<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<STYLE>.hmmessage P {
PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
BODY.hmmessage {
FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma
}
</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3199" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY class=hmmessage bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=387052721-21102007><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff>I find all of these thougths interesting about an old problem
which will not go away. Maybe Jon has a good solution. Based on lots
of experience viewing pilots that try to do a real snap vs those that minimize
the amount of elevator and rudder they use and end up with a more or less
aileron roll, the problem is discerning the difference. The rule book
requirement to see a pitch has been around forever and is based on full scale
where by my observation the aircraft has so much mass that you can
actually see the plane pitch and move forward before the rotation
starts. With our planes it aint gonna happen that way. I wish
the train of discussion had happened a month ago before the rules change cycle
closed. I would like to see FAI attack this as well.
</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma><B>From:</B> nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Earl
Haury<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, October 21, 2007 2:55 PM<BR><B>To:</B> NSRCA
Mailing List<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging-snap &
spin<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3>I also agree with the comments of Jon and John.
Chris's observations are also valid and I'd like to expand on his thoughts a
bit. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3>Remember, we use contestant judging - so it's a
pretty good bet that if the judge isn't capable of judging a snap correctly,
it's also unlikely that person can perform one correctly as a pilot. I'll
bet that often the judge "requiring" a huge "break" is the same person flying
them with a snap switch, or dual rates, set to maximum travels for all axis.
They just chop power and pull the switch or stuff the sticks into the corner.
Generally this results in a three axis track departure of some 15 to 30 degrees
(as a barrel roll), now interpreted as a "break", before flow separation occurs
on the lagging wing and a snap actually occurs. These excessive control
inputs also bury the snap and make it totally ugly. However - these folks
are doing what they think is required for a snap, so it must be right. (A lot of
these never snap and are total barrel rolls.)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3>So - the education process is better focused on the
pilot than the judge, and both will benefit (as will we all). As John points out
- each full scale will have different snap characteristics. Same with pattern
airplanes, and each situation may vary (45 deg lines, vertical up -down, level,
avalanche, etc.). Snaps take a good set-up and skill to fly well, as well as
being a fun part of pattern. Flyers who take the time to determine just what
set-up up and technique their airplane needs to snap well shouldn't be penalized
by those (pilot judges) who don't. However, this whole issue might slip
away if those who've figured out how to do decent snaps would take the time to
share with those that haven't. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3>Earl</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=3></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=cjm767driver@hotmail.com href="mailto:cjm767driver@hotmail.com">chris
moon</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> Sunday, October 21, 2007 2:01
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Judging-snap & spin</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Jon and John are correct in their comments. <BR>To add
something - I think the problem is that many of us "cater" to the <BR>judges
who do not judge these maneuvers correctly. There is no <BR>requirement to
over exaggerate the break in order to do the maneuver, <BR>however many do
just that as a defensive tactic against the judge who <BR>refuses to judge
correctly. The problem is the JUDGE - not the pilot. <BR>I don't advocate
changing the schedules or K factors as a work around <BR>for poorly informed
judges. We are much too politically correct and <BR>accept the zeros from them
if we don't do it "their" way. If you <BR>compete regularly, you know who they
are and cater your maneuver to <BR>accommodate their lack of ability in the
chair. Sorry for the rant, but <BR>we are talking about fixing things the
wrong way for the wrong reasons. <BR><BR>Chris <BR><BR><BR>John Ford wrote:
<BR>> Jon, <BR>> Hear, hear. <BR>> Couldn't have said it better!
<BR>> I also share the opinion that in the case of the snap (or the spin
<BR>> entry for that matter), our judging standards don't judge actual
<BR>> flight characteristics of the particular plane, and we are asking
<BR>> pilots to exagerate the break because that is what we agreed we
wanted <BR>> to see all the time, not because every plane should show it
naturally. <BR>> Maybe we are sitting on this bed of nails because for many
people, the <BR>> mystery and controversy of the break is more attractive
than <BR>> aerodynamic reality? <BR>> I've done lots of snaps in
full-sized planes and there are as many <BR>> break styles as there are
airplane designs. Some older/larger planes <BR>> require that you slow up
and reef back almost to the buffet before <BR>> mashing the rudder, others
are so touchy that a modest tap on the <BR>> rudder with only a hint of
pitchup will send the beast thru 150 <BR>> degrees of autorotation before
you can think about it. In both cases, <BR>> believe me, it was a true snap
roll, but in the first case, you may <BR>> have seen some break, but in the
latter, it would have looked like <BR>> everything happened at the same
time around all 3 axes. I'm sitting in <BR>> the thing, and I can't tell!
