[NSRCA-discussion] Judging question for the experts

[James Oddino]

I thought you guys drank Southern Comfort?

Jim O


On Feb 26, 2013, at 5:48 PM, Ronald Van Putte wrote:

> Well, it's hardly EVER flying time at 7:32 P.M.  I am sipping my second beer and about to crack another.
> 
> Ron
> 
> On Feb 26, 2013, at 7:32 PM, Jon Lowe wrote:
> 
>> For you REALLY old farts, (as opposed to us much younger old farts), "+1" means "I agree".
>>  
>> And Ron, I thought it was always sunny in FL. Why aren't you flying, or getting a new airplane ready to fly?
>> Jon
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ronald Van Putte <vanputter at gmail.com>
>> To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> Sent: Tue, Feb 26, 2013 7:21 pm
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging question for the experts
>> 
>> +1 what?  
>> 
>> +1 db is a lot.  
>> 
>> +1 on a 10 scale is still pretty big
>> 
>> Enquiring minds (who have nothing else to do) want to know.
>> 
>> Ron
>> 
>> On Feb 26, 2013, at 7:15 PM, Dave Lockhart wrote:
>> 
>>> +1
>>>  
>>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of flyintexan at att.net
>>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 8:24 AM
>>> To: General pattern discussion
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging question for the experts
>>>  
>>> How soon before we hire figure skating judges?
>>> 
>>> -Mark
>>> Sent from my phone.
>>> ----- Reply message -----
>>> From: "Andre Bouchard" <txf3a at entouch.net>
>>> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging question for the experts
>>> Date: Sun, Feb 24, 2013 11:14 PM
>>>  
>>> Don,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> This question of course relates to the Annex 5B – F3 R/C Aerobatic Power Model Aircraft Manoeuvre Execution Guide, Section 5B.9...
>>> 5B.9 SMOOTHNESS AND GRACEFULNESS OF THE MANOEUVRE
>>> "Concerns the harmonic appearance of an entire manoeuvre. Ie maintaining a constant flight speed throughout the various manoeuvre components, like in climbing and descending sections contributes significantly to smoothness and gracefulness. Radii performed very tight or very loose, though being of equal size within one manoeuvre may be subject for downgrading Smoothness and Gracefulness."
>>> If the radii are very abrupt the maneuver would not be "smooth and graceful."  Similarly, if the radii are very loose the maneuver elements would likely not be well defined (not graceful?).  I think "very" is the key word - beyond expectation, not normally seen, etc.  Extending that thought, I think this would be a uncommon downgrade.
>>> Stating the obvious here...there are no technical criteria for what constitutes "very tight or very loose" radii.  The criteria are subjective.
>>> Regards,
>>> Andre Bouchard
>>>  
>>>  
>>> 
>>> On Feb 24, 2013, at 9:13 PM, tocdon at netscape.net wrote:
>>> A question on radius judging.  Tight radius (or loose radius) manevuer segments are subject to downgrade in FAI.  What constitutes a tight radius?  Physically tight (in feet, for example), or tight (fast speed through the radius giving the impression that the plane is pulling excessive g's, however that is interpreted).   A slow flying radius could be extremely tight, for example the last radius at the bottom of the triangle loop (135 degree pull) or figure Z.
>>> Best regards,
>>> Don
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130227/5f076fd3/attachment.html>