[NSRCA-discussion] Masters Seq

[rcmaster199 at aol.com]

Jim,

Yes both are needed. 

You may try increasing roll rate for both the 3 rolls opposite and the vertical.  The seemingly simple 3 rolls opposite should be difficult to do well. On the other hand, a faster vertical roll is trully trivial matter; you have to keep the plane at a reasonable altitude to do the Rev Cuban at a reasonable altitude and keep it sized consistent with the rest of the maneuvers. The flying I've witnessed so far this season shows me that there's much room for improvement

regards,
MattK






-----Original Message-----
From: J N Hiller <jnhiller at earthlink.net>
To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Thu, May 5, 2011 12:11 am
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Seq


Most to you know this already but maneuvers 4, 5 & 6 are more crunched than
pparent with non-obvious downgrade potential.
Driving a long full roll vertical line in the half square loop (#5)
ollowing 3 rolls reversed (#4) could easily exceed 2 x horizontal bottom
ine. The top line could also be chopped entering a large reverse cuban
ight (#6).
o add to the uncertainty its hard to distinguish between the maneuver
eparation line and horizontal portions of the half square loop. Do we need
oth?
The 2-point half square (#17) isn't an issue due to the preceding and
ollowing maneuvers finishing and starting near center.
I'm thinking I may need to increase roll rate a little to keep the height in
heck.
aving fun now.
im


______________________________________________
SRCA-discussion mailing list
SRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
ttp://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20110505/62750615/attachment.html>