[NSRCA-discussion] Bowtie

Derek Koopowitz derekkoopowitz at gmail.com
Fri Jul 1 10:10:34 AKDT 2016


That was my "point" when writing the article.  There is no way one could
fly it to look like a square and have all the radii the same...

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 11:02 AM, flyintexanmark--- via NSRCA-discussion <
nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:

> It can never be truly square, unless you are capable of flying a radius
> equal to zero.
>
> Sent by MailWise <http://www.mail-wise.com/installation/4> – Your emails,
> with style.:)
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> From: Verne Koester via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> >
> Sent: Friday, July 1, 2016 12:35 PM
> To: NSRCA <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Bowtie
>
> I just read the Judges Chair in the latest K-Factor regarding the Bow Tie
> in Masters. Their opinion is that the overall shape of the maneuver should
> form a rectangle rather than a square. I can’t see how that’s geometrically
> possible. The center portion of the maneuver has two opposing 45 degree
> lines. Assuming we want the baseline and top line height the same and we
> want the maneuver centered, the 45 degree lines mandate an overall square
> shape. The only way to make a rectangle out of it is to either fly an angle
> of less than 45 degrees through the center or add short straight lines
> before and after the 45’s going into the radiuses into the verticals. The
> illustration in the K-Factor showing how the Bow Tie should be shaped
> illustrates this because the center angle lines in their rectangle drawing
> are clearly less than 45 degrees. The Masters aresti shows the correct
> overall shape and it’s square.
>
>
>
> Verne Koester
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160701/eeb9753d/attachment.html>


More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list