[NSRCA-discussion] NATS & Landing elimination

[Peter Vogel]

Mike,

I have always thought that the requirement for scored landing and takeoff
in the lower classes without it being present in FAI was weird; and I have
personally killed more than one landing gear block in sportsman in the
effort to "not get a zero" on my landing which I think also creates more
unsafe situations than safe situations particularly when there is a
crosswind. So I agree with the *principle* of not having scored TO and
Landing in any class.

However!  I will say this clearly: THE NATS IS NOT THE PLACE FOR THIS KIND
OF CHANGE.  Jon and others have said it eloquently and backed by the
rules.  The NATS is an AMA rulebook event and unless you are solving an
otherwise unsolvable problem, you play it by the rulebook.

Fundamentally, what you propose DOES NOT SOLVE the problem you outlined.
Yes, it gives the judge a slightly longer break (about a 30 second
difference between the end of one sequence and the plane dropping to 2
meters on approach to landing where I need to start paying attention again
as a judge) between pilots but it DOES NOT SAVE TIME.

The alternative, (IMAC-style takeoff and circle outside the aerobatic space
until your turn) is worse from a judge break perspective because you get
less time between pilots, though it does save time, it does so at the risk
of aircraft and injury to pilots.

Joe's already said it, the NSRCA would not support this suggested change,
and I'd be shocked if the AMA supported it.

Peter+


On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Jon Lowe via NSRCA-discussion <
nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:

> For the CD/ED to make the change, it would have to be in the approved
> sanction, and announced before people sign up. I don't know why AMA would
> approve a sanction for a NATS rule book class that has rules deviations
> unless there are extraordinary issues involved. They do add unofficial
> events, such as this year's NATs Sportsman competition. I believe
> controlline and free​ flight also add unofficial events.
>
> Once the CD/ED is running the contest, they are God, answerable only to
> AMA, but are required to abide by the letter of the rules and sanction. Any
> decision they might make that is outside the rules would be subject to a
> protest. They can make changes for weather, and other things beyond their
> control, but the procedures to do so are outlined by the rulebook. This is
> all outlined in the AMA CD manuals, and the test you take to become a CD.
>
> Not to put words in his mouth, but what I think Joe was saying, for this
> sequence cycle, no to deleting landings from the sequences. But, like I
> said in an earlier post, it would take more than just a sequence change in
> any event.
>
> Jon
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>



-- 
Director, Fixed Wing Flight Training
Santa Clara County Model Aircraft Skypark
Associate Vice President, Academy of Model Aeronautics District X
Treasurer, National Society of Radio Control Aerobatics (NSRCA)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20170712/0646de17/attachment.html>