[NSRCA-discussion] [F3A-Discussion] snaps
Phil Spelt
chuenkan at comcast.net
Mon Jul 5 12:24:48 AKDT 2010
I don't know where you guys shop, but here in Oak
Ridge, TN, mine only cost $.089, plus TN sales
tax and three Kellog's box tops. For an extra
dime, I got a secret decoder ring, too...
At 04:19 PM 7/5/2010, you wrote:
>Dave,
>
>Mine only cost 10 million... I negotiated ;)
>
>Regards,
>Jason
><http://www.jshulman.weebly.com/>www.jshulman.weebly.com/
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:DaveL322 at comcast.net>Dave
>To: <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>'General pattern discussion'
>Sent: Monday, July 05, 2010 4:12 PM
>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] [F3A-Discussion] snaps
>
>Ken,
>
>In theory
..
>
>IF the rotation in pitch is rapid enough, the
>wing can be forced to stall before the plane
>measurably departs from the flight path
.and
>then the rudder is applied to control the
>direction of the snap
..which produces biased
>lift causing rotation in roll axis (even a
>stalled wing produces some lift). Most of our
>pattern models do not snap well without aileron
>(which further biases the lift).
>
>I think most of us read the post on the NSRCA
>list by Jerry Budd which concluded the typical
>modern pattern plane is not capable of snaps as
>described in the rules
.however
the rules are
>what they are
..and making a maneuver look as
>the rules describe is what the event is about.
>
>Completely different discussion point –
>A judge observes a square loop with 4 equal
>length sides, 4 equal radii corners, and no
>deviations in distance from the
>flightline. Judge scores a 10. In actuality, a
>$14 million GPS system shows the square had 4
>different radii, and was wider than
>tall. Nothing changes
..the judge saw a 10 per
>the rulebook
and that is all that matters. The
>pilots that perform maneuvers that appear to be
>error free as described by the book should get a
>10
..whether the maneuver is actually correct is another matter.
>
>Regards,
>
>Dave
>
>
>----------
>From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Ken Thompson
>Sent: Monday, July 05, 2010 3:57 PM
>To: General pattern discussion
>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] [F3A-Discussion] snaps
>
>Dave et all,
>
>I am having a bit of trouble understanding how a
>plane in forward motion can with 100% certainty
>rotate on it's CG...when the tail drops or
>raises, depending on Pos or Neg snap, the nose
>goes the opposite direction. I just don't see
>how you can stop the CG from moving at all, even
>the slightest bit would be a downgrade.
>
>What I think would be very cool is. we get a vid
>of what we all would consider as perfect a snap
>as we've ever seen and generate a line as an
>overlay to represent the track...extend that
>line forward of the planes position, then we
>will be able to see if there is an actual deviation of flight track or path...
>
>I think I'm living in a dream world...LOL!
>
>Ken
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:DaveL322 at comcast.net>Dave
>To: <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>'General pattern discussion'
>Sent: Monday, July 05, 2010 1:47 PM
>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] [F3A-Discussion] snaps
>
>“
.break and separation from the flight path
..”
>
>and
>
>“
.constant flight path through the manoeuvre
”
>
>Seems to me that the definition is
>contradictory. A break could occur in the sense
>that there is a deviation between attitude and
>track, but “separation from the flight path” and
>“constant flight path” are contradictory. I
>would hope it is clear enough that snaps absent
>of both pitch and yaw must be downgraded.
>
>I would point out that a snap that finishes on
>the same heading, but shows a minor line
>displacement has very little effect on the
>geometry of the maneuver. Looking at a straight
>line of 400’
a snap in the middle of the line
>would have to displace 50 feet (8 wingspans)
>vertically or horizontally to change the line
>(from start to finish) by 15 degrees (1
>point). I see no other guidance in the rulebook
>applicable to how a line displacement should be downgraded.
>
>Regards,
>
>Dave
>
>
>
>----------
>From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Dr Mike
>Sent: Monday, July 05, 2010 11:28 AM
>To: 'General pattern discussion'
>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] [F3A-Discussion] snaps
>
>Good point, thanks Troy.
