[NSRCA-discussion] New FAI Rule Changes

Thu Apr 27 11:56:39 AKDT 2023

Vicente,

The line lengths must be the same for all 4 legs in a square loop.  Those
deductions are made while the square loop is being flown - not afterwards.
You cannot make another deduction with regard to geometry after the
maneuver is completed - that would mean you are dinging the pilot twice for
the same infraction.

Best,
-Derek

On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 11:19 AM Vicente Bortone via NSRCA-discussion <
nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:

> Hello Derek^2,
>
> So how we down grade an square loop that has everything perfect but is
> clearly looks like rectangle.
>
> Good point of discussion,
>
> Vince
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 1:05 PM derek emmett <derekemmett at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Apr 11, 2023, at 10:18 AM, Derek Koopowitz via NSRCA-discussion <
>> nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
>>
>> 
>> Just a point of clarification here... there is NOT an additional
>> downgrade given for not following the required geometry on a maneuver.
>> Those deductions are already made for not following radii, line lengths,
>> correct angles (45 or 60 degree), etc.  The F3A rules are very clear about
>> this - see 5B.8.1.
>>
>> 5B.8. 1. GEOMETRICAL ACCURACY OF THE MANOEUVRE
>>
>> As a guide for downgrading deviations from the defined manoeuvre
>> geometry, the manoeuvres are
>>
>> divided into their different components: lines, loops, rolls, snap-rolls,
>> horizontal circles,
>>
>> line/loop/roll/horizontal circle combinations, stall turns, and spins.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 6, 2023 at 7:26 AM Vicente Bortone via NSRCA-discussion <
>> nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Good morning to all,
>>>
>>> This could be a good morning discussion and judging review.  It is good
>>> to mention that constant speed maximum downgrade is 1 point.  This means
>>> the judge can downgrade one point if the pilot does a terrible job in
>>> maintaining constant speed.  I will say that constant speed is
>>> equivalent to power management.  The fact is one point downgrade maximum
>>> means that is not the most important  part of the overall flying
>>> presentation because it is well known that it is practically impossible to
>>> do exact speed in all positions but it is possible to do power management.
>>> Clearly the easiest portions that human judges can see very well are: wing
>>> level, constant radius, wind correction (probably the most frequent
>>> downgrade and easier for judges to see), constant roll speed, rolls square
>>> stopping, relative angles that relate to geometry and equal radius, and
>>> positioning.  I am going to take this opportunity to mention the geometry
>>> of the pyramid or triangle.  Many pilots and judges think that the
>>> pyramid or triangle has equal sides geometry and it does not.  The base
>>> side should be about 23-24% longer than the 45 sides.  When pilots try to
>>> do equal sides the angles are forced to do 60 degrees.  Assuming that
>>> everything else is perfect is a 2 points downgrade for missing the 45 lines
>>> plus whatever the judge downgrades for not doing the required geometry.
>>> Probably an additional 2 points more downgrade.  It is interesting to hear
>>> the comments when a pilot gets a 6 when he thinks he flew a perfect
>>> pyramid.  Yes there are spins, snaps, fighter turns and stall turns.  We
>>> know these very well but we could discuss them if need be.  Please try to
>>> avoid snaps but why not.  With our judging experience we can dissect the
>>> snaps very well too.  This is a good review to get ready for the 2023
>>> season and the 50th pattern Nats.  Feel free to share your judging
>>> experience.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Vicente "Vince" Bortone
>>> *NSRCA 1140.  Be Proud to show your NSRCA #*
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 8:35 PM GLEN WATSON via NSRCA-discussion <
>>> nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I believe the FAI weight increase will influence future rules around
>>>> the size of the aerobatic box. I've been privileged with others to
>>>> witnessed in real-time autonomous/computer flights configured with
>>>> basic-pattern maneuvers flown by an Epowered 2m plane. This consisted of
>>>> center, turn-around maneuvers including a rolling circle flown at proper
>>>> distance within box limits. The recorded playbacks were viewed on
>>>> Flightcoach's Plotter immediately following the flights. The very credible
>>>> developer of this autonomous effort will by me and should by others remain
>>>> unknown.  AMA flyers should keep in mind what FAI adopts will flow downhill
>>>> to AMA rules eventually. The following are my opinions from the autonomous
>>>> flights I witnessed combined with my impression from my own Flightcoach
>>>> Masters 2023 flights recently reordered...
>>>>
>>>> 1) The increased weight rule for 2024 could influence larger/heavier
>>>> aircraft designs which could/should possibly influence the size of the
>>>> current aerobatic box? Flight coach (my opinion) is demonstrating it is
