[NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed Advanced maneuvers

Tue Jul 29 09:51:00 AKDT 2014

Right on!
Jim

From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of John Ford via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2014 4:47 AM
To: Chuck Hochhalter; General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed Advanced maneuvers

I would agree with Chuck, especially on the "know your plane" part. 

So much of the coaching I've given to pattern fliers over the years involves
flying the plane intensely.which means over and over again.with the vast
majority of flights in a given month on the pattern plane. It really is a
discipline sport and not much of it can be "part-time".  Often, I will spend
whole weekends just flying past myself doing rolls, knife-edge, loops,
snaps, or verticals.just to remind myself how the plane handles.it's amazing
how we forget stuff or teach ourselves bad habits by flying only the
straight pattern at contests. 

I know a few good pilots that bring four planes to the field and fly the
pattern plane only one flight at the end of the day when the wind dies, and
then say that they aren't attending the next pattern contest AT THEIR FIELD
because "patterns are way too difficult". 

I know a gentleman who once showed up at the field only three years ago,
with a old beat-up wrinkled Focus running a brown-tarnished OS 2-stroke
under a cracked cowling. He paid only a few hundred for the package, but he
so much wanted to win a contest that he flew the heck outta that plane, and
flew nothing else. We coached him, helped him set up his plane, and guess
what.he placed and then won a contest. He wasn't ashamed of his plane, and
he relied on himself.not on the plane.to win.

I'm sorry, but yes, I've seen lots of people buy 70- or 110-sized pattern
planes "because they are cheaper", but I seldom remember seeing anyone who
showed up at a contest saying that their 70-sized plane is the ONLY plane
they own/fly, or the ONLY plane they can afford. If they did (and I remember
one such person), they usually had their thumbs wired to their hearts and
out-flew everyone else. 
Usually, however, the "cheaper" 70-sized pattern plane sits next to the
110-inch Extra 300 gasser in the trailer or sits next to a dozen other sport
planes and three radios in the basement. 

I hear the concerns, but I think choices can and need to be made. I
personally own only one plane, fly it 100% of the time, what little time I
have.and my worst fear is that the pattern never changes or gets easier.
That will be my cue to try scale or jets. 

John

On Jul 29, 2014, at 5:58 AM, Chuck Hochhalter via NSRCA-discussion
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:
From: Chuck Hochhalter <cahochhalter at yahoo.com>
Date: July 28, 2014, 5:35:47 PM CDT
To: Del R <drykert2 at rochester.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed Advanced maneuvers
Del, absolutely spot on. I appreciate and agree with you... Almost ;) 

There are options all the way to the masters class that are very affordable
and adequate. 

Motors- dualsky, scorpion, himax

Batts- sky lipo, hobby people, g force 

Controller- sky fun, castle (not badly priced), jeti advance

Servos- sport servos from jr are adequate

Airframe- vanquish, monolog, used airframe, older airframe. Build a kit from
insightrc.

 I contend any airframe less than 8 yes ago will fly the masters pattern ,
setup is KEY TO being prepared. The integrated roll at the top of a loop can
easily be flown with any airframe with moderate practice. So little rudder
if any is required to accomplish this. Timing and an understanding of the
maneuver makes this easier. Gravity does most of the work and timing does
the rest.

Do more modern airframes make things easier yes, but at times there is a
price.... BIG fuse sides roll easily, but they are more work in the wind.
Small fuses cut like a knife but require better knowledge of rudder and
proper application. 

All being said, if you don't know your plane intimately, you will struggle
and hate certain maneuvers or conditions.

I want to encourage everyone in advanced and masters to embrace the
challenge and get help if you need it from other pilots that are better than
you. We all strive for tens... Sometimes we succeed , sometimes we fail, but
we accept the challenge and practice with a goal.

Chuck

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 28, 2014, at 5:19 PM, "Del R" <drykert2 at rochester.rr.com> wrote:
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
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>  
To: Gary Switala <mailto:plane.gary at cox.net>  ; General pattern discussion
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>  
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
_______________________________________________
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/20140729/13955571/attachment.html>