<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><STRONG>Congratulations</STRONG> to all the Nats
Finalists, Nats Champion Jason, runner-up Quique, and the US Team Jason, Chip,
& Sean, as well as Team Alternate, Don.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Here are some of my thoughts from the F3A Nats
finals basis what I observed from the Judges chair. These are my views only, I
did not / have not seen the work of other judges (other than the
outcome).Hopefully these observations won't offend anyone. Other Judges may feel
free to do the same, in agreement or challenge, so as to best serve the
game.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The Judges discussed snaps and distance at length,
along with the usual details, in a number of "official" and impromptu sessions.
<FONT face=Arial size=2>Of course, snaps require a "visible" attitude break and
separation from track in pitch (from the flight path) before rotation is started
and stall maintained throughout. Barrel rolls and axial rolls score zero.
</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Unfortunately, there are some (pilots and judges)
who believed that there is an undocumented exception for rolling circles
regarding distance out. This isn't true in pattern. Maybe it comes from IMAC or
is an artifact of TOC? The downgrade highlights for the rollers
include mention of downgrades for distance / size. Anyway, the consensus
was that visibility would the criteria for rollers rather than a
hard distance "wall". </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>We (Judges) observed "calibration" flights at 150,
175, & 200 meters and warm-up flights before F-05 and each unknown.
</FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2>The wind conditions were strong down the runway
with a fair inward slant as the finals started and then diminished a little as
the day wore on. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The wind, and the pilots desire to stay close in,
created severe right (and some left) side box violations. Generally, in an
effort to "save" the box there was often no line between center / box maneuver,
which now costs a point on the (higher K) center maneuver and the TA. The TA was
either flown well, but mostly out of the box, or the maneuver was compromised to
reduce the box error. Either way, large downgrades. I don't know if the pilots
thought that better scores were available inside 150 m, they were trying to stay
in to setup the roller, and/or the were loath to fly the attitudes needed to
hold track in the wind (more downgrades here). Centering was also not executed
well for many maneuvers in either direction, but being late on downwind
maneuvers was fatal! As the day worn on this improved by pilots moving out a
little, managing the wind better, and the lessening of the wind.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The early round rollers were huge, suffered
numerous roll rate changes, and oval in shape (wind). It's pretty obvious that
the finalists all have better eyesight than me! Very few rollers started rolling
at center, some were ruddered around some 45 degrees (3 pts) before the roll
started. The wind made these tough, but the pilots let the wind reek havoc by
flying the rollers so big (as to make it difficult to roll slow enough) that the
wind really elongated the "circle". Huge downgrades! As the day wore on some
dramatically improved their rollers (as the wind lessened) by reducing the
diameter. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Snaps were another item. Obviously a number of
pilots refined their technique to provide just enough (very rapid) pitch change
to effect the minimum track separation with stall, a rapid rotation while
reducing the elevator to maintain minimum stall, and allow a very clean
finish. <STRONG>Nothing wrong with that,</STRONG> but some took it too far!
In certain maneuvers the break was not visible. No <STRONG>visible
</STRONG>break = 0! As some snaps during a flight were nice - others
left doubt, again- possible wind effect. A number of judges must have
observed the same thing, as obvious adjustments were made by some pilots after
reviewing their scores, but (in my opinion) going too far in the other
direction. These snaps now became departures from track in pitch / yaw &
roll for several degrees before stall (downgraded 1pt / 15 in each axis) were
ugly, and the offsets often destroyed the general maneuver geometry. Seemed that
the decision was that a downgrade (even if large) was better than a zero. Then
some of the altered ugly were barrel rolls which also = zero. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Box, snaps, rollers cost the most points. The
standard defects are alive and well. Then there was some very good flying. The
F05s and first unknown were tough in the wind! The 2nd unknown was a wimp
(pilots must have been getting tired when they put that one together). At least
the 2nd unknown gave the Judges an opportunity to get rid of some of the basket
of 10's were holding most of the day.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>My strongest suggestion for improved scoring is
pretty simple. Be a student of the game, understand the maneuver descriptions
and apply techniques to <STRONG>clearly</STRONG> present those maneuvers to the
Judges. Don't give the Judge something to doubt! For example, ugly "wifferdils"
don't get it for snaps. They don't need to jump all over the sky and screw up
the rest of the maneuver. They do need to clearly show a break and maintained
stall. Rollers should not (and may not) exceed the distance limits. The choice
is to start at 175 m and do a 100 - 125 m roller <STRONG>in</STRONG>, or to
start close in and make the diameter small enough to stay inside the limits.
Rollers are neat done slow and big - but that isn't what's required (without a
rule change), smaller is easier, less affected by wind, and will score better.
Don't misunderstand me here, a rule change to allow rollers to visible
distance is OK by me - but a dispensation from the rules (at any level of
authority) is totally inappropriate, sets a dangerous precedent, and is bad for
pattern.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Earl Haury</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>