[From nobody Mon May 23 15:49:20 2005 Return-Path: <roho2@rcpattern.com> Received: from rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (rly-yh02.mail.aol.com [172.18.180.66]) by air-yh03.mail.aol.com (vx) with ESMTP id MAILINYH34-2ab4291bd062c0; Mon, 23 May 2005 07:23:01 -0400 Received: from sf.mail.nxs.net (sf.mail.nxs.net [198.144.160.65]) by rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (vx) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYH23-2ab4291bd062c0; Mon, 23 May 2005 07:22:46 -0400 Received: (qmail 5460 invoked by uid 507); 23 May 2005 10:28:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.nxs.net) (198.144.160.60) by 0 with SMTP; 23 May 2005 10:28:01 -0000 Received: from sa.mail.nxs.net (unverified [198.144.160.68]) by nxs.net (Rockliffe SMTPRA 6.1.17) with ESMTP id <B0130495484@mail.nxs.net> for <discussion@nsrca.org>; Mon, 23 May 2005 07:22:42 -0400 Received: (qmail 1887 invoked by uid 507); 23 May 2005 12:26:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO sf.mail.nxs.net) (198.144.160.65) by 0 with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP; 23 May 2005 12:26:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 5354 invoked by uid 507); 23 May 2005 10:27:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO vs.mail.nxs.net) (198.144.160.64) by 0 with SMTP; 23 May 2005 10:27:57 -0000 Received: from mx1a.mail.nxs.net ([198.144.167.162]) by vs.mail.nxs.net (SAVSMTP 3.1.0.29) with SMTP id M2005052307031723742 for <discussion@nsrca.org>; Mon, 23 May 2005 07:03:17 -0400 Received: (qmail 7029 invoked from network); 23 May 2005 11:22:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (65.54.175.85) by mx1a.mail.nxs.net with SMTP for <discussion@nsrca.org>; 23 May 2005 11:22:40 -0000 Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Mon, 23 May 2005 04:22:37 -0700 Message-ID: <BAY104-DAV13854DB784DD2DF58A5673E80C0@phx.gbl> Received: from 65.54.175.201 by BAY104-DAV13.phx.gbl with DAV; Mon, 23 May 2005 11:22:37 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [65.54.175.201] X-Originating-Email: [ed_alt@hotmail.com] X-Sender: ed_alt@hotmail.com From: "Ed Alt" <ed_alt@hotmail.com> To: <discussion@nsrca.org> References: <E1Da2yy-0001Q6-00@pop-knobcone.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Subject: [SPAM] Re: Re: Take Off & Landing "Reality of a Contest" Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 07:22:39 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 May 2005 11:22:37.0922 (UTC) FILETIME=[B99DEC20:01C55F89] X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on sa1.mail.nxs.net X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=3.4 required=3.2 tests=EXCUSE_3,FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK, J_CHICKENPOX_54,J_CHICKENPOX_73,MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Report: * 0.1 EXCUSE_3 BODY: Claims you can be removed from the list * 0.3 J_CHICKENPOX_54 BODY: {5}Letter - dot - {4}Letter * 0.3 J_CHICKENPOX_73 BODY: {7}Letter - dot - {3}Letter * 0.4 MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR URI: Includes a link to a likely spammer email * 0.8 MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER Message-Id was added by a relay * 1.6 FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK Forged mail pretending to be from MS Outlook Reply-To: discussion@nsrca.org Sender: discussion-request@nsrca.org X-AOL-IP: 198.144.160.65 Derek: Actually, there is a legion of IMAC pilots who can't takeoff or land without threatening the safety of of others, mainly the guys at the other pilot/judging station. I have regularly seen close calls and dangerous displays of model operation at IMAC contests during TO/landing. You have to recognize something about the hobby these days. There is a alot of sex appeal to IMAC because of the big'n'loud gas airplanes. Everyone wants to do it and is is quite often the case that the pilots wallet far outweighs his skill and sometimes his common sense. Guys now get into the hobby with ease because of ARFs and easy to use equipment, but they don't always learn the right way and frequently can't be told how to do it with right or with safety in mind. At IMAC contests that I have CD'ed, I made the explicit point about the runway environment and how it was required that pilots observe the deadline, including the fact that we would disqualify them if they violated it. Why? It has proven to be necessary based on observations of close scrapes at the many dozens of contests I had attended in the past. It was the minimum thing I felt that I had to do to be responsible as a CD. I would say that Pattern is better off keeping the takeoff/landing score in some form. It is in fact a measure of pilot skill to be able to safely control a model at low airspeed in various wind conditions, while in close proximity to the ground, obstacles and people. Although it's not an aerobatic flight mode, neither is a straight line between figures, but we also measure that. Should we extend the argument to allow banking left or right to fix earlier mistakes and just worry about the figures alone, or should we measure the skill of the pilots to control the model throughout? By having some objective way of measuring it and assigning a score as an incentive to try to do it right, you can only make the situation easier to manage. Removing it can only heighten the risk of achieving what IMAC has currently has bred, i.e., a free-for-all mentality by many pilots. Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: "Derek Koopowitz" <derekkoopowitz@earthlink.net> To: <discussion@nsrca.org> Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 10:46 PM Subject: RE: Re: Take Off & Landing "Reality of a Contest" > Jim, > > This is what I've proposed... > > I don't think TO/landing are maneuvers that should be scored at all. > These > are legacy maneuvers that at one point in time needed to be scored but in > todays proficiency age I feel that the maneuvers shouldn't even be in the > sequence, let alone scored. Scoring well on TO/landing does not a good > pilot make (grammar purposely phrased that way) and I think precision > aerobatics should be about aerobatic maneuvers not TO and landing. > > I know some incredibly talented race car drivers that can lap a track > faster > than anyone else but have a hard time backing up a car into a parking > spot - > is the point of being a race car driver seeing how well one can park a car > or how fast one can go around a track? > > I would much rather see a great aerobatic flight with a crappy TO/landing > than see a crappy aerobatic flight with great TO/landing. To me... call > the > box, scoring starts- fly the sequence, call the exit and scoring stops. > Period. We wouldn't have to worry about wording on rules for TO/landing. > > So how do we fix the current problem? I think we really have 3 choices: > > 1. Go back to the old rules and score the TO/landing > 2. Spend an inordinate amount of time rewording/rehashing the new rules > to > fix the problem > 3. Remove TO/landing completely and not worry about it at all. > > > My preference is for #3 - followed by #1 - both are simple and quick > fixes. > Will #3 happen - probably not - but I guess I can dream/hope. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: discussion-request@nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request@nsrca.org] > On > Behalf Of Jim Ivey > Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 7:45 PM > To: discussion@nsrca.org > Subject: Re: Re: Take Off & Landing "Reality of a Contest" > > Jerry > I watched some IMAC nats last year and these guys takeoff while the other > guy is on his final.Some of the planes were just pointed at the runway and > turned loose across runway. Maybe that's what we need to do. We don't > score > skills at takeoff or landing anymore.Why not? Did I put a idea in > someones > head? > > Jim Ivey >> >> From: "Jerry Stebbins" <JAStebbins@worldnet.att.net> >> Date: 2005/05/22 Sun PM 09:46:36 EDT >> To: <discussion@nsrca.org> >> Subject: Re: Take Off & Landing "Reality of a Contest" >> >> Maybe so, but someone done writ it wrong and now we got rules that are >> incomplete, unsafe, and conflicting. >> Same ol simple "ifn it ain't broke don't fix it" but some thought it >> was broke, had there own version of a "better way", and rammed it thru. >> Jerry >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Bob Pastorello" <rcaerobob@cox.net> >> To: <discussion@nsrca.org> >> Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 6:26 PM >> Subject: Re: Take Off & Landing "Reality of a Contest" >> >> >> > The idea was SUPPOSED to be "Takeoff - no aerobatic manuevers, >> > doesn't >> break >> > safety line = 10". "Landing - finish sequence in whatever >> > direction, make turns necessary to land, no aerobatic maneuvers, no >> > breaking the safety >> line >> > = 10"..... >> > >> > Wasn't it ? >> > >> > Bob Pastorello >> > www.rcaerobats.net >> > rcaerobob@cox.net >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Larry Diamond" <lld613@psci.net> >> > To: "NSRCA" <discussion@nsrca.org> >> > Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 4:57 PM >> > Subject: Take Off & Landing "Reality of a Contest" >> > >> > >> > >I know there has been much discussion on this, but after CDing a >> > >contest this weekend, I believe there needs to be a clear >> > >understanding of what >> is >> > > expected in two areas. >> > > >> > > 1) When to call "Take-Off complete / Landing commencing". When >> > > does it need to be called? After exiting the Box for the last >> > > maneuver for Landing. >> > > Prior to entering the box for the trim pass on Take-Off. This is >> > > what makes sense to me from CDing a contest. >> > > >> > > 2) Is a Dead-Stick Landing a "Zero Landing"? At the beginning of >> > > our contest I stated that we would not zero TO / L for calling. So >> > > we scored all landings. However, if a dead-stick prevents >> > > completing the prescribed maneuver, then a zero is really the most >> > > likely result at the NATS. I don't believe this was intended. >> > > >> > > The Judging committee should really jump on this and get >> > > clarification >> out >> > > as quickly as possible for the "Official Judge Ruling" People are >> > > trying to practice this and although seemingly easy on paper, the >> > > execution of calling and judging properly does get a bit >> > > confusing...We need to make sure everyone is practicing this >> > > correctly before the NATS or it will be a potential area of >> > > concern for the CD's... >> > > >> > > Larry Diamond >> > > NSRCA 3083 >> > > >> > >> > ================================================= >> > To access the email archives for this list, go to >> > http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/ >> > To be removed from this list, go to >> > http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm >> > and follow the instructions. >> > >> > List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from >> > the >> list. >> > >> > >> >> >> ================================================= >> To access the email archives for this list, go to >> http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/ >> To be removed from this list, go to >> http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm >> and follow the instructions. >> >> List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the > list. >> >> > > ================================================= > To access the email archives for this list, go to > http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/ > To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm > and follow the instructions. > > List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the > list. > > > > ================================================= > To access the email archives for this list, go to > http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/ > To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm > and follow the instructions. > > List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the > list. > > ================================================= To access the email archives for this list, go to http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/ To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm and follow the instructions. List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the list. ]