<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE id=ridTitle>Clear Day</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"><BASE
href="file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 10px; COLOR: #0033cc; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Helvetica
}
</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=ridBody bgColor=#ffffff background=cid:560285323@02102006-1b22>
<DIV><SPAN class=560285323-02102006>Fred,</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=560285323-02102006> Well the reason people were "quiet" is
because there was nothing to protest or discuss. Takeoff and landing ARE scored
0 or 10 under the current rules. Don't worry, next year your exquisite takeoffs
and landings will be fully appreciated. :) Now, look at the call sheet
again. The maneuvers that count the most have a K of 2: "2 Inside Loops",
"2-Point Roll", "STALL TURN", "Immelman" and the "Double Immelman". I would
fix the problems with the stall-turn if I were you. The most effective
way to improve your score is to polish up the hard maneuvers. If nothing else,
it will make you a better pilot. That's really what this is all
about.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=560285323-02102006></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=560285323-02102006>
<P><FONT size=2>John Pavlick<BR><A href="http://www.idseng.com/"
target=_blank>http://www.idseng.com</A><BR> </FONT> </P></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><SPAN class=560285323-02102006></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Tahoma><SPAN class=560285323-02102006> </SPAN>-----Original
Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Fred
Huber<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, October 02, 2006 12:46 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> [NSRCA-discussion] If you
don't score by the rules.... don'tadvertise a rulebook
event<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0033cc 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>This has been annoying me for a long time....<BR><BR>At Sportsman level
the K=1 takeoff and landing scores can significantly <BR>affect the contest
results.<BR><BR>The all too common practice of changing the rules at the last
minute, to <BR>give Sportsman 0 or 10 on take-off and landing, is
inappropriate. <BR>(Inappropriate to chane the scoring system for any maneuver
at ANY level!) <BR>Of course all the higher level pilots will agree to it...
it does not affect <BR>them. ANY ONE PILOT in Sportsman (or whatever
other class is affected) <BR>contesting the change without it having been
advertised as a rule <BR>modification in advance should prevent the
change.<BR><BR>Yes, the takeoff and landing scoring is something that I think
has affected <BR>my outcome at contests. I flew a plane that had a large
problem with stall <BR>turns... with a 6 being a good result for that
maneuver. Full opposed <BR>aileron wasn't enough to prevent the plane
from rolling when rudder was <BR>applied. But I figured my quality of
takeoff and landing would more than <BR>make up for the poor stall turns, so I
showed up for the contests. And <BR>every contest I showed up at... they
on the spot said "Sportsman gets 0 or <BR>10 takeoff and landing" When
all the marginal takeoffs of the other pilots <BR>in my class got 10's (Many
deserved 5's... or 2's... and I was consistantly <BR>getting
complimented on the smoothness of my takeoffs and landings.) it took <BR>away
the ability for me to make up for my known problem with the stall
turn.<BR><BR>Next contest I go to... if they decide to change the rules on the
spot... I <BR>want my entry fee back. (applies to some other events I have
been to <BR>also...)<BR>If they advertise in advance that the scoring won't be
by rulebook... I <BR>won't show up.<BR><BR>I kept quiet about it (except
discussing it with a couple of local flyers) <BR>when it occured. Too
many much more accompished pilots were in favor of the <BR>change. IT
HAD NO EFFECT ON THEM! They shouldn't have been part of the
<BR>discussion at all.<BR><BR>You want to change a rule that affects only one
class at the pilots' meeting <BR>before the first flight... ANY ONE PILOT in
that class opposing the change <BR>prevents it. And pilots in other
classes have no vote.<BR><BR>If the wind is too much for the pilot to think he
wants to risk getting a <BR>bad score on takeoff and landing... maybe its too
much wind for that pilot <BR>to bother making a takeoff. All of the
other pilots in the class will be <BR>dealing with the same wind. It has
just as much chance of preventing them <BR>from getting a 10.<BR><BR>Any
contest that decides to give Sportsman 0 or 10 for takeoff or landing
<BR>should list it as non-rulebook in advance. If you are going to do
the <BR>2-passes through the sequence without the full stop landing and
another <BR>takeoff... you need to advertise that too.<BR><BR>I oppose the
flying of 2 "flights" of Sportsman with one takeoff and one
<BR>landing... The takeoff and landing are scored maneuvers, suppposed
to be <BR>able to get a score other than 0 or 10, therefore cutting half of
the <BR>opportunities to do well or poorly on them is changing the scoring vs
the <BR>rulebook. (see above... I moved this paragraph due to changes in
the below <BR>from the original version)<BR><BR>Also... the Sportsman sequence
is relatively short for a reason. This is an <BR>introductory
class. The contestants are not used to competing... not used <BR>to
getting judged. They need the ability to do one competition round... go
<BR>back and talk with others about what they did right, what they did wrong
and <BR>how to improve. They also need a bit of timne to RELAX between
the scored <BR>flights.<BR><BR>Considering how nervous some people are in
thier early competition rounds... <BR>its a wonder to me that a first time
Sportsman level competitor ends up with <BR>thier airplane in the air by the
end of a second sequence within one flight.<BR><BR>The first contest someone
flys in, they typically fly too close in, and <BR>because of this ALL
maneuvers are extremely rushed. By the end of the <BR>flight some
contestants are so frazzled that they have severe problems doing <BR>the
double-immelman AT ALL. Then you want them to immedately turn around
<BR>and run the sequence again? Why not just tell them to land at the
judges <BR>feet so the judges can stomp on the model?<BR><BR>Thats not a
formula to promote more participation... its a formula to scare <BR>off
beginners. If the pilot is ready to run the sequence twice in a row FOR
<BR>THE JUDGES.. they are probably ready to start working on
Inermediate.<BR><BR>Most people I have seen move up from Sportsman, its been
due to seeking the <BR>higher challenge of Intermediate... not due to getting
the points forcing <BR>the move up. "Sandbagging" Sportsman is
rare.<BR><BR>Also... it is justifiable for someone competing at Sportsman to
set up thier <BR>plane for one round flight durration. If they average 4
minutes to do a <BR>round... and put in a tank which gives 6 minute fuel
supply, then the <BR>2-rounds in one flight is a guaranteed dead-stick before
completion of the <BR>second round. Do you force Master's level pilots
to carry enough fuel for 2 <BR>passes through the sequence? Would they
tollerate that?<BR><BR>Forcing a competitor to carry the DEAD WEIGHT of the
fuel for a second round <BR>through the first round is inappropriate. At
Sportsman level... the type <BR>models which are competitive include models
which would have severe CG <BR>change with the fuel depletion...<BR><BR>If you
think a Sportsman competitor needs to be able to run 2 times through <BR>the
sequence nonstop, you probably also think everyone needs to buy a $3000
<BR>plane, capable of flying the Masters sequence, in order to try out
<BR>Sportsman. Its totaly unnecessary, inappropriate and shuts out
beginners.<BR><BR>FHH <BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>