>>>> extremely difficult to execute and demonstrate a straight line before/after
>>>> and in-between every in-box maneuver.
>>>>
>>>> 2) Regardless of equipment constant speed is not realistic. "Constant"
>>>> implies the same or continuous. Those viewing their fight data via
>>>> Flightcoach understand "constant” is not possible. The wording of this
>>>> criteria in FAI's rules should evolve to say something like "similar
>>>> speed".
>>>>
>>>> 3) It is not feasible given today's technology to replace subjective
>>>> judging. Flight qualities such as smooth/gracefulness, geometry especially
>>>> radii, entry and exit altitudes, and box position portrayed by Flightcoach
>>>> is way different when witnessed real-time.  At this juncture of technology
>>>> there is no substitute for what the Pilot does to manage these flight
>>>> aspects to make things appear correct to human judges to be compliant with
>>>> the rules.
>>>>
>>>> ~Glen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > On 04/05/2023 3:00 PM Andrew Jesky via NSRCA-discussion <
>>>> nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > I fear it causes manufactures to relaxes their standard to make light
>>>> airplanes, then the power requirements will need to be adjusted accordingly…
>>>> >
>>>> > Andrew
>>>> >
>>>> > Sent from my iPhone
>>>> >
>>>> > > On Apr 5, 2023, at 2:51 PM, Mark Atwood via NSRCA-discussion <
>>>> nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Tony,
>>>> > >
>>>> > > I would argue you were ON time.  At this point I think weight
>>>> change is 10 years too late and will only serve to escalate costs in the
>>>> sport (My opinion).  At this point the Glow/Electric debate is basically
>>>> over and electric power has proven itself viable in the current weight
>>>> scheme.  More allowance will only lead to higher volume aircraft with
>>>> lighter wing loadings.  Thus… retooling.  Which will cost both
>>>> manufacturers and participants more money.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > -M
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On Apr 5, 2023, at 12:39 PM, Anthony Frackowiak <
>>>> frackowiak at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Well, the weight rule is exactly what I proposed for AMA several
>>>> years ago. I guess I was just ahead of my times.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Tony Frackowiak
>>>> > >
>>>> > >> On Apr 5, 2023, at 8:57 AM, Mark Atwood via NSRCA-discussion <
>>>> nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> Hey All,
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> Attached are the results from the CIAM plenary meeting and vote
>>>> that took place on April 1st.  These rule changes will go into effect in
>>>> 2024.  Most of the rules that address F3A are minor and merely clarify
>>>> clerical issues in the rulebook or help outline procedures.  There are also
>>>> changes to the wording around telemetry, but again, only for better
>>>> clarity. But there are TWO notable rule changes.  Neither of which we
>>>> supported.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> 1) Increase the weight limit to 5.5Kg TAKE OFF WEIGHT.   This is a
>>>> straight up increase for electric, and a change to weighing procedure for
>>>> glow planes to include FULL tank of fuel.   The issues here are obvious and
>>>> I know we have many on both sides of this discussion, but it’s the new rule
>>>> in FAI.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> 2) This one confounds me.   They have changed the judging
>>>> guidelines, such that they no longer want accurate geometry relative to the
>>>> aircrafts plane of flight, but instead want geometric accuracy FROM THE
>>>> JUDGES PERSPECITVE.    In other words, a half loop at the end of the box
>>>> needs to LOOK round, rather than BE round relative to the plane of flight.
>>>>  It completely changes our way of flying and makes tools like flight coach
>>>> useless.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> Personally, I can’t imagine this will last, and more over I can’t
>>>> imagine this will actually be used.  A few of us (US/ UK / AUS) fought hard
>>>> against it, but in the end it won out.  They had no explanation as to how
>>>> cross box maneuvers will accomplish this (such as a rolling circle) but
>>>> insisted this is what was wanted.  I’m sure there will be much discussion
>>>> at events prior to this going into effect.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> There were also some minor changes for how ties are handled and
>>>> better language and procedure for handling smaller championship events (<40
>>>> pilots). But most of that is benign.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> F3A Starts on page 25
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> <CIAM 2023 ePlenary Meeting -
>>>> Proposals_Final_v1.pdf>_______________________________________________
>>>> > >> 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
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
> *NSRCA 1140.  Be Proud to show your NSRCA #*
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20230427/4e6f11bf/attachment.html>