[NSRCA-discussion] Judging

[Larry Diamond]

Sanity check... If the pilot pulls a vertical line, then the pilot introduced the roll element in a none rolling maneuver, is it proper to judge a zero for an incorrect maneuver?
For the down grade, would that not apply only to a pull to vertical resulting in the wings not level by xx degrees.


Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S® 6, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: Vicente Bortone via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> Date: 8/7/17  8:31 AM  (GMT-06:00) To: "Atwood, Mark" <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>, Daniel Underkofler <underdw at gmail.com>, General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging 
One posible interpretation  is that the pilot introduced an element that is not supposed to be there.   I will agree if the up line included roll element and pilot miss to stop the roll and correct.    A judge could get this interpretation that is allowed in the rule book.  


On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 8:12 AM Atwood, Mark <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com> wrote:





Agree.   Historically the error is downgraded, not the correction.  If you miss a Spin or a Snap by 45 degrees, you will see a 3pt down grade… not 6 (which you would get if they downgraded both the miss, and the correction).























MARK ATWOOD


o.  (440) 229-2502
c.  (216) 316-2489
e.  atwoodm at paragon-inc.com



Paragon Consulting, Inc.
5900 Landerbrook Drive, Suite 205, Cleveland Ohio, 44124
www.paragon-inc.com
 

Powering The Digital Experience















On Aug 7, 2017, at 9:08 AM, Daniel Underkofler via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:



Have to disagree Vince.
If turbulence causes a wings out-of-level condition, there is no downgrade if the pilot corrects quickly.
In this scenario, where, as you state, it is clearly a pilot error, he gets 1 pt per 15deg = 5pt downgrade.  He should not be penalized for making the correction - that would be double jeopardy, which is dealt with in the rules.
Dan



On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 7:02 AM, Vicente Bortone via NSRCA-discussion
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:



Hi Don,



75 degree roll is more than expected for a correction due to turbulence.  Therefore, clearly it has been done by the pilot and cannot be interpreted as a correction due to turbulence that is the only one allowed in the rulebook.  Therefore, the
 option No1 appears the best option since the pilot introduced an element that was not suppose to be there.



Best,
 





Vicente "Vince" Bortone



On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Don Ramsey via NSRCA-discussion
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:









Another judging question:
 
Senario:  An upline is flown that requires no rolls.  The pilot executes a partial roll that turns about 75 degrees then immediately returns to vertical
 as specified in the maneuver description.  
 
Two choices seem to be available:

1.      
 0 the maneuver because 2 turns have been made that require 5 pt downgrade each.  Errors are initial roll and roll that returns the
 mode to the correct attitude.
2.      
 Score it a 5 because only one error was made and a correction was made to return the model to the correct attitude.  Do not downgrade
 the correction.









_______________________________________________

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



-- 
Vicente "Vince" Bortone
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20170807/d4f61a68/attachment.html>