<div>Never have wind. Just how many directions did we fly at Lubbock???? :):):)</div> <div> </div> <div>I believe there are certain fields where an exception to the rules is applicable. Albuquerque is one of them. The wind swirls, and it really doesn't matter which way you take off, you may have a 20mph downwind landing, if the letter of the rules is followed. However, in the pilot's meeting, the past 10 years the CD has made it very clear landing direction only had to be OK'd by the judges. I believe this is responsible and totally acceptable.</div> <div> </div> <div>In Lubbock we have flown the Sportman sequence twice through for the past 5 years. I think I have mentioned it in the sanction deviation from the rules. However, I always pull the sportsman pilots aside and ask if anyone has an objection or fuel issue. They have always, to date, been extremely happy that they get more air time. Our score
sheets are redone to reflect this in the flight. Again, smiles and happy pilots.</div> <div> </div> <div>At Temple several years ago prior to the change in rules the CD made a rulling when the wind was swirling and blowing badly. 0 or 10 and was agreed upon by the pilots. Realize this runway is only about 300ft long and is surrounded by trees in a horseshoe pattern. Again, I believe this decision to be responsible and totally acceptable due to the conditions.</div> <div> </div> <div>On the other hand, in Lubbock where our runway truely is HUGE, even with pilots boxes the landing area is 85 ft across, there really isn't any reason to make a Landing/TO change from the rules.</div> <div> </div> <div>However, that is why we have a CD, Pilot's Meeting etc etc. Each case needs to be looked at reasonably.</div> <div> </div> <div>My $.02</div> <div>ed<BR><BR><B><I>Terry Brox <tbrox@cox.net></I></B> wrote:</div>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2963" name=GENERATOR> <DIV><FONT color=#000000>Brian is correct. We have done this many times at our contest. I have been to many contests that was done the same way. As far as telling people ahead of time, it can only be done with some knowlege of what the weather gods are going to present us at the contest. Here in Kansas, that is not possible such as it is in the Texas contests. LOL They never have wind. Just a slight breeze. LOL</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=brian_w_young@yahoo.com href="mailto:brian_w_young@yahoo.com">brian young</A> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt
arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, October 02, 2006 8:16 PM</DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] If you don't score by the rules....don'tadvertise a rulebook event</DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV> <DIV>Sorry you got a bad impression. From past experience and when the landings were scored incrementally the reason they were changed to 0 and 10 at the pilots meeting is frequently less than perfect conditions, or small runway. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Landing is normally where planes get broken, and takeoffs are normally where people get ran out of judges chairs. So in bad conditions it makes sense to modify the scoring. So if you bother to travel to a contest and the weather is crummy it makes it a little easier for some if they dont have so much pressure to make a
landing. We dont want anyone to break a plane and possibly end their season, we need everyone thats interested in pattern to stay interested. Hope you get back in the mood to hit some contests. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Im with ya on the scoring of the TO and landings though, landings can be tough to get right and if you do them well you want them scored no matter the k factor. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><B><I>Fred Huber <fhhuber@clearwire.net></I></B> wrote:</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid"><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 6.00.2900.2963" name=GENERATOR> <DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=#000000>This wasn't this year... I didn't go to a contest this year partly
because of the bad feeling left over from the previous rules deviations... which were made at the pilots meeting propr to the first flight... and I would have been the sole opposition.</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=verne@twmi.rr.com href="mailto:verne@twmi.rr.com">Verne Koester</A> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA Mailing List</A> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, October 02, 2006 4:53 PM</DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] If you don't score by the rules....don't advertise a rulebook event</DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV> <DIV><FONT
color=#000000 size=3>Fred,</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=3>They WERE scoring by the rules at the contests you attended this year. Under the current rules, takeoffs and landings are scored EITHER 0 or 10 for all classes. </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=3></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=3>Effective January 1, </FONT><FONT color=#000000 size=3>2007, Takeoffs and landings will be FROM 0 to 10 in half point increments for all AMA classes. </FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=3></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=3>You're right, deviations from the rule book are supposed to be advertised in advance of the contest date.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=3></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=3>Verne Koester</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=fhhuber@clearwire.com href="mailto:fhhuber@clearwire.com">Fred Huber</A> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, October 02, 2006 12:45 PM</DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [NSRCA-discussion] If you don't score by the rules.... don't advertise a rulebook event</DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV> <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> <DIV> <HR> <DIV></DIV>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> <HR> <DIV></DIV>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion <DIV> <HR> <DIV></DIV>No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>Checked by AVG Free Edition.<BR>Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.11/460 - Release Date: 10/1/2006<BR></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <div> <HR SIZE=1> Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. <A href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/postman7/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=39666/*http://messenger.yahoo.com">Great rates starting at 1¢/min. <div> <HR>
<div></div>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion <div> <HR> <div></div>No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>Checked by AVG Free Edition.<BR>Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.12.11/460 - Release Date: 10/1/2006<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></A>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>