<DIV style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif;"><DIV>You can borrow my lighter; and now that I fly 2 stroke, a half gallon of old ys20/20.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>We have some IAC flyers in the DC area. One the judges held in highest reguard is the wife on one of the flyers. She has been very actively involved in aviation but not as a pilot. She knows plane, how they look and work. She just judges what she sees. Wish I could borrow to judge our contests.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I have heard the phase - 'and one more point downgrade for grace or smoothness' . I never could figure out how to add more grace to the flight. Sounds like an ounce of lightness to me.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Randy</DIV>
<DIV><BR>--- trexlesh@msn.com wrote:<BR><BR>From: "Rex LESHER" <trexlesh@msn.com><BR>To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Wind correction scoring<BR>Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 12:31:16 -0700<BR><BR></DIV><!--[gte IE 5]><?xml:namespace prefix="v" /><?xml:namespace prefix="o" /><![endif]-->
<DIV>
<DIV>Dave</DIV>
<DIV>It seems to me that 'smoothness' and 'gracefullness' in pattern pretty much goes hand and foot... It takes smoothness to make a geometrically perfect maneuver in the first place. If you fly a pretty much perfect maneuver, it is gracefull just by it's own virtue!</DIV>
<DIV>The problem with things like this being written in a rules book is that someone is going to take issue simply because it's there and not fully explained. There's no room in competition for undefined terms that can come under scrutiny.... I agree that if it can't be defined it should be removed... </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> I've got some extra matches if you run short!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Rex Lesher</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="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>From:</B> <A title="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net">DaveL322@comcast.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, October 02, 2006 11:56 AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Wind correction scoring</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>John,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I couldn't agree more, and I'd like to see "smoothness and gracefullness" completely removed as a judging criteria as no one has ever been able to quantify what the downgrade should be, or how a geometrically perfect maneuver can be outscored by a more "graceful" maneuver.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Standing by with a bucket of water...</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards,</DIV>
<DIV><BR>Dave Lockhart</DIV>
<DIV><A title="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net">DaveL322@comcast.net</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>From: "John Ferrell" <johnferrell@earthlink.net> <BR>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial" size="2"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial" size="2">That ought to draw a little fire.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>John Ferrell W8CCW<BR>"My Competition is not my enemy"<BR><A title="http://dixienc.us/" href="http://dixienc.us/">http://DixieNC.US</A><BR></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="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net">DaveL322@comcast.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, October 02, 2006 10:57 AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Wind correction scoring</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Many good points already made, and good technical discussions presented.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The distinction between textbook technical judging and non-textbook "impression" judging will always exist, and I think (as most if not all) we should strive to eliminate the impression judging whenever possible. For that reason, I would opposed to an "artistic" or "overall" flight score which could be an opening for a very subjective score which is markedly contrasting to the objective scoring/goal on which pattern is based. It takes a lot of effort make a well designed schedule which is technically well executed look unappealing.</DIV>
<DIV><BR>Regards,</DIV>
<DIV><BR>Dave Lockhart</DIV>
<DIV><A title="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net">DaveL322@comcast.net</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>From: Rcmaster199@aol.com <BR>
<DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV></DIV>
<HR>
<DIV></DIV>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</DIV>