[NSRCA-discussion] Snap

[Vicente "Vince" Bortone]

Amen.... 

Vicente "Vince" Bortone 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ed Alt" <ed_alt at hotmail.com> 
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> 
Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 7:33:56 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central 
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap 

 
Don: 
I don't agree with that. You need to see a distinct pitch break and yawing action to accompany the pitch break, otherwise there is no real evidence that autorotation occurred. "Tail coning" alone is not even a reliable indicator of a snap.  You can easily cheat that to sell a "snap".   A snap is a stalled wing, autorotation maneuver. Also, the tendency to downgrade snaps because of any line displacement goes entirely against the physics of what must occur in order for a real snap roll take happen.  I think we should have a rule that most clearly accounts for the physics of what must occur for it to be a real snap, or just take them of sequences entirely.  And of course, educate judges and pilots accordingly.  Also, when you're a judge, don't be afraid to zero or severely downgrade a wiffle snap, or whatever is being presented to you if it's not a real snap. Especially don't be afraid of zeroing snaps when it's a big name trying to sneak a snap cheat in front of you. 

Regards, 
Ed 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Don Ramsey 
To: 'General pattern discussion' 
Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 7:01 AM 
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Snap 




Ok, how about this for the snap?   “If its not a barrel roll and not an axial roll, it’s a snap.” Maybe have the coning of the tail in the description. This eliminates about 90% of the judging differences. 



Don 




From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Bob Richards 
Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 8:09 PM 
To: General pattern discussion 
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] basic judging question (warning 4 letter word) 



I think changing the judging criteria, just for the snap part of the manuever, would suffice. 

--- On Sat, 10/10/09, John Ferrell <jferrell13 at triad.rr.com> wrote: 




? 


I believe " We could fix most of that, by assigning a low K to snap maneuvers" is the only appropriate solution. If you cast them out, it is giving up. 





John Ferrell  W8CCW 
  

No virus found in this incoming message. 
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.9/2427 - Release Date: 10/10/09 06:39:00 




_______________________________________________ 
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/20091011/00fa52e6/attachment.html>