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

Tue Oct 13 18:06:15 AKDT 2009

Matt, 

I got a question.  I assume that the snap was present (no barrel or axial rolls).  What is the downgrade using the current FAI rule when yaw break was evident as you described?  

Vicente "Vince" Bortone 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: rcmaster199@ aol .com 
To: nsrca -discussion at lists. nsrca .org 
Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 8:24:03 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central 
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] How I became an expert Snap Judge (TIC) 

Hmmmmm ! 

Don you told me that before. "If it's not a barrel and not an axial, it's a snap" 

Hell what about when they lead the sucker with rudder? Don't laugh....I've sat the chair in the F3A Nats Final and had finalists do that in front of me. I guarantee that the pilots didn't score zeroes from all the judges. 

Damn....and I promised myself not to get into this again for the upteenth time. Where's RVP with that downwind turn. Or was it downhill turn with the lights off? 

MattK 

-----Original Message----- 
From: Don Ramsey <don. ramsey @ suddenlink .net> 
To: 'General pattern discussion' < nsrca -discussion at lists. nsrca .org> 
Sent: Tue, Oct 13, 2009 1:23 pm 
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] How I became an expert Snap Judge (TIC) 

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 ).” 0A 

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 i s 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 ru in 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 
posit ive 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 the20flight 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 down grade 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 20 
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 
_______________________________________________ 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/20091014/e16953ad/attachment.html>