[NSRCA-discussion] New sequences

[Vogel, Peter]

Thanks for the flown and specific feedback Mark!. This is exactly what the board and the sequence committee need to drive to official sequences for 2018+2019!

From: NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org> on behalf of Curt Oberg via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Reply-To: Curt Oberg <obergc at cox.net>, General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Monday, July 17, 2017 at 9:05 AM
To: "'Atwood, Mark'" <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>, 'General pattern discussion' <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] New sequences

Good info on the power consumption Mark, first time I've seen any meaningful info on that and power consumption should be of paramount importance when setting up new sequences.
Curt

________________________________
From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Atwood, Mark via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 10:10 AM
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] New sequences

Hey All,

I was able to fly both the proposed Masters and Advanced sequences this weekend with Chuck Edwards.  All in all good, with a few thoughts.

Masters -

I like it. Flows reasonably well.  Some fun challenges, but nothing daunting.  The two rolls opposite is easily the prettiest maneuver in the schedule, and it will separate anyone not comfortable rolling both ways.

One concern - The only sticky maneuver I thought is the 1 1/4, KE flight, 1 1/4.   It’s simply too long to make look pretty, and if it’s a strong head wind, will really look like crap.  You’re basically trying to fit 2 1/2 rolls AND sustained KE flight on a downwind leg and stay in the box, thus forcing somewhat rapid rolls which simply look rushed.

I would strongly suggest changing it to 3/4 roll, KE, 3/4 roll.   Same difficulty really, but a full roll shorter and thus allows for a more graceful, controlled roll rate.

Total Mah draw in modest wind (7-9kt cross) was 3580mah  without paying particular attention to throttle management, given that it was the first time through the sequence.  Quite a bit less time and power than the current schedule.


Advanced.
It’s also nice, with one major concern.  The Cobra.  It’s not as conventional as I think is expected, and I feel it’s too much for an advanced flyer just learning to snap their airplane (my opinion).  You’re already a bit rushed going into is, and you’re pushing in from Inverted.  No biggie.  Half roll up, over the top and back down on a 45.  THEN you have a single snap on the 45 deg DOWN line.

I can tell you from personal experience and a re-kitted Spark (St. Clairsville flying F-11 with a 1 1/2 snap down on the cobra) that a snap like this WILL crash an airplane.  You’re heading down, not all that high to begin with, and if you badly miss the snap and lose your orientation, you’re likely on low throttle and low airspeed and will proceed to stall/snap it into the ground in your attempt to recover.    I’d much rather see a snap on the UP leg of the cobra.  It would still be rushed, but FAR more airplane and pilot friendly.

Other than that, is has all the traditional challenges.     Power was very low as I flew the schedule with only 2800mah (also a 7-9kt crosswind).

My $0.02 worth with 1 time through Advanced and twice through Masters.  So limited testing.  Your mileage may vary.

Hope to see a bunch of you in Arkansas!

-Mark
MARK ATWOOD
o.  (440) 229-2502
c.  (216) 316-2489
e.  atwoodm at paragon-inc.com<mailto:atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>

Paragon Consulting, Inc.
5900 Landerbrook Drive, Suite 205, Cleveland Ohio, 44124
www.paragon-inc.com<http://www.paragon-inc.com/>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20170717/fffccde7/attachment.html>