[NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA-discussion Digest, Vol 137, Issue 5

Wed Apr 5 12:32:43 AKDT 2017

Don

AMA rule: 10.2.
Each contestant is entitled to one (1) attempt for each official flight. The CD shall have sole discretionary authority to grant a single repeat attempt if for some unforeseen reason beyond control of the contestant, the model fails to become airborne (i.e., safety delay due to other aircraft traffic, weather or etc.). If the flight is interrupted by an unforeseen reason beyond control of the contestant (i.e. sudden deteriorating weather or air traffic but excluding any mechanical failure of the aircraft) the competitor is entitled to a re-flight with only the remaining unscored maneuvers being scored. The re-flight must occur by the end of the current round and the result of the re-flight will be final.

As a Cd, I would say a rut in the runway can be something out of the control of the contestant if it isn't large enough to be clearly seen from the flight line. The CD has the discretion to allow the repeat attempt to be judged.

AMA rule: 14.5.
The contestant (or helper) may not touch his/her plane after it has become airborne until completion of the flight; i.e., he/she may not land the plane between maneuvers in order to make adjustments to engine, trim, etc. Failure to comply with this shall result in disqualification of the contestant for that round.

 If the plane got airborne then landed, even on takeoff, and had to be handled, then the flight is over.

-----Original Message-----
From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of nsrca-discussion-request at lists.nsrca.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2017 3:00 PM
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Subject: NSRCA-discussion Digest, Vol 137, Issue 5

Send NSRCA-discussion mailing list submissions to
	nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	nsrca-discussion-request at lists.nsrca.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	nsrca-discussion-owner at lists.nsrca.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of NSRCA-discussion digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Questions for the judging experts (tocdon at netscape.net)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 22:51:39 -0400
From: tocdon at netscape.net
To: harryells at gmail.com, nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Questions for the judging experts
Message-ID: <15b3c0654f8-83a-128ee at webprd-a12.mail.aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Harry thanks this is very helpful and clears that one right up.  The recommendation from those attending the clinic was to see if there is a way to make AMA rules more consistent with FAI for definition of radius for entry radius, stall turn, and double I  deductions and maneuver descriptions and for these maneuvers, etc.  

A couple other question for the experts.  This question came from a pilot who got both a zero and a 5  from the two judges on a particular maneuver- vertical upline with half roll.  He hesitated in the half roll, essentially doing what appeared to be a 2 of 4.  One judge zero'd the other severely downgraded the maneuver.  If someone could point out the specific rule on that one, would appreciate.  One location I believe calls for 1 pt per 15 degrees (6 points off) the other could be interpreted as "wrong maneuver".    He did fly it with a hesitation (unintentional) so it technically stopped rolling momentarily at the 90 degree point, then proceeded to complete the other 90 degrees to complete the half roll (or 2 of 4 depending on judges interpretation).

Final question that came up was a pilot's plane got stuck in a rut during takeoff and the helper had to go out and move the plane.  He got zero'd by the judges since he called takeoff and the plan moved slightly then got stuck.  However he pointed out that the rules state an example of an engine restart upon failing on takeoff (for zeroing the takeoff) which does not apply to electric planes.  I believe the intent is zero if someone touches the plane after takeoff is called and before it becomes airborne, but pls clarify.  NOTE:  in many contests with rough grass fields a CD may elect to not score takeoff or allow for this situation if announced at the pilots meeting but apparently this did not happen at that particular contest.

I am reviewing my notes to see if there were other questions, but I think this is about it!

Thanks again,
Don

-----Original Message-----
From: Harry Ells <harryells at gmail.com>
To: tocdon <tocdon at netscape.net>; General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Sat, Apr 1, 2017 8:15 am
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Questions for the judging experts

Hope this helps Don.

5B.8.4. LOOPS
A loop must have by definition,a constant radius, and must be performed in the vertical plane throughout. Itis entered and exited by a well-defined line which, for a complete loop, ishorizontal. For a part-loop, however, such lines may be in any other plane offlight as required by the particular manoeuvre. 
Loops and part-loops within onemanoeuvre must have the same radius. 

Each occurrence of aslight difference in radius must downgrade the manoeuvre by 1 point, while moresevere deviations may downgrade it by 2 or 3 points for each occurrence. 

Theradius of the first loop or part-loop, determines the radii of subsequent loopsor part-loops within one manoeuvre. 
Every loop or part-loop must beperformed without interruption to the circular flight path. Every visiblesegmentation must be downgraded by 1 point. 
If the loop is not performedentirely in the vertical plane ie it drifts closer or further from the judges,minor drift must be downgraded by 1 point, while more severe drift must bedowngraded by several points. 
In three-, four-, six-, andeight-sided loops, the main criteria are that the loop must have the sides atthe same lengths/correct angles for the defined number of times, and allpart-loops must have the same radius. 

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:43 PM, Don Szczur via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:

Questions for the NSRCA judging experts for 2017:  

Is the correct answer for clearly seen significant flat spots, take 2 or 3 points off  (test question)?  Or, should the answer cite slide 42 of maneuver execution guide which shows 1 point per (as shown in the picture) significant flat spots for consistency in judging this defect?

Is the intent of the plane being inverted for reverse top hats for unknowns, but the new sequence has a knife edge at the bottom of the reverse top hat so its neither upright or inverted technically speaking?

Does the first radius define the rest of the radius segments in F3A maneuver? It does state that in FAI regulation rules for F3M, but I could not find any reference to this in section 5.B.8.4 for F3A.

Latest rules for F3A is February 2017.  By the way, check out the new FAI rules for drone racing that came out this week (unrelated, but organizations are certainly pulling international interest in that direction).

No comments or questions on the AMA test.  Appears straight forward.

Thanks in advance,
Don

_______________________________________________
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/20170404/998be857/attachment.html>

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

------------------------------

End of NSRCA-discussion Digest, Vol 137, Issue 5
************************************************

(c) 2017 Compass Engineering & Consultants, LLC. All rights reserved. This electronic transmission, and any attachments hereto, is intended only for the use of each individual recipient named above and may contain information belonging to the sender that is confidential, proprietary, is subject to copyright, constitutes a trade secret or is legally privileged. If you are not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately (i) notify the sender, (ii) permanently delete the original and all copies of this electronic transmission and all attachments hereto, and (iii) destroy all printouts of this electronic transmission and all attachments hereto. Please note that electronic transmissions to and from the sender may be monitored by the sender's employer. Thank you for your cooperation.