<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=470040402-11012005>Yep,
them old planes was built like a Harley 45. You boys are flying some whimpy
stuff now, that's why yer breakin <censored>. Glue them wings t'gether and
'glas 'em good. Whatta ya need to use the throttle fer anyway 'cept landin' and
takin' off?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=470040402-11012005>
<P><FONT size=2>John Pavlick<BR><A href="http://www.idseng.com/"
target=_blank>http://www.idseng.com</A><BR> </FONT>
</P></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<DIV align=left class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> discussion-request@nsrca.org
[mailto:discussion-request@nsrca.org]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Bob
Pastorello<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, January 10, 2005 9:04 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
discussion@nsrca.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: Reverse av/RCU
poll<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Oh, wait.........that was ME when I was in
FAI..... OMG.....</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Then there was a guy whose theory was "small is
better" on the Hourglass.... Well, he had this SL1 SMOKIN' through the
pattern, and at that speed, it was apparent we were in for a REAL treat.
I was calling for him....if I recall, the Hourglass was a
mid-entry.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> Anyway, he's streaking to
center, pulls to the up angle, NEVER got off the power on the first radius,
and it was TIGHT. I still remember thinking I saw the nose touch the
tail as it went around that corner. He was bound and determined to make
'em all match, so yee HA, that bottom corner was just amazing to
witness. He didn't pop a wing tube, but I remember his retracts pulling
out. They came out about halfway and then snapped back up.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> Man, that was glorious to
see....in subsequent flights, the pilot remembered to pull back on the
throttle.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR>Bob Pastorello<BR>NSRCA 199 AMA 46373<BR><A
href="mailto:rcaerobob@cox.net">rcaerobob@cox.net</A><BR><A
href="http://www.rcaerobats.net">www.rcaerobats.net</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A href="mailto:rcaerobob@cox.net" title=rcaerobob@cox.net>Bob
Pastorello</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org"
title=discussion@nsrca.org>discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, January 10, 2005 7:42
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Reverse av/RCU poll</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>After much reflection, I've recalled that the
Hourglass, and the Z, were both responsible for many more brief
vanishings than airplanes. You could HEAR those boxers being
sucked up during that bottom corner....I'm sure I may have called for
an FAI pilot who shall remain nameless whose whole slacks outfit
vanished....it was frightening to witness. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR>Bob Pastorello<BR>NSRCA 199 AMA 46373<BR><A
href="mailto:rcaerobob@cox.net">rcaerobob@cox.net</A><BR><A
href="http://www.rcaerobats.net">www.rcaerobats.net</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A href="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net" title=DaveL322@comcast.net>David
Lockhart</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org"
title=discussion@nsrca.org>discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, January 10, 2005 7:27
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Reverse av/RCU
poll</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Wayne,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I definitely remember that manuever causing
increased "pucker" factor - how many wings it broke I'm not sure.
The bottom corner in an hourglass (or Figure Z) is not much different than
the bottom corner in a pyramid loop...............hmmmm.....</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Dave </FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A href="mailto:wgalligan@goodsonacura.com"
title=wgalligan@goodsonacura.com>Wayne Galligan</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org"
title=discussion@nsrca.org>discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, January 10, 2005 4:53
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Reverse av/RCU
poll</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Dave,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Don't forget the hourglass
maneuver... wasn't that a culprit of many a broken
wing?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Wayne G.<BR></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A href="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net"
title=DaveL322@comcast.net>DaveL322@comcast.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
href="mailto:discussion@nsrca.org"
title=discussion@nsrca.org>discussion@nsrca.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, January 10, 2005
3:32 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Reverse av/RCU
poll</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Bob,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Point taken. And now that it is 2005, that evil avalanche
is a reality. However - I would submit all the sequences have
been capable of breaking planes for more than a few years
now.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>A simple Stall turn for example - plane is on the verge of
flopping - pilot goes to half power, flops anyway, pilots gets
disoriented, plane is heading for mother earth like a meteor, a moment
of indecision, then a half roll, plane is accelerating faster still
and the engine is howling like mad, and as the shadow on the
ground is getting bigger by the instant the pilot panics.....YANK on
the elevator and POP goes the wing.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Or the simple square loop - pilot gets disoriented with wings
level and rudder corrections on top of loop, pulls corner 3 without
reducing throttle, plane is still crooked, and throttle is never
reduced resulting in a very exciting final corner.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I've seen both of the above scenarios - more than once.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I don't think we'd really be happy if the rules legislated planes
that couldn't hurt themselves. Pattern with combat Zagis
anyone?? And don't forget the pattern community is not immune to
individuals that can break an anvil.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Dave Lockhart</DIV>
<DIV><A
href="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net">DaveL322@comcast.net</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">--------------
Original message -------------- <BR>
<DIV>Nat,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I respectfully disagree. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Forget about the reverse avalanche for a moment. I find it
unacceptable that it is <EM>possible</EM> for a schedule to be put
in place with a maneuver that breaks current airplanes. And everyone
says "suck it up", "get over it", and we have to build new planes.
Which, by the way, are now worth less since anyone planning to move
up to Masters is not going to want to buy them.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Having to design/build new planes because the old design does
not fly the new schedule very well is one thing, but to have to do
it because the current designs simply won't survive is something
else altogether. Sure, I could fly a Tipo in the Advanced class if I
want. It may not fly the greatest, but it will fly. And it will
certainly challenge me. At least I won't have to carry a shovel in
my flightbox.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Sure, in a couple of years, everyone flying Masters will
all have planes that will survive. Natural selection will take care
of that. BUT, will the sport be better off? I don't think so. Some
flyers may be put off by it. But, we only want the best flying
Masters, right!</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I'm not saying we should not make the maneuvers less
challenging. Heck, we could make the schedule more challenging --
for the pilots, not the planes -- without having to put
maneuvers in the schedule that breaks planes.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I really wanted to get back into pattern this year. Had planned
on flying my old Finesse. Looks like I might be better off with my
old Cap 21. Then again, maybe not.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Bob Richards (climbing off my soapbox).</DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR><B><I>Nat Penton
<natpenton@centurytel.net></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq
style="BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Ok
all you masters fliers, quit complaining and take your medicine.
Your <BR>problems with the reverse avalanche are imaginary.
Manuever schedules have <BR>always been designed to bring about
enhancement of the pilots and the <BR>airframes
capabilities.<BR><BR>It is not difficult to build an airframe that
you cannot tear up. The <BR>wingtube, for its weight, provides the
most strength and rigidity of any <BR>structural component. Why
would you cut it off
??<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>