[NSRCA-discussion] How I became an expert Snap Judge (TIC)

Tue Oct 13 06:48:02 AKDT 2009

While speaking with Don Ramsey about the nuances of judging snaps at a recent contest I found that he agreed with my interpretation of the FAI snap rule. The severe downgrade should only be applied if there is no break AND there is no autorotation (this is exactly what the rule says). Basically, lack of a break is not substantial grounds for the severe downgrade in FAI. If the break is not seen and autorotation still occurs at some point during the roll the one point per 15 degree rule applies. Since the snaps happen so fast, for me it's usually not more than 1 or 2 points unless it was blatantly obvious that the plane rotated a while before the snap truly began. It's the same as if you stop the snap before completing the rotation and do an axial roll to finish. This nonsense of people being so quick to apply a severe downgrade has gone too far. One element of a maneuver (because I can't think of any sequence that has just a snap roll) should not ruin a whole flight, or even that one maneuver unless it just wasn't a snap. I like the idea of "if it's not a barrell roll and not an axial roll, it's probably a snap."

Matt
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Vicente "Vince" Bortone 
  To: General pattern discussion 
  Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 5:12 PM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] How I became an expert Snap Judge (TIC)

  I believe that the current downgrade is severe.  AMA 5 points.  FAI 5 or more points if my memory is correct.  

  In local contest I have been using 3 points downgrade.  I know that is wrong but it has been my best way for me to take into account the break issue.  It used to be zero and it was changed to 5 points (IMAC still a 10 points downgrade or nada).  Therefore, Ron is correct.  Probably makes sense to go 2-3 points downgrade if the judge can not see the break before rotation.    

  Vicente "Vince" Bortone

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "John Fuqua" <johnfuqua at embarqmail.com>
  To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
  Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 1:51:00 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] How I became an expert Snap Judge (TIC)

  Ron makes valid observation which I came to many years ago at the TOC when
  Mr. Bill graciously funded for full scale pilots like Patty Wagstaff do demo
  flights to entertain us.   The one thing that I came away with in comparing
  full scale to our airplanes is the speed of the snap/rotation.  In the full
  size aerobatics types that I observed there was plenty of time to see the
  nose pitch and then after somewhat of a hesitation yaw and rotate.  In our
  pattern planes, especially when using a snap switch, it all gets to be a
  blur due to sheer speed.  I have no solution to this issue but to MAKE the
  pilots show a break by having severe downgrades.  Otherwise the concept of a
  snap will be ignored.  Yes it's hard to see which makes it incumbent on the
  pilot to present it to the judges.  

  -----Original Message-----
  From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
  [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of
  ronlock at comcast.net
  Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 1:26 PM
  To: General pattern discussion
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] How I became an expert Snap Judge (TIC)

  Here is a description that shows technically correct snap execution, and
  valid, consistent judging is possible.

  (Half of the District One guy need not read this, they have already heard
  it)   <G>

  At a small airport airshow, one of demos was an in-trail formation of four
  full scale AT-6 Texans.   As each plane got to stage center, it did a single
  positive snap roll. Spectators saw four snap rolls in a row, about 5 seconds
  apart.

  The flight of four went around, and repeated the maneuver.  Some spectators
  are getting bored - even a pattern guy could get bored with a string of 8
  nearly identical maneuvers.   And then, they did it yet again!!

  What's in this for us?   The snap maneuver by each AT-6 appeared to take a
  second or so, from initiation to completion.

  By the time the fourth plane did a snap, you could start seeing....

  -  there is a nose pitch up,  

  -  then a yaw, 

  -  then plane rolled in direction of yaw,

  -  plane returned to straight and level flight.

  By the time the flight came around for another four snaps, you could see
  more details..

  -  there is a nose pitch up,  (somewhat sudden, at least sudden for an AT-6)

  -  then a large amount of yaw, 

  -  then rapid roll in direction of yaw, (rolling faster than it could with
  ailerons) 

  -  plane returned to fairly close straight and level, nose slightly high.

  By the time the flight positioned for yet another four snaps, (Yawn,
  spectators headed for cotton candy) the four distinct elements of the snap
  roll maneuver were easy to see, and there was time to evaluate (judge) each
  element.

  1.    there is a nose pitch up,  (somewhat sudden, at least sudden for an
  AT-6, with little rise in altitude)

  2.   then large amount of yaw, (the yaw proceeds the upcoming roll)

  3.   then autorotation at rate faster than it could do an aileron roll)

  4.   plane returns to level flight track, with nose lowering to level flight
  attitude.

  We can all be expert Snap Roll Judges!   Ahhh, at least for AT-6 snaps.

  What I take from all of this-

  The problem is not snap descriptions.   It's the application of them;
  observation, discrimination and judging of elements in the split second
  observation time we have.  Is the task beyond reasonable expectations of
  most of us as a judging community?   I suppose we will continue work started
  over 10 years ago to improve in these areas.

  In the meantime, shall we reduce the impact of inconsistent judging of snaps
  by limiting the downgrade of the snap portion of a maneuver to say..two
  points2?

  Ron Lockhart

  _______________________________________________
  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/20091013/9e8676bc/attachment.html>