<!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 6.00.2800.1458" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"
bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face="MS Sans Serif">I have never seen it written or stated
at any judging classes I've attended that a defect had to be a full 15º before a
downgrade is deserved. As judges we are supposed to detect and penalize for the
defects we see. I have always maintained the view that if I can see the
defect than a downgrade is in order. That's why not many 10's are
awarded. </FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face="MS Sans Serif"> I do know that it
says we aren't supposed to be downgrade for weather effects so when do bobbles
become grounds for downgrading. If the plane is getting bounced by wind gusts we
aren't supposed to penalize. I realize it happens as I received many
penalties flying a smaller plane at the nats in the wind and when it wasn't
getting bounced around I scored much higher. I was the only 60 size
on that line. Yes I do enjoy and know how to fly competively in the
wind.</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face="MS Sans Serif"> del
</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face="MS Sans Serif"></FONT></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face="MS Sans Serif"></FONT></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=Rcmaster199@aol.com
href="mailto:Rcmaster199@aol.com">Rcmaster199@aol.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=discussion@nsrca.org
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org">discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, August 09, 2004 8:29
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Wind correction / wings
level</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>Absolutely Jimbo. Your assessment is on the mark. In a fair amount of
cross wind, any departure in pitch from wind-corrected straight and level
flight will require some small roll command. The masters do that
seamlessly.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>If roll correction is done throughout the pitching element to achieve
wings level, less rolling would be required overall and would be less obvious.
We called that a "Maneuver Smoother" back in the heyday of Pattern.
Still applies today and will always apply.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In regard to wing bobbles and such caused by the maneuver corrections, in
the FAI regs it is stated that (I am paraphrasing) extremely small deviations
are not to be counted. The problem is a real definition for what "extremely
small" means. To me, it means a couple degress (less than five). Definitely
not enough for a whole point deduction. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I don't recall reading such verbiage in the AMA regs. In the AMA
schedules, I judge a couple such bobbles as a half point off IF I see them.
That's what it's supposed to be anyway. In reality, it's much harder to judge
that correctly, having to keep a count for each and every maneuver, etc,
etc.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Remember having a conversation on same subject with Earl Haury at the
2003 TEAM Selection Tournament. I believe we were discussing when
to penalize the whole point downgrade (1pt/15 degrees), and we pretty
much concluded that at least two small 5-10 degree bobbles had to be seen in
the same F3A maneuver to penalize the whole point. That these are
additive as they should be. If only one is observed, then no downgrade is to
be assessed.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>That's my take. As always, open to differing or opposing points of
view</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Matt</DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>