>
>From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Troy Newman
>Sent: Monday, July 05, 2010 10:06 AM
>To: General pattern discussion
>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] [F3A-Discussion] snaps
>
>Ken,
>
>It still has to stay on flight path
>
>“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.”
>
>
>As Matt suggested this is not a discussion on we
>think it should be, rather it is how the rule is written
>
>Troy
>
>
>From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Ken Thompson
>Sent: Monday, July 05, 2010 7:13 AM
>To: General pattern discussion
>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] [F3A-Discussion] snaps
>
>Glad for that description...the way I originally
>understood it the plane was not supposed to
>deviate from the flight path...always said that was impossible...
>
>Ken
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:drmikedds at sbcglobal.net>Dr Mike
>To: <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>'General pattern discussion'
>Sent: Monday, July 05, 2010 7:04 AM
>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] [F3A-Discussion] snaps
>
>Yes that is correct, thanks Matt.
>Mike
>
>From:
><mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]
> On Behalf Of <mailto:rcmaster199 at aol.com>rcmaster199 at aol.com
>Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 6:22 PM
>To:
><mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org;
><mailto:f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us>f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us
>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] [F3A-Discussion] snaps
>
>The F3A maneuver description may be inadequate
>and/or inaccurate, however that doesn't much
>matter for the judge who has the ardeous task of
>deciphering the snap. The description stands as
>is for this cycle and that's how the World's
>judges will judge them to the best of their
>ability next year. I urge all judges that judge
>F3A Semis and Finals at this year's Nats/Team
>Selection contest to take heed of FAI
>description (not AMA) and judge accordingly.
>
>In essence, Snaps should not zeroe'd as easily
>as they once were; far cry from where it was
>just a couple years ago. I believe that's the
>main reason the rule was written as indicated.
>
>Mike's point I think deals with bringing the
>Snap back out of hibernation such that folks get
>a chance to re-read it and re-hash just in time
>for the Team Selection; fresh in one's mind so to speak
>
>Matt K
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Woodward, Jim R (US SSA) <jim.woodward at baesystems.com>
>To: 'f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us'
><f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us>;
>'nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org' <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>Sent: Sun, Jul 4, 2010 4:27 pm
>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] [F3A-Discussion] snaps
>Mike, I'm replying from a blackberry without the
>benefit of the rulebook in front of me. I
>thought these were called "Flick Rolls" now? I
>don't think any of us are equipped in the
>context of judging a 0.5 second manuever to
>determine if is "stalled" or "unstalled." I
>think Jerry Budd posted on the nsrca list the
>last dissertation on snaps, which from memory,
>pretty much proved the planes are not stalled.
>
>Given you posted this, what do you want to see happen? Thx Jim W.
>
>
>----------
>From:
><mailto:f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us>f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us
><<mailto:f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us>f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us>
>
>To: 'General pattern discussion'
><<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>;
><mailto:f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us>f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us
><<mailto:f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us>f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us>
>Sent: Sun Jul 04 17:11:46 2010
>Subject: [F3A-Discussion] snaps
>Given the abundance of snap maneuvers(7
>maneuvers, 9 snaps) in the F-11 pattern, I feel
>compelled to give the exact description via the F3A rulebook:
>
>A snap-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 I a stalled condition throughout
>the maneuver. If the stall/break does not occur
>and the model aircraft barrel-rolls 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
>competitors 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.
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>NSRCA-discussion mailing list
><mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>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
>
>
>----------
>_______________________________________________
>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
-->There are only two types of aircraft -- fighters and targets.
Phil Spelt, Past President, Knox County Radio Control Society, Inc.
URL: http://www.kcrctn.com
AMA--1294, Scientific Leader Member SPA--177, Board Member
My URL: http://mywebpages.comcast.net/~chuenkan/
(865) 435-1476 v (865) 604-0541 c
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20100705/620a6a4a/attachment.html>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list