[NSRCA-discussion] basic judging question

Wed Oct 7 19:18:12 AKDT 2009

Ok I found the new schedule. I got the other one as a result from a search.
I apologize for misleading anyone on this.
This link should get the new schedule.
http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/CBProcedures.doc
Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of J N Hiller
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 7:59 PM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] basic judging question

I wondered if that was right. T thought I remembered reading where the time
limit had been extended but couldn't find it.
The link to what I found on AMA's site was included below. I will send a
copy to you off list as it is 1235 KB.
Jim Hiller

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of John Fuqua
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 7:36 PM
To: 'General pattern discussion'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] basic judging question

Not sure where you got the cutoff date of Sept 30.  The period for accepting
rules proposals for the 2011 cycle runs from 1 Jan 2009 to 15 March 2010 (1
Jan of odd year-2009 to 15 Mar of even year-2010).

John

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of J N Hiller
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 8:48 PM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] basic judging question

Bob I agree there is a need for rules clarification. I checked AMA's change
proposal calendar and found a cutoff date of September 30 of 'Year One'.
http://www.modelaircraft.org/search.aspx?query=rULES+CHANGE+CYCLE
Contest Board Procedures Changes_v2final.pdf - Posted on: 11/17/2008
page 18

I became curious as to what the rule actually stated for the Figure M and
found that in the maneuver description the track is clearly spelled out.

Figure M with or without Rolls: Model pulls up into one-quarter (1/4) loop
to a vertical track, hesitates then performs prescribed roll, hesitates then
executes a stall turn through 180 degrees, hesitates, performs prescribed
roll, hesitates then executes one-half (1/2) outside loop to vertical track,
hesitates, performs prescribed roll, hesitates, executes a stall turn
through 180 degrees, hesitates, performs prescribed roll, hesitates then
recovers with another one-quarter (1/4) loop to level flight. Direction of
rolls and stall turns are pilot's option. The length of the vertical
segments is not a judging criterion. Downgrades:
1. Model not vertical at start and finish of rolls and stall turns.
2. Stall turns not exactly 180 degrees.
3. Model does not execute prescribed rolls.
4. Rolls not centered in vertical lines.
5. Bottom of outside half loop not at same altitude as entry and exit.
6. Loop segments not the same size and radius.
7.Pendulum movement after stalls.

This got me curious so out came the old rulebooks.
1992-93 had a figure M with half rolls and this description. "Model pulls up
into a vertical attitude, -----" the first downgrade was "Model not vertical
at start and finish of rolls and stall turn"
1994-95 changed the description to.  "Model pulls up into a vertical track,
-----" However the maneuver downgrade "Model not vertical at start and
finish of rolls and stall turn" didn't change. This discrepancy remained
through the last rulebook I have (2002-2004 and is with us today.
These apparent conflicts have been with us a while.

I think it is generally accepted that wind correction overrides general
maneuver description unless stated otherwise. The mention of 180 degree
rotation can probably be eliminated, superceded by the requirement to
display a wind corrected vertical down line. A 180 degree rotation in a
crosswind immediately brought back to a wind corrected down line would be
rather ugly, however on occasion I have stalled down wind exceeding 180
degrees to prevent a 2-3 wingspan offset resulting from excessive up line
wind correction.

Jim Hiller

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Bob Richards
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:13 AM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] basic judging question

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://us.mc11.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.or
g>
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