[NSRCA-discussion] [F3A-Discussion] snaps

Tue Jul 6 09:22:44 AKDT 2010

I agree.  Based on that thinking, Lance van Nostrand has tried to bring into the rule book, that which is actually happening with the airplane, and making it into a rule.  Good idea.
I have spent a lot of hours watching "snap rolls" in slow motion, (actually, various speeds of slowed real-time flying) and what I have seen is totally enlightening.  It was obvious that what Jerry Budd (reinforced by Ron van Putte)  said, was absolutely true.  I didn't see a single "snap roll" that satisfied the rule book as being legal; every one of them would merit a zero, because of lack of one or more elements, if you took the rule book verbatim.
I also found that much of the"coning" that we look for, is, in MANY cases, an optical illusion caused by very careful choice of paint configuration.  On first glance, it appears that coning takes place.  By slow motion, it shows that there is very little coning; in many cases, no actual coning.  However, playing the maneuver in real-time, it appears that coning is occurring.
The above is just what I've observed.

Bill Glaze
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Vicente "Vince" Bortone 
  To: General pattern discussion 
  Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 10:35 AM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] [F3A-Discussion] snaps

  Bill,

  Base on my experience that is very easy to judge.  Let's called when you go from "flick roll" or "autorotacion" condition to pure roll rotation.  Let's forget about stalled or unstalled terms.  Looks like those terms need to be erased from the snap description.  

  We still have the break in pitch  requirement before the snap that this is the one that is difficult to judge and perform.  If the pilot try to do it will loose more points than just to the "flick roll" because in general most of us are not downgrading this element of the snap roll.   

  Vicente "Vince" Bortone

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Bill Glaze" <billglaze at bellsouth.net>
  To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
  Sent: Tuesday, July 6, 2010 7:30:57 AM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] [F3A-Discussion] snaps

  How can it return to an unstalled condition, when it was never stalled (per Jerry Budd) in the first palce?
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Dr Mike 
    To: 'General pattern discussion' 
    Sent: Monday, July 05, 2010 8:04 AM
    Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] [F3A-Discussion] snaps

    Yes that is correct, thanks Matt.

    Mike 

    From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of rcmaster199 at aol.com
    Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 6:22 PM
    To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org; 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: f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us <f3a-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us> 
    To: 'General pattern discussion' <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>; 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 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20100706/40ba9b99/attachment.html>