[NSRCA-discussion] Proposed rule change

[Bill Glaze]

I remember very well Ron van Putte's pilot's meeting at the Nats, (1997, I 
believe) where he stated that "crab angle approaching a spin had to increase 
to maintain track,"  (True, of course) and wind drift during stalled 
conditions was to be disregarded.  As soon as the aircraft recovered from 
the (stalled condition) spin, CRAB ANGLE MUST BE RE-ESTABLISHED TO MAINTAIN 
A PARALLEL TRACK."  (Emphasis added)  If, now, on stall turns we establish a 
beginning crab angle, and maintain that angle for the entire climb, this 
means that when the airplane begins to slow, that drift will occur at an 
increasing rate, as the plane continues to slow to a near stop.  If the 
airplane is to be allowed to drift at an increasing rate, why even establish 
a crab angle at all?  Just let 'er drift beginning at the pull up.
I so much remember Kirk Gray pulling up  in a vertical, and, as the velocity 
of the palne changed, somehow he was able to apply control that kept the 
track absolutely vertical.  It can be done, but it's not easy.. As I see it, 
the advice given to Don by the FAI flyers is counter to not only the book, 
but also to established judging criteria. Or should be so.
I'm having trouble seeing what is trying to be really accomplished here.
Bill Glaze



  ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Fuqua" <johnfuqua at embarqmail.com>
To: "'General pattern discussion'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposed rule change


> Don proposes what we now do with spin entry.  Once the crab/attitude is
> established you maintain that until the stall and disregard drift.  Makes
> sense to me.
>
> Also I like the move to generating clear definitions and downgrades in a
> single section and referencing them in the manuerver description.  I need 
> to
> remind all that if we go to not having schedules in the rulebook that will
> probably end the practice of describing each and every maneuver with its
> downgrades and go to something more generic based on types of maneuvers,
> spins, line, loops, part loops, etc.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Atwood, 
> Mark
> Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 12:13 PM
> To: 'nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org'
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposed rule change
>
> Hey Don,
>
> I'm not sure I agree.  To properly wind correct Up AND down, in a strong
> headwind, the model has to transition through vertical in the stall. I.e. 
> It
> only makes sense to BE vertical at the point of stall.
>
> Use a stick model and you'll see what I mean.  If your leaning 15 deg into
> the wind at the point of stall, and then yaw 180deg, you'll be canted 15 
> deg
> DOWN WIND immediatly following the stall. This would require a serious 
> push
> or pull to get the model properly wind corrected for the downline.   That
> transition has to occur somewhere. Seems only appropriate that it be the
> center of the stall.  This presents the best, and therefore scores the 
> best.
>
>
> -m
> --------------------------
> Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>
> To: 'General pattern discussion' <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Sat Oct 10 12:17:25 2009
> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposed rule change
>
> What do you guys think of this rule change for stall turns?
>
>
>
> In the Judge's Guide Page RCA 20 of Regulations under "Stall Turns":
>
> Change  1.. Lines must have exactly vertical and horizontal flight paths.
> To
>
> 1.  Horizontal lines must be wings level and parallel to the flight line.
> On entry vertical lines must be wind corrected to establish a vertical
> track.  The wind corrected attitude of the model must not be changed as 
> the
> stall is approached and any wind drift is not cause for downgrade unless 
> the
> model drifts out of the maneuvering area.
>
>
>
> In the maneuver descriptions under "Figure M with or without Rolls"
>
> Change downgrade 1 from "Model not vertical at start and finish of rolls 
> and
> stall turns" to
>
>
>
> 1.  Horizontal and vertical lines must be flown as described under "Stall
> Turns" in the Judge's Guide above.
>
>
>
> In the maneuver descriptions under "Stall Turns with or without Rolls"
>
> Change downgrade 3 from "Model track not vertical at start and finish of
> rolls and stall turn"  to
>
>
>
> 3.  Horizontal and vertical lines must be flown as described under "Stall
> Turns" in the Judge's Guide above.
>
>
>
>
>
> Here's the logic behind the change:
>
>
>
> Once a crosswind becomes stronger than the speed of the model the model 
> can
> no longer maintain a vertical track even if turned 90 degrees into that
> wind.  Stall turns flown as described in the changes always score better
> with the majority of judges.  This change brings the stall turn in line 
> with
> the spin in allowing some wind drift of the model as it slows and provides 
> a
> much more consistent judging standard.
>
>
>
> Don
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>