<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2963" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Ed..</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> Good point and I for one have
always choose avoidance first.. Blame it on my full scale training I
guess.. Or protecting my pocketbook - BUT.. I always defer to my
caller or my own situational awareness and will do something/anything to give me
more air space from another threat. Have I ever lost a place d/t
avoidance. Possibly one time in all my years and I was happy to give up
those points to keep me and my plane happy. I have had occasional judges
tell me after flight they saw my intentional avoidance and didn't gig me for it.
I thanks them for their kindness and said I would have had no problem with them
nailing me for my incorrect maneuver.. The reply.. AS pilot that can
be aware and make a smart judgment call in those judges eyes was the better
pilot. Not looking to start a war or instigate a rule change. I just
look at is as smart flying and desire to go home with my plane intact. I have
always made up my mind before entering any contest that was first and foremost -
my primary priority. Granted I still strive to fly precision but not at the
price of my aircraft. Thankfully I have never had a mid air at a contest in all
my years of competition.. close to 30 years.. I attribute that part to
luck and desire to fly different distance out when I can if flying a similar
routine / envelope as the other flight line. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial
size=2>
Del <BR> nsrca -
473</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=divesplat@yahoo.com href="mailto:divesplat@yahoo.com">Ed Deaver</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> Wednesday, October 04, 2006 2:05
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [NSRCA-discussion]
Avoidance</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Now the ball is rolling on judging, I have another subject worth
discussion. Not sure it has been actually.</DIV>
<DIV>At N Dallas 2 weeks ago, a midair occurred. Here is the
scenario.</DIV>
<DIV>Both pilots were flying on the same track, but spread apart. On an
endbox manuever, both pulled vertical and both held their nerve(to their
credit) It appeared one plane was inside the other. Suddenly plane
#1 pulled to complete his 1/2 square (which appeared inside plane #2) when #2
cut it in 1/2 and flew through it.</DIV>
<DIV>My question is:</DIV>
<DIV>Can pattern effectively begin or have an "avoidance" rule. These 2
planes were so close had one just pulled the power back a little, let the
other one go on, $6K would still be flying. I realize some overzelous
competitors would use this indescretionately, but still we could write in some
wording indicating judges had to agree it was in the best interest of both
pilots. As well no change to distance out could occur (not making it a
positioning advantage)</DIV>
<DIV>Any thoughts on this one.</DIV>
<DIV>Ed</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>