<div>I am curious about this also. It is almost guaranteed if a pilot makes a radical heading change in "no mans land" to be given a fairly stiff downgrade. If the pilots "sneaks" it in (we all do it ya know) but gets caught what downgrade to give.</div> <div>My understanding in Pre-turnaround, a pilot was judged only while in the box or while performing the maneuver show center. However, we are flying turnaround now.</div> <div>Maybe we need a rules proposal to incorporate something along the lines of: Once in the box, there is no dead zone and after the 15M straight line is drawn to end the previous manuever, the next manuever begins. Or something else, maybe 1/2 way between maneuvers establishes when the last maneuver ends and the next begins. In this manner, all flight in the box is judged and assigned a specific downgrade to a specific maneuver.</div> <div>Just a thought.</div>
<div>Ed<BR><BR><B><I>Keith Black <tkeithblack@gmail.com></I></B> wrote:</div> <BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Looks like we're leaving the discussion regarding what happens in 'no man's<BR>land' as your example has nothing to do with lines between two consecutive<BR>maneuvers. My deja vu was intended to switch to something that could be<BR>related to more readily to provoke thought and illustrate my point, it was<BR>supposed to be similar.<BR><BR>My guess is that you're trying to bring smoothness and gracefulness into<BR>play with your question. I for one would give both maneuvers 10 and would<BR>not deduct for the height difference. Since the end maneuver is a height<BR>adjusting maneuver it seems perfectly acceptable to adjust the height of the<BR>centered maneuver.<BR><BR>I understand that there's an objective to fly all maneuvers a similar size<BR>and ideally position, but I've never heard
anything concrete as to how to<BR>credit or debit for this. For me if someone flies the triangle perfect and<BR>the square perfect but at a 50' different base line they're still both<BR>getting 10's.<BR><BR>That being said, a few weeks back I was posting arguments in favor of S&G.<BR>Unfortunately I'm not sure it's well enough defined for pilots to get all<BR>the credit they may deserve. The only way to truly credit for overall<BR>matched size, speed and positioning may be to have a separate score/judge<BR>viewing the sequence as a whole.<BR><BR>Keith Black<BR><BR><BR>----- Original Message ----- <BR>From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <PATTERNDUDE@COMCAST.NET><BR>To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 11:41 PM<BR>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR><BR><BR>> Let me call the example, because yours is really just deja vu all over<BR>> again.<BR>><BR>> The pilot performs two perfect center
manuvers in a row. What they are<BR>> doesn't matter but let's say they are the new triangle and then the<BR>> golfball. The only thing is, the base altitude for each is 50ft<BR>different.<BR>> Should this get a lower score than another pilot that also flies the same<BR>> manuvers also perfect but their base altitude is the same?<BR>><BR>> --Lance<BR>><BR>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> From: "Keith Black" <TKEITHBLACK@GMAIL.COM><BR>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 10:54 PM<BR>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>><BR>><BR>> >I completely disagree with you, this is not a S&G issue. In my example I<BR>> > never said the drop in altitude wasn't smooth and graceful. In fact, it<BR>> > may<BR>> > well have been the most graceful and smooth loss of altitude ever, but<BR>it<BR>> > still gets a downgrade based on
geometry.<BR>> ><BR>> > New example:<BR>> ><BR>> > A pilot gets blown way too far in, so on the long line from the end of<BR>the<BR>> > humpty to the square eight the pilot very smoothly and gracefully blends<BR>> > in<BR>> > rudder and moves the plane out about 75 yards. Fifteen meters prior to<BR>> > center this crafty flier adjusts his track and straightens the track<BR>out.<BR>> > You, however, being the attentive judge that you are notice this sneaky<BR>> > adjustment and judge it how? And on what grounds?<BR>> ><BR>> > For me it's easy, you can't both fly a parallel track to the flight line<BR>> > and<BR>> > adjust your distance from the flight line by 75 meters, that's bad<BR>> > geometry.<BR>> > Seems we teach the Sportsman this lesson in the two straight flight<BR>> > segments. For a 75 meter adjustment I'd probably take 1 point, maybe<BR>more<BR>> >