<BR>> Essentially the same comments for spin entry, in agreement with Jon's
<BR>> comments. <BR>> I'll judge by the rules of the CD, but I do it
with a bit of a <BR>> shoulder shrug, I suppose. <BR>> John <BR>>
<BR>> */JonLowe@aol.com/* wrote: <BR>> <BR>> The age old problem of
what a "break" is in a snap was solved at <BR>> the Don Lowe Masters a
couple of years ago. They defined it as a <BR>> "simultaneous departure in
all three axis". There you saw graceful <BR>> snap entries, clearly
defineable as a snap. At the IMAC Tuscon <BR>> shootout, they had had the
pitch departure requirement, and most <BR>> were pitching what looked like
45 degrees (was probably 25 <BR>> degrees), before they entered the snap.
Break, pause, enter snap. <BR>> Ugly as hell. At a pattern judging seminar
I went to this year, we <BR>> sat around for half an our trying to decide
what a "pitch break" <BR>> was. We finally decided that if you saw anything
at all, it was <BR>> ok. But beware of IMAC judges crossing over, unless
they have been <BR>> retrained. I got some 5's this year this year, because
they didn't <BR>> see a large break. <BR>> As regards spin entries,
there are too many spin entry nazis IMHO. <BR>> The rule book clearly
defines downgrades for entries. In my book, <BR>> if they don't break any
of those rules, (wing coming over before <BR>> the nose passes thru
horizontal, not stalled, weathervaning, <BR>> etc.), I don't downgrade for
the entry. Too many people want to <BR>> add their own definition to the
rules about how an entry "should" <BR>> look, and tell you they downgraded
or zeroed you. When you ask <BR>> them what specific rule you violated,
they say it "didn't look <BR>> right". Some of these same people will coach
you to "cheat" at the <BR>> entry to get a pretty one, dumping up elevator
to get the nose to <BR>> fall thru, which really breaks the stall.
Unfortunately, all <BR>> airplanes do not enter the same way, and some
entries are not <BR>> pretty, but they don't break the rules. Maybe, as
well as teaching <BR>> what isn't correct, we ought to teach what ISN'T
downgradeable in <BR>> some of these manuevers. <BR>> Jon <BR>> In a
message dated 10/21/2007 8:50:52 AM Central Daylight Time, <BR>>
patterndude@tx.rr.com writes: <BR>> <BR>> Ron, <BR>> Your idea caused
me to stop and think. I'm wondering if it <BR>> would really help, however.
If a pilot "in the hunt" screws <BR>> the landing (K=1) he's now "out of
the hunt" on that round. <BR>> Scores are often very compressed at local
contests so even if <BR>> we reduce the KF, a bad score on any manuver is
usually enough <BR>> to do mortal damage. <BR>> --Lance <BR>>
<BR>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> *From:* Ron Lockhart
<MAILTO:RONLOCK@COMCAST.NET><BR>> *To:* NSRCA Mailing List <BR>>
<MAILTO:NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> *Sent:* Saturday, October
20, 2007 11:34 AM <BR>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging-snap
& spin <BR>> <BR>> Eliminating is one solution - a price that comes
with that <BR>> solution is lack of practice doing and judging snaps-
<BR>> which is desirable for some in AMA classes, and for sure <BR>> for
those looking ahead to F3A. <BR>> An in between thought - reduce the K
factor considerable <BR>> for snap and spin maneuvers. <BR>> That leaves
them in the schedules, provides flying and <BR>> judging practice on them,
but reduces the <BR>> impact of the imperfect judging of them on round
scores. <BR>> Ron Lockhart <BR>> <BR>> ----- Original Message -----
<BR>> *From:* BUDDYonRC@aol.com <MAILTO:BUDDYONRC@AOL.COM><BR>> *To:*
nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org <BR>>
<MAILTO:NSRCA-DISCUSSION@LISTS.NSRCA.ORG><BR>> *Sent:* Saturday, October
20, 2007 11:44 AM <BR>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging <BR>>
<BR>> My cents worth on the subject. <BR>> Snaps and Spin entry seem to
cause much of the problem. <BR>> Why do we continue to repeat trying to
solve a problem <BR>> that most agree is controversial at best and <BR>>
impossible to judge consistently on an equal basis? <BR>> Seems that the
best solution is to eliminate these <BR>> from the schedules and pick
maneuvers that more suit <BR>> Precision Aerobatics and their ability to be
judged <BR>> correctly by everyone not just those who have advanced
<BR>> to the top of the super judge platform. <BR>> <BR>> Buddy
<BR>> <BR>> Jon Lowe <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
<BR>> See what's new at AOL.com <BR>> <HTTP: www.aol.com
?NCID="AOLCMP00300000001170">and Make AOL Your <BR>> Homepage <HTTP:
www.aol.com mksplash.adp?NCID="AOLCMP00300000001169">. <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>> Do You
Yahoo!? <BR>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection
around <BR>> http://mail.yahoo.com <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>
<HR>
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Café. <A
href="http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_OctWLtagline"
target=_new>Stop by today!</A>
<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>