<!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 6.00.2800.1528" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Fred, are you suggesting that a 45 degree angle at
the end of the box would appear the same if the plane is five feet in front of
the flight line or 500 feet in front of the flight line? I don't buy
it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Keith</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.net href="mailto:fhhuber@clearwire.net">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 Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, April 09, 2007 11:41
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] APPARENT
GEOMETRY (PARALLAXED VIEW)</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Distance in/out has no effect on parallax. Its the
angle relative to the viewed line.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>The judges and pilots will have the same parallax to deal
with if the pilot flys a 30 inch model at 85 yards away as they
will with a 60 inch model at 170 yards. You might be hard pressed
to tell plane which is which on film... Thats why 1/4 and 1/2 scale
models get used for making movies. The camera can remove perspective
clues that indicate distance and scale.</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=tkeithblack@gmail.com href="mailto:tkeithblack@gmail.com">Keith
Black</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, April 09, 2007 11:24
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
APPARENT GEOMETRY (PARALLAXED VIEW)</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I tend to agree with Ed. Furthermore, what hard
facts could possibly be stated about this in the rule book? Would you want
it to say that when observing end maneuvers the judge should downgrade if
the angle doesn't look steeper than 45 deg.? IMO this is inappropriate for
the rule book, though it's perfectly acceptable to point out in a judges
clinic or judging tips document.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Keep in mind also that the distance in our out
will also change the look of the end 45 deg. angle. This means that this
discussion also would need to be in the rule book. I think the rule
book should just state facts, educating the pilot and judge on how to
recognize geometry so they can enforce the rule book is important but
ancillary to the official rule book.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>My opinion.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Keith Black</FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<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> Monday, April 09, 2007 11:04
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
APPARENT GEOMETRY (PARALLAXED VIEW)</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Have been thinking about this discussion (currently going on
elsewhere also) and suddenly had the light bulb go on.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>At some clubs as we enter the driveway that leads to the field, 1/2
mile away or maybe a bit more, or the NATs site for example from site 3
(grass field I think) to site 2, it is very easy to watch the geometry of
the plane being flown. At this distance, there is almost zero
vertical parallax due to the distance from the pilot.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Sooooo, what do we see at this distance. Loops sure do look
round to me when flown by good pilots, 45's look like 45's or maybe 50's
(my contention is a slight bit steeper always scores better than a slight
bit flatter) and even though the pilot is standing "under" the manuever,
the good pilots still keep the geometry when looked at from a distance,
Correct.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>At the end of the box, standing this distance away it is easier to
see the geometry again, with only a very little parallax and the good
pilots, IMO still keep the geometry very close to what it should be.
The 45's may be a slight bit steeper, but from a distance the 1/2 cuban 8
flown well, will still have a round radius, with very close to a 45 degree
downline (again depending on what the local teacher states), with the
rolling element centered.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>My point is, too much is being made of this parallax issue and think
judges will reward the pilot that flies the correct geometry, which again
IMO, can be verified by watching a flight from a distance.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Just my $.02</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Ed<BR><BR><B><I>rcmaster199@aol.com</I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">
<DIV>A question has been posted from an IMAC gentleman (who is
trying to write better IMAC rules) as to how Pattern people fly and
judge skewed appearance of maneuvers at box ends or in center when tall
maneuvers (Hourglass, Vert Sq 8, Rolling Ess, etc) are involved. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Some of us have searched the book and found no wording written that
describes what the pilots' responsibilities and the judges'
responsibilities are in the performance of the skewed apparent geometry.
There is a statement in the Judges Training tape in regard to end
maneuvers.... that these will appear different even when accurately
flown. The oness is essentially on the judges to know how the True
Geometry should appear when flown at an angle to the eye, and must not
downgrade for Apparent or Parallaxed appearance difference.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Spoke with Don about this earlier today and we decided to present
the question to the group and get some conversation going. We should be
explicit in the book regarding how such Apparent Geometry should be
treated....ie- what is the pilot's responsibility and what is the
judge's. Description improvements could be written over the next couple
rule cycles.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The pilot's responsibility may appear easy.... they simply need to
fly precise geometry per the book. True enough, BUT.....consider what is
actually flown, especially by the top guys, and what scores well. These
are not necessarily as precise as one might think. The better pilots
tend to fly purposely flawed maneuvers that give the impression of
precision. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>MattK</DIV>
<DIV class=AOLPromoFooter>
<HR style="MARGIN-TOP: 10px">
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free
from AOL at <A href="http://www.aol.com/?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000437"
target=_blank><B>AOL.com</B></A>.<BR></DIV>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<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>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>Checked by AVG Free
Edition.<BR>Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.26/752 - Release Date:
4/8/2007 8:34 PM<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<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>