<html>
<head>
<style>
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma
}
</style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
I was the one who started the thread on RCU after seeing the midair at Dallas. I agree with Mike H. about midairs being a tragic loss of time and $$ that could be lessened by just trying out different ideas. There's got to be a way of doing this. To the guys who say they have never seen a midair, just wait, you're now cursed. District 6 has had its fair share of them. Also, it seems every person who brings up a good idea has it immediately shot down by the naysayers. Come one guys, let's just try to look at this together and come up with a solution that isn't too imposing. I liked the idea of the CD with a whip out there running one line with one plane taking off while the other is preparing for landing. BUT, as soon as that was brought up a friend told me if you fly only one line, you'll only be able to fly 4 rounds and he won't waste his time going to a tournament. Another says the degree offset won't work. I don't know about that since we've never seen it in action. At least, let's give these ideas a try it at a couple of contests and rule out the ones that don't work or are too time consuming. <BR>
<BR>
I have a personal reason for this. I'm supposed to be getting my Integral from Jason in the next couple of weeks and don't want to see it taken out either. <BR>
<BR>
Thanks,<BR>
<BR>
John S. Johnson<BR>
Lubbock, TX<BR><BR>> From: mwickizer@msn.com<BR>> To: nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 18:31:23 -0500<BR>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air discussion<BR>> <BR>> You can add a Beryll and an Insight from this year to that list. We seem to <BR>> have more than our share of mid-airs in D6.<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> >From: "Dr. Mike Harrison" <drmikedds@sbcglobal.net><BR>> >Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>> >Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air discussion<BR>> >Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:27:00 -0500<BR>> ><BR>> >Keith,<BR>> >I think the 10 degree offset has merit. I believe most fields can <BR>> >accommodate that. Make that 10'('-short for degree) for each pilot from <BR>> >runway, effecting a net 20' change. The centerline would be offset 10' <BR>> >each also.<BR>> ><BR>> >Also, another help is to separate the lines farther so that center <BR>> >manuevers do not overlap.<BR>> ><BR>> >It is easy enough for the CD at some contest somewhere to try. I would <BR>> >encourage it. I don't know of any contests we(you and I) have been to that <BR>> >this could not be implimented. I can think of 4 midairs that would have <BR>> >been avoided if this system were in place. You-2 midairs, Don Ramsey -1, <BR>> >Glen Watson-1. That is a loss in the last 3 years of 7 airplanes- about <BR>> >$14,000.<BR>> ><BR>> >I am all for this concept.<BR>> ><BR>> >Lets try it a t Crowley.<BR>> ><BR>> >Mike<BR>> >ps as far as previous comments that midairs are rare and a necessity of the <BR>> >sport, I disagree. They are all too common, they effect quality of flying, <BR>> >they are a stupid loss, and there has to be a reasonable way to avoid it.<BR>> > ----- Original Message -----<BR>> > From: Keith Black<BR>> > To: NSRCA Mailing List<BR>> > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 1:23 PM<BR>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air discussion<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > The problem is that one avoidance caller can't do a good job and would <BR>> >sound the alarm too often due to the depth perception issue. A second <BR>> >caller (spotter) at the corner of the box would reduce alerts to a minimum <BR>> >and would probably allow the spotters to anticipate collisions much sooner. <BR>> >I think this is at least worth experimenting with.<BR>> ><BR>> > As to the offset paths, adequite offset paths are not possible at most <BR>> >fields due to fly-over issues and we're already flying off by 10 degrees as <BR>> >we go in and out constantly.<BR>> ><BR>> > As to agreeing who flies close and who flies near, I've tried this at <BR>> >practice an it's amazing how often two pilots still drift to common ground. <BR>> >Plus, this often would not be agreeable to both pilots.<BR>> ><BR>> > Keith<BR>> > ----- Original Message -----<BR>> > From: vicenterc@comcast.net<BR>> > To: NSRCA Mailing List ; NSRCA Mailing List<BR>> > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 6:52 AM<BR>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air discussion<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > Probably the avoidance callers between both lines makes sense. He <BR>> >could be consider a third judge. If he sound the horn means that both <BR>> >pilots has the right to bail out and they can resume the fly. It has to be <BR>> >organized. The pilots flying in line A will be instructed to go down and <BR>> >cut the engine. The pilots in line B will be instructed to go up. Of <BR>> >course if they are rolling they will need to stop rolling. We need to <BR>> >think what needs to be done when we are flying vertical. It could be one <BR>> >bail to the right and the other bail to the left or just both cut engines. <BR>> >The avoidance judges will be the pilots that just finish their rounds.<BR>> ><BR>> > I don't think that the pilot's caller can pay attention to both <BR>> >planes. He is busy trying to help the pilot and reading the next manuever.<BR>> ><BR>> > Regards,<BR>> ><BR>> > --<BR>> > Vicente "Vince" Bortone<BR>> ><BR>> > -------------- Original message --------------<BR>> > From: "Dave Michael" <davidmichael1@comcast.net><BR>> ><BR>> > No- if it's obvious that you were in no danger of a mid-air then you <BR>> >get a zero.<BR>> > ----- Original Message -----<BR>> > From: J N Hiller<BR>> > To: NSRCA Mailing List<BR>> > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 6:17 AM<BR>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air discussion<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > Thanks, now I understand. If I didn't hit the other airplane I <BR>> >obviously didn't need to bail out and would receive a zero.<BR>> ><BR>> > Jim Hiller<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > -----Original Message-----<BR>> > From: nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org <BR>> >[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Dave Michael<BR>> > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 7:39 PM<BR>> > To: NSRCA Mailing List<BR>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air discussion<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > No- you can't bail in this situation. It would be obvious to the <BR>> >judges and you'd receive a 0 on the manuever- and the next as well if you <BR>> >were to exit in the wrong direction or orientation for the next manuever.