[F3A-Discussion] F3A Rules proposals

[Atwood, Mark]

Very glad to see them add new turn around maneuvers as it was a challenge to have a good sequence with a K factor of 70 and not repeat the same maneuver continuously, however upping the K to 72 will still be a challenge if they keep the K1 maneuvers in the catalog.  Either that, or they aren’t truly creating random unknowns.


MARK ATWOOD
President
o.  (440) 229-2502
c.  (216) 316-2489
e.  atwoodm at paragon-inc.com<mailto:larry.yoder at paragon-inc.com>

Paragon Consulting, Inc.
5900 Landerbrook Drive, Suite 205, Cleveland Ohio, 44124
www.paragon-inc.com<http://www.paragon-inc.com/>

<http://www.paragon-inc.com/>
Powering The Digital Experience

On Apr 14, 2015, at 5:04 PM, Atwood, Mark via F3A-Discussion <f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us<mailto:f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us>> wrote:

+1 on that.

MARK ATWOOD
President
o.  (440) 229-2502
c.  (216) 316-2489
e.  atwoodm at paragon-inc.com<mailto:larry.yoder at paragon-inc.com>

Paragon Consulting, Inc.
5900 Landerbrook Drive, Suite 205, Cleveland Ohio, 44124
www.paragon-inc.com<http://www.paragon-inc.com/>

<http://www.paragon-inc.com/>
Powering The Digital Experience

On Apr 14, 2015, at 5:00 PM, Earl Haury via F3A-Discussion <f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us<mailto:f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us>> wrote:

Derek

After discussing with several competitors I support the changes to the noise measurement process. Having been involved with measuring noise on the flight line in 2011 it was obvious that the potential for injury was greater than desired. With very few exceptions, the measured sound level was well below the limits suggesting that per flight measurement was also a huge time consumer that wasn’t necessary. Completing sound measurements during processing makes sense to me.

I believe the proposal should clarify that, presumably, sound measurement isn’t an “important model characteristic” under ABR B.17.13 which calls for testing same for 20% of models during competition.

Earl

From: Derek Koopowitz via F3A-Discussion<mailto:f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us>
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 3:16 PM
To: f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us<mailto:f3a-discussion at lists.f3a.us>
Subject: [F3A-Discussion] F3A Rules proposals

Hi everyone,

I sent out an email on March 13 and never heard anything.  There are a number of rules proposals that will be voted on in April at the CIAM meeting and I'd like feedback on them.

You can view the rules in the attached.  I have supporting documentation that I will send separately to keep the size down.

Any/all feedback would be great to have!

-Derek

________________________________
_______________________________________________
F3A-Discussion mailing list
F3A-Discussion at lists.f3a.us<mailto:F3A-Discussion at lists.f3a.us>
http://lists.f3a.us/mailman/listinfo/f3a-discussion
_______________________________________________
F3A-Discussion mailing list
F3A-Discussion at lists.f3a.us<mailto:F3A-Discussion at lists.f3a.us>
http://lists.f3a.us/mailman/listinfo/f3a-discussion

_______________________________________________
F3A-Discussion mailing list
F3A-Discussion at lists.f3a.us<mailto:F3A-Discussion at lists.f3a.us>
http://lists.f3a.us/mailman/listinfo/f3a-discussion

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/f3a-discussion/attachments/20150414/40e84988/attachment-0001.html>