[NSRCA-discussion] How I became an expert Snap Judge (TIC)
John Gayer
jgghome at comcast.net
Tue Oct 13 12:20:31 AKDT 2009
What are you supposed to "jab" when vertical? and why? There's no load
on wings or fuselage.
The whole concept of jabbing elevator or rudder or ? to show a "pitch
break" reminds me of the old cheat of spin entry by "jabbing" down
elevator to show a stall.
John
Woodward, Jim (US SSA) wrote:
>
> Mark – in that case you are supposed to “jab” the rudder to show a
> pitch break in the horizontal plane.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Atwood, Mark
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 13, 2009 3:28 PM
> *To:* General pattern discussion
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] How I became an expert Snap Judge (TIC)
>
>
>
> Hate to jump into this…but does that mean that by definition the Snap
> from knife edge starts at a 5 because there is NO way to see the pitch
> break??? Come on…
>
>
>
> If do, we got a lot of gravy scores this year. Although…if we all
> started at 5…that would just lower the value of that maneuver which is
> what some were going for in this discussion. Maybe you are on to
> something J
>
>
>
> *Mark Atwood*
> */Paragon Consulting/*
> office ~ 440-684-3101 ext. 102
>
> _mark.atwood at paragon-inc.com_
>
> * *
>
> *IT Solution Providers: Custom Software Development. Staff
> Augmentation. *
>
>
>
> *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Vicente "Vince" Bortone
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 13, 2009 3:35 PM
> *To:* General pattern discussion
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] How I became an expert Snap Judge (TIC)
>
>
>
> Verne,
>
>
>
> Following AMA description: if we don't see the break is 5 points
> downgrade. That is 1/2 of the snap roll maneuver. Therefore, if
> we see the snap roll but don't see the break the judge has the right
> to write down 5 points score assuming that all other components are
> perfect. Therefore, base on the rule book the snap roll without a
> break has a value of 5 points.
>
> Vicente "Vince" Bortone
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: verne at twmi.rr.com
> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Cc: "Don Ramsey" <don.ramsey at suddenlink.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 2:14:02 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] How I became an expert Snap Judge (TIC)
>
> Is there anybody involved in this discussion that honestly can't
> recognize a snap when they see one? I'm just asking.....
>
> Verne
>
>
> ---- Don Ramsey <don.ramsey at suddenlink.net> wrote:
> > Vince,
> >
> > What about the next sentence in the FAI definition, “If the
> stall/break does not occur and the model aircraft barrel rolls
> > around, the manoeuvre must be severely downgraded (more than 5 points).”
> >
> > How about if the break does not show and the model does NOT barrel
> roll around. Do you still downgrade by 5 or more points? I don’t
> know what the intent of the rule was but I can tell you for a fact
> that the judges that only score FAI in Europe do not downgrade it by 5
> or more points. I believe they use the “If it’s not a barrel and not
> an axial roll then it’s probably a snap, so judge it that way” because
> they have been instructed in the past to do it that way.
> >
> > Don
> >
> >
> > rom: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Vicente
> "Vince" Bortone
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 12:10 PM
> > To: General pattern discussion
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] How I became an expert Snap Judge (TIC)
> >
> > Matt,
> >
> > I am copying the snap description from the current FAI and AMA
> manuals. I don't see the AND you mention in the FAI rule book.
> > See the important portion in bold. I see that the AMA description is
> better in this respect. You are correct in regard the downgrade in
> FAI. 5 or more points if you don't see the break and the model barrel
> rolls. Therefore, what is the downgrade in FAI if the judge does not
> see the break and there is autorotation? I will say 5 points since it
> says 5 or more points if the model barrel rolls. Again, it appears
> that AMA down grad descriptions are better.
> >
> > FAI:
> > SNAP-ROLLS
> > A snap-roll (or flick roll/rudder roll) is a rapid autorotative roll
> where the model aircraft is in a stalled
> > attitude, with a continuous high angle of attack
> > Snap-rolls have the same judging criteria as axial rolls as far as
> start and stop of the rotation, and
> > constant flight path through the manoeuvre is concerned.
> > At the start of a snap-roll, the fuselage attitude must show a
> definite break and separation from the
> > flight path, before the rotation is started, since the model aircraft
> is supposed to be in a stalled
> > condition throughout the manoeuvre, If the stall/break does not occur
> and the model aircraft barrelrolls
> > around, the manoeuvre must be severely downgraded (more than 5
> points). Similarly, axial
> > rolls disguised as snap-rolls must be severely downgraded (more than
> 5 points).
> > Snap-rolls can be flown both positive and negative, and the same
> criteria apply. The attitude
> > (positive or negative) is at the competitor’s discretion. If the
> model aircraft returns to an unstalled
> > condition during the snap-roll, the manoeuvre is severely downgraded
> using the 1 point/15 degree
> > rule.
> >
> > AMA:
> > Snaps: A Snap roll is a simultaneous, rapid autorotation in the
> pitch, yaw and roll axes of flight in a stalled wing attitude. The
> following criteria apply:
> > 1. Since the maneuver is defined as a stalled maneuver, initiated by
> a stall of the wing induced by a rapid change in pitch attitude, the
> nose of the fuselage must show a definite break in pitch attitude from
> the flight path in the direction of the snap (positive or negative)
> while the track closely maintains the flight path. The lack of a
> discernable pitch break is downgraded by 5 points. Large deviations
> from the flight path, indicative of a delayed stall, are to be
> downgraded using the 1 point per 15-degree rule for each axis of the
> excursion before stall. For example, it the model pitches 15 degrees
> nose up and the wings rotate 15 degrees before the stall, the maneuver
> should be downgraded 1 point for pitch and 1 point for roll.
> > 2. The track visualized as the path of the Center of Gravity (CG)
> should closely follow the geometric flight path of the maneuver while
> the nose and tail auto rotate through opposite helical arcs around the
> flight path. Lack of these helical arcs (or coning) is indicative of
> an axial roll and is scored zero.
> > 3. If a stall does not occur and the model barrel rolls, the score is
> zero. A barrel roll can be identified when the CG, the nose, and tails
> scribe the same helical path through the required rotation of the
> maneuver
> > 4. Snap rolls have the same judging criteria as axial rolls as far as
> start and stop of rotation, constant flight path through the maneuver
> and centering on lines.
> > 5. If the model returns to an unstalled condition during the
> maneuver, such that the autorotation is not visible and the model
> rolls or barrel rolls to complete the maneuver, it would be downgraded
> using the 1 point per 15 degree rule.
> > 6. Airspeed is not a criteria which should be used to judge this
> maneuver. The wing of the model is stalled during this maneuver;
> therefore a significant decrease in speed may occur and is not a cause
> for downgrade.
> >
> >
> > Vicente "Vince" Bortone
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Matthew Frederick" <mjfrederick at cox.net>
> > To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 9:47:30 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] How I became an expert Snap Judge (TIC)
> >
> > ?
> > 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 <mailto:vicenterc at comcast.net> "Vince" Bortone
> > To: General pattern discussion
> <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> > 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________ NSRCA-discussion
> mailing list NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.9/2428 - Release Date:
> 10/13/09 06:35:00
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>
> Internal Virus Database is out of date.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.420 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2415 - Release Date:
> 10/05/09 06:19:00
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20091013/7b2c5a9f/attachment.html>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list