<BR>> ><BR>> > ----- Original Message -----<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > From: J N Hiller<BR>> ><BR>> > To: NSRCA Mailing List<BR>> ><BR>> > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 9:39 PM<BR>> ><BR>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air discussion<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > If I am in the process of hosing a maneuver can I bail out claming <BR>> >mid-air avoidance and re-fly it?<BR>> ><BR>> > I have only had one mid-air in pattern competition and that was <BR>> >pre-turnaround, on a turnaround over a quarter mile out. I had a close one <BR>> >this year I saw the other airplane go by and heard the gasps from behind <BR>> >without flinching. I flew in a Scale Masters finals competition once in <BR>> >LasVegas with five flight lines. I have gotten so I don't pay any attention <BR>> >to other airplanes when I am flying.<BR>> ><BR>> > I guess I would flinch plenty, maybe even crash if we were using <BR>> >that 140 DB air horn to warn of potential midairs.<BR>> ><BR>> > Jim Hiller<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > -----Original Message-----<BR>> > From: nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org <BR>> >[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Dave Michael<BR>> > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 4:45 PM<BR>> > To: NSRCA Mailing List<BR>> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air discussion<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > I recall a discussion on this subject earlier in the year. My <BR>> >background is heavy IMAC but I am wanting to fly some more pattern soon. <BR>> >Part of the earlier discussion was about the issue that calling avoidance <BR>> >and breaking from the sequence if you think you might mid-air is allowed in <BR>> >IMAC but not in pattern.<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > In 10+ years of IMAC competition- maybe 40-50 contests - I can <BR>> >only think of a few mid-airs, maybe three or so. Believe me when I say <BR>> >that calling avoidance and breaking the sequence is not something that you <BR>> >want to do in the heat of competition- it can really throw off a good <BR>> >sequence. Having said that, with fewer mid-airs in IMAC perhaps we can <BR>> >conclude that allowing sequence breaks to avoid potential mid-airs makes <BR>> >sense for pattern too.<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > Dave Michael<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > ----- Original Message -----<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > From: Keith Black<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > To: NSRCA Mailing List<BR>> ><BR>> > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 5:47 PM<BR>> ><BR>> > Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Mid-Air discussion<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > Following my mid-air at the N. Dallas contest this weekend there's <BR>> >been an RCU thread started on the subject. From this discussion an <BR>> >interesting idea has evolved. For those who would like to read the thread <BR>> >here's the link: <BR>> >http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_6409493/anchors_6413018/mpage_1/key_/anchor/tm.htm#6413018<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > If you'd just like to hear the idea I'll paste my RCU posting <BR>> >below:<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > This is my third mid-air in four seasons. My first may have been <BR>> >avoided, but the last two were a complete shock to both me and my caller. <BR>> >In fact, in mid-air #2 my caller said "you're good" (meaning we were not <BR>> >going to hit). The other pilot's caller walked up to me and apologized <BR>> >saying that he told the other pilot that he was in the clear. Therefore, I <BR>> >don't know how effective a third "spotter" sitting between the lines could <BR>> >be.<BR>> ><BR>> > That being said, two recent events have given me an idea of how we <BR>> >might be able to greatly improve this problem. The first light bulb was <BR>> >Vicente's suggestion of the spotter that warns the pilots. The second event <BR>> >was my walk out to pick up the fragments of my beloved Brio. As I was <BR>> >walking back I stood for a bit to observe the planes looking down the <BR>> >flight path. It was amazing how clearly you can see each plane as it moves <BR>> >in and out from the flight line.<BR>> ><BR>> > So here's the idea: What if we sat a spotter at the corner of the <BR>> >box to watch plane separation in the distance out dimension and then had <BR>> >the other spotter sitting between the judges (or even back under the cover) <BR>> >watching in the right to left dimension. These two spotters could use <BR>> >radios with headsets and continually talk to each other. There are many <BR>> >times that planes appear to be close to a mid-air from the flight line <BR>> >viewpoint, however, the number of times that both spotters would be alarmed <BR>> >should be! fairly minimal. When this occurs the spotter could sound an <BR>> >alarm (this deserves discussion as to the details) and each pilot could <BR>> >peel off of their course. If one pilot froze the collision may still be <BR>> >avoided by just one pilot taking action. Sure, this could cause a mid-air, <BR>> >but viewing from two dimensions should help in alerting only when an impact <BR>> >is probable.<BR>> ><BR>> > Some have stated that they've seen very few mid-airs, but my <BR>> >experience in D6 and NATS is that at least 70% (if not more) of the <BR>> >contests I've attended have had mid-airs. I'm not going to run away crying <BR>> >and quit the hobby due to this mid-air, but reducing such losses would be a <BR>> >benefit to us all!<BR>> ><BR>> > Keith Black<BR>> ><BR>> ><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>> >------------------------------------------------------------------------<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>> ><BR>> >------------------------------------------------------------------------<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>> >----------------------------------------------------------------------------<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>> >------------------------------------------------------------------------------<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>> >_______________________________________________<BR>> >NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> >NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> >http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<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 /><hr />Explore the seven wonders of the world <a href='http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=7+wonders+world&mkt=en-US&form=QBRE' target='_new'>Learn more!</a></body>
</html>