[NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed Advanced maneuvers

[Del R]

Not meaning this comment to attack or to be condescending to anyone but, after many years of competing with both outdated equipment and modern current equipment the differences are DRAMATIC.  Now with that being said everyone average may be different but when more complex maneuvers are added to the schedule you need to have the equipment that will fly it competently. If you are campaigning a 70 inches 6# plane and flying masters, I defy the best at the contest to beat someone in the master or FAI class with that plane if there are equally competent pilots.. equipment does matter of course..  You need light planes and power to do many of the maneuvers. If you want them done well you have to be practiced and have adequate equipment.. A friend for years campaigned less than cutting edge equipment and didn't realize how badly he was beating himself that no amount of practice would overcome.. Then one day he flew a currently campaigned model and found out the complication factor dropped by a factor of 2 or 3.. Why.. The plane was designed for flying those maneuvers and presenting them well with less input from the pilot.. Now his workload dropped dramatically and he could stay ahead of the model and make corrections 3 times easier because the workload was much less.. So if you believe the lies that campaigning a lesser model still makes you competitive you really need to put your money where your mouth is.  
 
Please do not take this as a personal attack on you Chuck.. My reply to this thread is not directed at you..  There are more than a couple who have made similar claims over the years and that lie is accepted by pilots who don't know any better and believe what higher class competitors share with them.. Yes you can still fly an Ugly stick in the beginning class and do well if you are a good pilot and know how to present the maneuvers.. But realize if someone shows up with a full blown 2 meter pattern ship adequately powered but don't know how to present the maneuvers the stick will win.. On the other hand a stick will have a big disadvantage in the wind and against a skillful pilot.  
 
So yes Chuck you are correct in used equipment from top pilots is normally better than average. It is a competitive sport and by its very nature if you want to be equally competitive you have to better than average equipment if your practice window is limited d/t time constraints,weather, etc. you want to be as competitive as your budget can accommodate. 
 
    Del 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Chuck Hochhalter via NSRCA-discussion 
  To: Gary Switala ; General pattern discussion 
  Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 9:20 AM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed Advanced maneuvers


  I disagree with average not being good enough to compete with. I have flown and competed successfully with avg equipment.


  One can also purchased very good used equipment from top pilots that has "better than avg" stuff in it often.


  Chuck

  Sent from my iPhone

  On Jul 27, 2014, at 6:39 PM, Gary Switala via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:






        My comments on the new  Advance schedule. I have 20 + flights on it with both other pattern guys and club members observing. The comments of the club members are:  “Why is everything upside down?“; “ makes no sense to me“; from the pattern guys  “ugly, damn ugly”;  and “WTF.”  From the flights I have put in I see that it’s not for the average Advanced flyer with an average plane with an average motor with an average battery set and with an average ESC . So looks like more $$$$ needs to be spent.  Some of the maneuvers are bad enough, but the way they are arranged the true difficulty in their relationship to proceeding and succeeding maneuvers are not taken into account.  As in # 5 to #6 and #9 to #10 to #11. I also do not understand why the figure 9 is only a K Factor of 1?? And why is the Shark’s tooth given the same K as the one we’re doing now. The new proposed one is an entirely different maneuver and considerably more difficult as proposed.  This is a descending maneuver at 45 degs. doing  2/2 reverse rolls  trying to slow the model down and hold a straight line and have enough speed and power to get through the outside Avalanche.  I also take exception with the way the Hourglass has been butchered. It would make more sense replacing it with the Standing Eight starting in the center with options as it would add some of the missing gracefulness needed.



    Caution



    _______________________________________________
    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/20140728/5fc6fab6/attachment.html>