depending on how dramatic the adjustment in distance looked.<BR>> ><BR>> > "But he straightened out 15 meters before the start of the square", you<BR>> > say,<BR>> > "what about the 'no man's land'.<BR>> ><BR>> > "Don't care", I say, "we fly a sequence, not a lot of individual<BR>> > maneuvers.<BR>> > There is no 'no man's land'."<BR>> ><BR>> > Again I'm more than willing to change the way I judge if Don or the<BR>> > judging<BR>> > committee explain that I'm wrong, after all, what do I know.<BR>> ><BR>> > Keith Black<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> > From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <PATTERNDUDE@COMCAST.NET><BR>> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> > Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 6:43 PM<BR>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> >> 1/2 pt
S&G<BR>> >><BR>> >> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >> From: "Keith Black" <TKEITHBLACK@GMAIL.COM><BR>> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >> Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 11:32 PM<BR>> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>> >><BR>> >><BR>> >> >I agree that the downgrade is lenient, this didn't escape my<BR>attention.<BR>> >> > However, I'm not sure by what other criteria/rule one would downgrade<BR>a<BR>> >> > loss<BR>> >> > of altitude. Perhaps Don could help here.<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> > Keep in mind that the 15 foot drop you mention may not appear as much<BR>> >> > of<BR>> > a<BR>> >> > drop depending on the height of the plane and box positioning during<BR>> >> > the<BR>> >> > drop. I'll be honest, right or wrong, if
I'm in the chair and I see a<BR>> >> > noticeable drop I'll take 1/2 point, if it's really obvious drop I'd<BR>> > take<BR>> >> > 1<BR>> >> > pt. Maybe I'm wrong, this is a good time to set me straight and level<BR>> > ;-)<BR>> >> > .<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> > OK Lance, so if you're judging Sportsman and you see the plane drop<BR>20<BR>> >> > feet<BR>> >> > on the straight flight out as it flies from one end of the box to the<BR>> >> > other,<BR>> >> > how would you score it. By your definition seems like you have to<BR>give<BR>> > it<BR>> >> > a<BR>> >> > 10 since the error would only be around 3 to 4 degrees.<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> > Keith Black<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> ><BR>> >> > ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >> > From: "Lance Van Nostrand"
<PATTERNDUDE@COMCAST.NET><BR>> >> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >> > Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 10:32 PM<BR>> >> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> ><BR>> >> >> I don't think the rules support your claim that the 15m entry/exit<BR>is<BR>> >> >> a<BR>> >> >> minimum. I think you have just made up your own rule to downgrade<BR>at<BR>> >> >> 1<BR>> >> >> point per 15. However, this is very lenient downgrading because to<BR>> >> >> get<BR>> > a<BR>> >> > 1<BR>> >> >> point downgrade by descending or ascending at 15 degrees, over a<BR>100m<BR>> >> >> distance, the plane would change altitude by 77 ft. A pilot<BR>changing<BR>> >> >> altitude by 15 ft or so would only be making a 3 degree
error.<BR>(note:<BR>> >> >> the<BR>> >> >> box width at 150 meters is 600 meters).<BR>> >> >><BR>> >> >> Therefore, if I lose 15 ft of altitude as I fly from the end of the<BR>> >> > reverse<BR>> >> >> cuban into the stall turn (manuvers 1 and 2) this should hardly<BR>> > register<BR>> >> > as<BR>> >> >> a downgrade.<BR>> >> >><BR>> >> >> --Lance<BR>> >> >><BR>> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >> >> From: "Keith Black" <TKEITHBLACK@GMAIL.COM><BR>> >> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >> >> Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 7:40 PM<BR>> >> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>> >> >><BR>> >> >><BR>> >> >> >I agree with Don's
description on the maneuver, this makes perfect<BR>> > sense<BR>> >> > to<BR>> >> >> > me. However, I really don't think it matters if you visualize the<BR>> >> >> > center<BR>> >> >> > or<BR>> >> >> > the first corner as the start because IMO any deviation in track,<BR>> >> > altitude<BR>> >> >> > change or wing bobble approaching the eight, whether 15 m or<BR>greater<BR>> >> > from<BR>> >> >> > the theoretical start of the eight is grounds for downgrade.<BR>> >> >> ><BR>> >> >> > This thinking goes to what Lance was discussing as "no man's<BR>land".<BR>> > I'm<BR>> >> >> > not<BR>> >> >> > sure there is such a thing, I've always thought of the 15 m entry<BR>> > line<BR>> >> > as<BR>> >> >> > a<BR>> >>
>> > minimum.<BR>> >> >> ><BR>> >> >> > Let's take an example. A pilot comes out of the Humpty Bump prior<BR>to<BR>> >> >> > the<BR>> >> >> > figure eight and draws a 15 m straight line. Then they start<BR>loosing<BR>> >> >> > altitude and continue dropping until 15 m before center (Lance's<BR>> >> >> > theoretical<BR>> >> >> > no man's land). I for one would deduct points from the eight based<BR>> >> >> > on<BR>> >> > the<BR>> >> >> > 15<BR>> >> >> > degree rule. I don't think the spirit of the rules is "anything<BR>> > goes",<BR>> >> > or<BR>> >> >> > "it's not so bad" as long as it's not 15 m before a maneuver<BR>starts.<BR>> > If<BR>> >> >> > one<BR>> >> >> > does score this way then the pilot
