[NSRCA-discussion] Suggested New Snap Roll(BrakeRoll)Description

Fri Oct 16 10:30:32 AKDT 2009

I wasn't getting a lot of offset, mostly heading change flying the advanced avalanche. I usually needed momentary full opposite rudder. Adding elevator and reducing rudder helped. Maybe I wasn't doing something right. Anyway they won't let me fly advanced any more.
Where I am getting a problem now is in the 1 1/2 45 down snap, that extra half rotation seams to point the airplane off line and if the finish is downwind it can get ugly. It all happens real fast especially if the speed is up a little. In any case I'm getting more comfortable with it.
Jim Hiller

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Vicente "Vince" Bortone
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 9:30 AM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Suggested New Snap Roll(BrakeRoll)Description

Isn't better to snap into the wind to avoid displacement when there is cross wind (almost always in contests)?  

Vicente "Vince" Bortone

----- Original Message -----
From: "J N Hiller" <jnhiller at earthlink.net>
To: jpavlick at idseng.com, "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 11:24:00 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Suggested New Snap Roll(BrakeRoll)Description
I found that the direction of the snap was better one way over the other also. 
That "what ever works" part is what we need to remember when writing rules and quit trying to include how to fly the airplane in the maneuver description.
Jim Hiller

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of John Pavlick
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 9:01 AM
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Suggested New Snap Roll(BrakeRoll)Description

I do positive snaps on the Avalanche and I got a few 9's at the NAT's so apparently it doesn't pinch it too much. LOL

I'm working on practicing it both ways to see what looks better. I guess it depends on the airplane. Some just don't like to do negative snaps and others will really mess up the loop geometry if you do a positive snap. Like everything else, whatever works for you is best.

It's snowing here too. :)

John Pavlick

--- On Fri, 10/16/09, frank <frankjuliei at comcast.net> wrote:

From: frank <frankjuliei at comcast.net>
Subject: RE: [NSRCA-discussion] Suggested New Snap Roll (BrakeRoll)Description
To: jpavlick at idseng.com, "'General pattern discussion'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Friday, October 16, 2009, 11:25 AM
Woudn’t that pinch the loop ?  For the sake of my example,   let’s use a  positive snap.  Don’t know if my point about judging  this maneuver is clear.  Flying weather is ,well, not the best ( 35 degrees and flurries) so I’m rehearsing with a stick plane.LOL. 
F.

  _____  

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of John Pavlick
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 11:04 AM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Suggested New Snap Roll (BrakeRoll)Description

Frank,
 In the Advanced Avalanche you don't have to push (negative snap) - you can pull if you prefer. 

John Pavlick

--- On Fri, 10/16/09, frank <frankjuliei at comcast.net> wrote:

From: frank <frankjuliei at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Suggested New Snap Roll (Brake Roll)Description
To: "' General pattern discussion '" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Friday, October 16, 2009, 10:45 AM
 In the current Master’s sequence, the Avalanche with 1 ½  snap (from the bottom)-  The model is inverted and flies the first half of the outside loop.  The aircraft is  supposed to pitch up (pull) for the break, then perform the 1 ½  snap roll.  In the Advanced Sequence  Avalanche with a single  snap , the aircraft is  inverted at the top, but the pilot has to pitch (push)  before  the roll. In both situations, it seems likely  that  judges will have to look hard to see the break because of the altitude/location/climb of the model, no?. 

Frank

  _____  

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of rcmaster199 at aol.com
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 9:43 AM
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Suggested New Snap Roll (Brake Roll)Description

Jerry Budd explained pretty well the fact that pattern planes are so lightly loaded that a large amount of force in pitch must exist to cause a stall. Stalls, accelerated and/or assymetric, I don't think are what happens in a pattern snap.

I believe an assymetry in lift does however. Think of the the wing as two halves (fancy that) where one sides lifts the equivalent of its whole area and the other side only a small percentage. Neither panel is stalled per se....one simply lifts less than the other. Yaw will induce the differential lift once the wing has been loaded in pitch. Assymetric lift will cause the wing to autorotate in roll axis.....we accelerate that autorotation with ailerons (duh!!). Some planes will snap with yaw command alone once pitch loading has happened. Most pattern planes will not because, as Jerry pointed out, it doesn't take a whole lot of lift to keep a pattern plane flying

My 2c

MattK

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin X. Moleski, SJ < moleski at canisius.edu >
To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Fri, Oct 16, 2009 6:43 am
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Suggested New Snap Roll (Brake Roll) Description
Keith Black wrote: 
> How about this definition: 

> 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 maneuver ... 

That what Vicente (and others) are arguing is a bad 
definition for our purposes. 

I agree with those who want to remove all references to 
stalling from the definition of the maneuver. 

The model must depart (break away) from all three 
axes. Saying that the first departure must be separated 
from the other two does not make good sense to me. 

Demonstrating the kind of "stall" that leads to a 
spin entry is very different from the assymetric stall 
required for autorotation--at least in my own understanding 
of what accelerated stalls are like. 

  Marty 
_______________________________________________ 
NSRCA-discussion mailing list 
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc805.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>  
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion 

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <http://us.mc805.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@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/20091016/74912240/attachment.html>