48 AM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] basic judging question
 
Woodward, Jim (US SSA) wrote: 
  
 
However, this dovetails into the recent IMAC & Pattern comparison threads.  In IMAC, the plane is supposed to be brought into the “vertical plane” prior to the stall-turn(pivot) taking place.  This is mostly evident if you are flying in a strong headwind where you are wind correcting the vertical line.  Just prior to the stall turn, the pilot hast to pitch the plane into the vertical plane, then yaw around the pivot, then return to the wind corrected down line.
 
 Not sure where you got this about IMAC, but it is incorrect. This may be the cause of your confusion (from Rule 8.5):

The wings must remain in the vertical geometric plane throughout the turnaround, and the aircraft‘s attitude before and after the turnaround must be absolutely vertical (unless wind correction is required), with no extraneous tail movement. There must be no rotation around the pitch or roll axis. If there is movement around any axis other than the yaw axis, often referred as "torquing" (Fig. 25), there is a deduction of 0.5 points per 5 degrees of axis.

At no time in IMAC is the actual attitude of the plane judged, it is ALWAYS the track of the theoretical center of mass. You are not required to alter the pitch of the plane at the point if the rotation starts if the pitch attitude in not vertical due to wind correction.



-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
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/20091007/3c50e28a/attachment.html>