that keeps a perfect line<BR>between<BR>> >> > these<BR>> >> >> > two maneuvers will not be rewarded for doing a better job.<BR>> >> >> ><BR>> >> >> > Keith Black<BR>> >> >> ><BR>> >> >> > ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >> >> > From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <PATTERNDUDE@COMCAST.NET><BR>> >> >> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >> >> > Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 8:07 AM<BR>> >> >> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>> >> >> ><BR>> >> >> ><BR>> >> >> >> Don,<BR>> >> >> >><BR>> >> >> >> Since it is the point of this list to be nitpicky, let me say<BR>that<BR>> >> >> >> when<BR>> >> >> > the<BR>> >>
>> >> plane is inverted at center it is at a point that it will never<BR>> > return<BR>> >> >> >> to,<BR>> >> >> >> therefore the actual center can not be the start of the manuver.<BR>> >> >> >> Granted,<BR>> >> >> >> the center is part of the straight line that begins and ends all<BR>> >> >> >> manuvers,<BR>> >> >> >> but it is not part of the actual figure 8. So to be complete,<BR>> > judging<BR>> >> >> >> starts 15m before the exit of the final radius and ends 15m after<BR>> > this<BR>> >> >> >> point. This encompases the center but is not the actual beginning<BR>> > and<BR>> >> >> >> ending.<BR>> >> >> >><BR>> >> >> >> As for Stuart's comment, I think any downgrade applied to what<BR>the<BR>> >>
>> > airplane<BR>> >> >> >> does when it is in "no man's land" falls in the smoothness and<BR>> >> >> > Gracefulness<BR>> >> >> >> category and should be minimal. ("no man's land" exists between<BR>> > some<BR>> >> >> >> manuvers that are far apart where the prior manuver and its 15m<BR>> >> >> >> exit<BR>> >> > line<BR>> >> >> >> end, but there is a long space before the 15m entry line of the<BR>> >> >> >> next<BR>> >> >> >> manuver.)<BR>> >> >> >><BR>> >> >> >> --Lance<BR>> >> >> >><BR>> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >> >> >> From: "Don Ramsey (CoxNet)" <DON.RAMSEY@COX.NET><BR>> >> >> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List"
<NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >> >> >> Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 7:40 PM<BR>> >> >> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>> >> >> >><BR>> >> >> >><BR>> >> >> >> > Lance,<BR>> >> >> >> ><BR>> >> >> >> > I believe it starts at center. Straight line before center and<BR>> > start<BR>> >> > at<BR>> >> >> >> > center. The reason I say that is rule 14.1 which says "Each<BR>time<BR>> >> >> >> > the<BR>> >> >> >> > model<BR>> >> >> >> > passes before the judges, a maneuver is executed, except after<BR>> >> > takeoff<BR>> >> >> > and<BR>> >> >> >> > landing." Of course, some maneuvers start before center as the<BR>> >
slow<BR>> >> >> > roll,<BR>> >> >> >> > etc. As for scoring, I'm not entirely sure it matters.<BR>> >> >> >> ><BR>> >> >> >> > Don<BR>> >> >> >> ><BR>> >> >> >> > ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >> >> >> > From: <JIVEY61@BELLSOUTH.NET><BR>> >> >> >> > To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >> >> >> > Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 7:16 PM<BR>> >> >> >> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>> >> >> >> ><BR>> >> >> >> ><BR>> >> >> >> >> Lance<BR>> >> >> >> >> You will have to have a entry line before the push to vertical<BR>> > past<BR>> >> >> >> >> center.This is
where I think it starts... at the start of the<BR>> > entry<BR>> >> >> > line.<BR>> >> >> >> >><BR>> >> >> >> >> Jim Ivey<BR>> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >> >> >> >> From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <PATTERNDUDE@COMCAST.NET><BR>> >> >> >> >> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >> >> >> >> Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 7:51 PM<BR>> >> >> >> >> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>> >> >> >> >><BR>> >> >> >> >><BR>> >> >> >> >>> OK,so where does the manuver begin and end? At center, the<BR>> > radius<BR>> >> >> > after<BR>> >> >> >> >>> center, at the first corner
initiation?<BR>> >> >> >> >>><BR>> >> >> >> >>> --Lance<BR>> >> >> >> >>><BR>> >> >> >> >>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >> >> >> >>> From: <JIVEY61@BELLSOUTH.NET><BR>> >> >> >> >>> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >> >> >> >>> Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 4:06 PM<BR>> >> >> >> >>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>> >> >> >> >>><BR>> >> >> >> >>><BR>> >> >> >> >>> > Jason<BR>> >> >> >> >>> > The way we are flying the 8 is enter inverted and 1st loop<BR>> >> >> >> >>> > (outside)<BR>> >> >> >>
