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

[Bill Glaze]

Superb question.  Bill
----- 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 3:14 PM
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