<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2912" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Jerry:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>It's all on the AMA website in the Flying and
Judging Guide for Scale Aerobatics. See section 8.9.3 and 8.9.4 The
presentation being referred to is probably from their judging clinics, but you
can get the idea from the F&J Guide. I attended one of the first
judging seminars that Ray Rose put on and there was plenty of discussion about
snaps and the fact that some displacement was inevitable and by itself, not
necessarily a cause for downgrade. Yeah, it's a conflict with the other
criteria about maintaining maneuver geometry, but I think there can be
descriptions written to deal with that.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Really big displacements are an indicator of
other problems that probably mean that a snap didn't really happen, such as
barrel rolling or only partial auto-rotation during the roll. A slow
developing snap will exhibit alot of displacement for example. I
haven't seen any updated IMAC judging school materials, so whether they still
teach that displacements during a snap aren't automatically downgradeable or not
is unclear. I think that if you look at what they do have in the
F&J Guide, it provides pretty good guidance on how to tell that a snap
probably happened at least. It points out stuff like watching what the
nose does re. departing from the flight path, not whether the tail is describing
a cone shape. You can get the tail to cone just using aileron and rudder
alone - that's not a snap. Snaps are tough to deal with in the rules and
on the flight line. It's just my opinion, but I think that the Scale
Aerobatic rules are better defined in this particular area.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Ed</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=JAStebbins@worldnet.att.net
href="mailto:JAStebbins@worldnet.att.net">Jerry Stebbins</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">Discussion -NSRCA</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, July 07, 2006 9:19 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [NSRCA-discussion] Snaps</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>It would seem that if IMAC has a better
"definition" or "presentation" that helps shed some sunshine on this
quandry---we should get it to Don, and have him certify it, or refute it.
Should be some common ground in there. At least that way there may be more
common ground developed to find an approach to getting a definable
standard.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>By the way I am an IMAC member and have never
seen this presentation,---maybe would have helped my judging
perceptions.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Jerry</FONT></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>