>>> > to<BR>> >> >> >> >>> > the<BR>> >> >> >> >>> > right of center and next (inside) loop to the left of<BR>> > center.The<BR>> >> >> > first<BR>> >> >> >> >>> > loop<BR>> >> >> >> >>> > is outside loop and 1st vertical segment starts past<BR>> >> >> >> >>> > center.Of<BR>> >> >> > course<BR>> >> >> >> >> swap<BR>> >> >> >> >>> > left and right for opposite flying direction.<BR>> >> >> >> >>> ><BR>> >> >> >> >>> ><BR>> >> >> >> >>> > Jim Ivey<BR>> >> >> >> >>> ><BR>> >> >> >> >>> > ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> >>
>> >> >>> > From: "JShulman" <JSHULMAN@CFL.RR.COM><BR>> >> >> >> >>> > To: "NSRCA" <NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> >> >> >> >>> > Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 4:08 PM<BR>> >> >> >> >>> > Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Square 8<BR>> >> >> >> >>> ><BR>> >> >> >> >>> ><BR>> >> >> >> >>> >> Hi All,<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >><BR>> >> >> >> >>> >> Does the Square horizontal 8 start at center or just past<BR>> >> > center?<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >><BR>> >> >> >> >>> >> Regards,<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >> Jason<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >>
www.jasonshulman.com<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >> www.shulmanaviation.com<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >> www.composite-arf.com<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >> -- <BR>> >> >> >> >>> >> No virus found in this outgoing message.<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >> Checked by AVG Free Edition.<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >> Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.2/528 - Release<BR>> > Date:<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >> 11/10/2006<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >><BR>> >> >> >> >>> >><BR>> >> >> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >> >> >> >>>
>> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> >> >> >>> >> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>> >> >> >> >>> ><BR>> >> >> >> >>> > _______________________________________________<BR>> >> >> >> >>> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >> >> >> >>> > NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> >> >> >>> > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>> >> >> >> >>><BR>> >> >> >> >>> _______________________________________________<BR>> >> >> >> >>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >> >> >> >>> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> >> >> >>>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>> >> >> >> >><BR>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________<BR>> >> >> >> >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >> >> >> >> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> >> >> >> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>> >> >> >> ><BR>> >> >> >> > _______________________________________________<BR>> >> >> >> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >> >> >> > NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> >> >> > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>> >> >> >><BR>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________<BR>> >> >> >> NSRCA-discussion
mailing list<BR>> >> >> >> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> >> >> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>> >> >> ><BR>> >> >> > _______________________________________________<BR>> >> >> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >> >> > NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> >> > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>> >> >><BR>> >> >> _______________________________________________<BR>> >> >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >> >> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> >> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>> >> ><BR>> >> > _______________________________________________<BR>> >> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >> >
NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>> >><BR>> >> _______________________________________________<BR>> >> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>> ><BR>> > _______________________________________________<BR>> > NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> > NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> > http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>><BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>