<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<STYLE type=text/css>P {
MARGIN: 0px
}
</STYLE>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18812"></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>While speaking with Don Ramsey about the nuances of
judging snaps at a recent contest I found that he agreed with my interpretation
of the FAI snap rule. The severe downgrade should only be applied if there is no
break AND there is no autorotation (this is exactly what the rule says).
Basically, lack of a break is not substantial grounds for the severe downgrade
in FAI. If the break is not seen and autorotation still occurs at some point
during the roll the one point per 15 degree rule applies. Since the snaps happen
so fast, for me it's usually not more than 1 or 2 points unless it was blatantly
obvious that the plane rotated a while before the snap truly began. It's the
same as if you stop the snap before completing the rotation and do an axial roll
to finish. This nonsense of people being so quick to apply a severe downgrade
has gone too far. One element of a maneuver (because I can't think of any
sequence that has just a snap roll) should not ruin a whole flight, or even that
one maneuver unless it just wasn't a snap. I like the idea of "if it's not a
barrell roll and not an axial roll, it's probably a snap."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Matt</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=vicenterc@comcast.net href="mailto:vicenterc@comcast.net">Vicente
"Vince" Bortone</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">General pattern discussion</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, October 12, 2009 5:12
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] How I
became an expert Snap Judge (TIC)</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<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>
<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>