[NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences

Mon Aug 25 10:52:36 AKDT 2014

As some who has competed in both IMAC and pattern with the same plane (Venus 120 glow) in the beginning classes I can tell you it's basically the same. Yes in IMAC there is a humpty and a 1 1/2 spin. But I have the same issues with these maneuvers as I do in pattern. Unequal lines between half rolls coming down from humpty. Under or over rotating spins, etc. The main difference is not a well defined "box" landings and take offs not judged, and flying the sequence twice per round. Overall I've found the IMAC guys to be just as helpful and welcoming. And it's a big planes game.  But I finished higher than several competitors with a 1/4 scale 50cc. Precision is precision.

> On Aug 25, 2014, at 11:38 AM, John Pavlick via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
> 
> Lucky,
> No one says you HAVE to start in Sportsman. Ed Alt came to Pattern from IMAC and ”started”  in Advanced.
>  
> FYI – Sportsman, at least at one point, was not “technically” even an official Pattern class – it was a created as a provisional class to get sport pilots involved in Pattern. My experience has shown me that here in the Northeast (where the flying season is somewhat limited time-wise) there are not very many “sport” pilots who can even fly a complete Pattern sequence in the box right from the start. Add snaps and spins and you’re just looking to turn people away. If they’re at that level I just tell them to start in Intermediate or Advanced and see how it goes from there.
>  
> John Pavlick
> Cell: 203-417-4971
>  
> <image001.png>
> Integrated Development Services
>  
> From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of lucky macy via NSRCA-discussion
> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 3:25 PM
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences
>  
> I actually wouldn't mind if the lower classes could be made 'funner' and more challenging.  I don't know why spins and snaps can't be attempted in lower classes than they currently are.  Spins and snaps are at the lower level IMAC.  If someone doesn't like to compete in IMAC, it's in spite of the fun knows, not because of them.
>  
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 11:59:37 -0400
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences
> From: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> 
> Basically, there has been quite a bit of deviation from the tradition here that goes way back when performance was an issue and certain maneuvers were just done a certain direction because of that. Rolling maneuvers were always downwind, square loops for example upwind, top hat upwind, reverse Cuban 8s upwind, Cuban 8s downwind, triangle loops downwind, square horizontal eight downwind, center stalls and spins having turnaround maneuvers after them to allow the pilot to bring the aircraft in or out because of wind drift while in the stalled condition, etc. 
>  
> I think what has really brought about this deviation from the norm  significantly more this time around is the design of   recent FAI sequences which have deviated a lot from what was done in the past.
>  
> Maybe we need to add more design parameters and boundaries to the sequence guide spelling out direction of flight of certain classes of maneuvers  for at least through Intermediate and to some extent Advanced and a little bit in Masters. I guess you could peg the blame on me for missing this when I put the original guidelines together with the committee at that time.  We do have many of the parameters which help in designing a good sequence, but I guess we may need a few more.
>  
> It is probably one of the reasons why there is such heated discussion on the proposed sequences and that is partially due to the experience of the current group of people on the sequence committee which is no fault of their own. The previous committees had the advantage of having a few guys who had many many years of involvement in past committees and just maybe they should have been at the very least kept on in an advisory role. Hindsight I guess.
>  
> No one is really  to blame here. If anything it should be a learning experience and  maybe some new parameters and boundaries need to be added to the guideline design criteria for each class.
> To: jpavlick at idseng.com; nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 06:56:30 -0400
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences
> From: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> 
> Yes, you’re correct.  And as I recall, that sequence was described as being the worse sequence ever developed by one of the current committee members.  I assume because maneuvers were flown in the wrong direction (Loop from top (u), Top Hat (d), Double I (d), downwind Rev Shark’s Tooth?)  Somewhere it must be written that rolling maneuvers are always flown downwind but I can’t seem find it.
>  
> I was asking because the sequence building module I have in the scoring app does define direction for the center maneuvers and these two kicked out as suspect.  I guess I just went too far with the logic.   
>  
>  
> From: John Pavlick [mailto:jpavlick26 at att.net] 
> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:40 AM
> To: 'Scott Smith'; 'General pattern discussion'
> Subject: RE: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences
>  
> Scott – wasn’t the Outside loop from the top maneuver back in the “old” 402 sequence (around 2006) done as an “upwind” maneuver? I can’t find any of my old call sheets but I think it was.
>  
> John Pavlick
> Cell: 203-417-4971
>  
> <image001.png>
> Integrated Development Services
>  
> From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Scott Smith via NSRCA-discussion
> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 4:36 PM
> To: 'General pattern discussion'
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences
>  
> A couple questions on the intermediate sequence:
>  
> Maneuver 6 Outside loop from the top (U) – Would that not typically be considered a downwind maneuver?
>  
> And maneuver 12 Square Loop (D) - Would that not typically be considered an upwind maneuver?
>  
>  
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________ 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/20140825/f3e63365/attachment.html>