<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12pt"><DIV>Why did this discussion come so early this year?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I think adjust the K factor to account for the variability.<BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><FONT size=2 face=Tahoma>
<HR SIZE=1>
<B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> "Vicente "Vince" Bortone" <vicenterc@comcast.net><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Monday, October 12, 2009 5:12:44 PM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] How I became an expert Snap Judge (TIC)<BR></FONT><BR>
<STYLE type=text/css>p {margin:0;}</STYLE>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<P>I believe that the current downgrade is severe. AMA 5 points. FAI 5 or more points if my memory is correct. </P>
<P> </P>
<P>In local contest I have been using 3 points downgrade. I know that is wrong but it has been my best way for me to take into account the break issue. It used to be zero and it was changed to 5 points (IMAC still a 10 points downgrade or nada). Therefore, Ron is correct. Probably makes sense to go 2-3 points downgrade if the judge can not see the break before rotation. <BR><BR>Vicente "Vince" Bortone<BR><BR>----- Original Message -----<BR>From: "John Fuqua" <johnfuqua@embarqmail.com><BR>To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 1:51:00 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central<BR>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] How I became an expert Snap Judge (TIC)<BR><BR>Ron makes valid observation which I came to many years ago at the TOC when<BR>Mr. Bill graciously funded for full scale pilots like Patty Wagstaff do demo<BR>flights to
entertain us. The one thing that I came away with in comparing<BR>full scale to our airplanes is the speed of the snap/rotation. In the full<BR>size aerobatics types that I observed there was plenty of time to see the<BR>nose pitch and then after somewhat of a hesitation yaw and rotate. In our<BR>pattern planes, especially when using a snap switch, it all gets to be a<BR>blur due to sheer speed. I have no solution to this issue but to MAKE the<BR>pilots show a break by having severe downgrades. Otherwise the concept of a<BR>snap will be ignored. Yes it's hard to see which makes it incumbent on the<BR>pilot to present it to the judges. <BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org<BR>[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of<BR>ronlock@comcast.net<BR>Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 1:26 PM<BR>To: General pattern discussion<BR>Subject: Re:
[NSRCA-discussion] How I became an expert Snap Judge (TIC)<BR><BR>Here is a description that shows technically correct snap execution, and<BR>valid, consistent judging is possible.<BR><BR> <BR><BR>(Half of the District One guy need not read this, they have already heard<BR>it) <G><BR><BR> <BR><BR>At a small airport airshow, one of demos was an in-trail formation of four<BR>full scale AT-6 Texans. As each plane got to stage center, it did a single<BR>positive snap roll. Spectators saw four snap rolls in a row, about 5 seconds<BR>apart.<BR><BR> <BR><BR>The flight of four went around, and repeated the maneuver. Some spectators<BR>are getting bored - even a pattern guy could get bored with a string of 8<BR>nearly identical maneuvers. And then, they did it yet again!!<BR><BR> <BR><BR>What's in this for us? The snap maneuver by each AT-6 appeared to take a<BR>second or so, from initiation to
completion.<BR><BR>By the time the fourth plane did a snap, you could start seeing....<BR><BR>- there is a nose pitch up, <BR><BR>- then a yaw, <BR><BR>- then plane rolled in direction of yaw,<BR><BR>- plane returned to straight and level flight.<BR><BR> <BR><BR>By the time the flight came around for another four snaps, you could see<BR>more details..<BR><BR>- there is a nose pitch up, (somewhat sudden, at least sudden for an AT-6)<BR><BR>- then a large amount of yaw, <BR><BR>- then rapid roll in direction of yaw, (rolling faster than it could with<BR>ailerons) <BR><BR>- plane returned to fairly close straight and level, nose slightly high.<BR><BR> <BR><BR>By the time the flight positioned for yet another four snaps, (Yawn,<BR>spectators headed for cotton candy) the four distinct elements of the snap<BR>roll maneuver were easy to see, and there was time to evaluate (judge)
each<BR>element.<BR><BR>1. there is a nose pitch up, (somewhat sudden, at least sudden for an<BR>AT-6, with little rise in altitude)<BR><BR>2. then large amount of yaw, (the yaw proceeds the upcoming roll)<BR><BR>3. then autorotation at rate faster than it could do an aileron roll)<BR><BR>4. plane returns to level flight track, with nose lowering to level flight<BR>attitude.<BR><BR> <BR><BR>We can all be expert Snap Roll Judges! Ahhh, at least for AT-6 snaps.<BR><BR> <BR><BR>What I take from all of this-<BR><BR> <BR><BR>The problem is not snap descriptions. It's the application of them;<BR>observation, discrimination and judging of elements in the split second<BR>observation time we have. Is the task beyond reasonable expectations of<BR>most of us as a judging community? I suppose we will continue work started<BR>over 10 years ago to improve in these
areas.<BR><BR> <BR><BR>In the meantime, shall we reduce the impact of inconsistent judging of snaps<BR>by limiting the downgrade of the snap portion of a maneuver to say..two<BR>points2?<BR><BR> <BR><BR>Ron Lockhart<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></P></DIV></DIV></DIV></div><br>
</body></html>