<!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 6.00.2900.2627" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Yes</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR>Bob Pastorello<BR><A
href="http://www.rcaerobats.net">www.rcaerobats.net</A><BR><A
href="mailto:rcaerobob@cox.net">rcaerobob@cox.net</A></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=divesplat@yahoo.com href="mailto:divesplat@yahoo.com">Ed Deaver</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> Saturday, June 11, 2005 7:11
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [SPAM] Re: New
Sequences</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Just a thought here. Doesn't or didn't FAI have a reverse humpty
from the top with either provision to cross or keep the line.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Can we possibly write these manuevers with either "option" as suggested
or give another specific opportunity such as top hat 3/4 rolls up 1/4 roll
down or 1/2 roll up and 1/2 roll down. Simply include the mechanics to
keep the same line or choose to come in or out.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>ed<BR><BR><B><I>Jerry Budd <jerry@buddengineering.com></I></B>
wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">I
think some of you are missing the point.<BR><BR>In a contest we had earlier
this year there was a pretty stiff <BR>quartering crosswind blowing out. On
my first three flights I nailed <BR>the crosswind correction such that I
held the plane over the poles <BR>with almost no variance. When I hit the
top hat I was forced <BR>(because there is no "option" with that maneuver)
to take it either <BR>in or out, when in fact there was no correction needed
- I was <BR>already on the desired line. I wound up in a worse position (I
went <BR>in twice and out once) as far as the line is concerned because of
it.<BR><BR>Because I had almost perfectly held the line prior to the
maneuver I <BR>was penalized after the wind correction maneuver by being in
(or out) <BR>more than what was appropriate, while those who were in trouble
with <BR>the cross wind prior to the wind correction maneuver actually
<BR>benefited from the maneuver.<BR><BR>IMHO, a wind correction maneuver
that forces a correction to be made <BR>is not a very good wind correction
maneuver.<BR><BR>Eric's right, there should be an option for any wind
correction <BR>maneuver that allows the pilot who doesn't need (or want) the
<BR>correction to not make it.<BR><BR>Thx, Jerry<BR><BR><BR>> > It's
also not really a top hat. More of a square loop with 1/2 rolls
on<BR>>the verticals.<BR>><BR>>And not NEARLY as difficult in my
opinion. Part of what makes the Top Hat<BR>>difficult *is* the cross box
component and how one has to deal with wind<BR>>corrections. Cross box
with a head wind is tricky, going straight into the<BR>>wind would be
much easier.<BR>><BR>>To some degree I feel this falls under the
category of "he who can do it<BR>>best scores best". SURE it's hard, but
it separates the good pilots from<BR>>the great pilots. After all, it's
called MASTERS.<BR>><BR>>Keith Black<BR>><BR>>----- Original
Message -----<BR>>From: "Verne Koester" <VERNE@TWMI.RR.COM><BR>>To:
<DISCUSSION@NSRCA.ORG><BR>>Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 11:32
PM<BR>>Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: New Sequences<BR>><BR>><BR>>>
Troy,<BR>>> It has possibilities. However, the inline version (1/2
rolls) leaves you<BR>>> inverted if you started upright and
vice-versa. It's also not really a top<BR>>> hat. More of a square
loop with 1/2 rolls on the verticals. Still, it<BR>>could<BR>>>
work as an option with the traditional crossbox, 1/4 roll top
hat.<BR>>><BR>>> Man, that's giving me a headache. Hittin the
rack so I can leave for<BR>>Muncie<BR>>> in the
morning.....<BR>>><BR>>>
Verne<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> ----- Original Message
-----<BR>>> From: "Troy A. Newman" <TROY_NEWMAN@MSN.COM><BR>>>
To: <DISCUSSION@NSRCA.ORG><BR>>> Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 11:44
PM<BR>>> Subject: [SPAM] Re: New
Sequences<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> >a top hat with options
type of thing?<BR>>> ><BR>>> > do it inline flat an
inverted at the top<BR>>> > ????<BR>>> ><BR>>>
><BR>>> > Troy<BR>>> > ----- Original Message
-----<BR>>> > From: "Grow Pattern"
<PATTERN4U@COMCAST.NET><BR>>> > To:
<DISCUSSION@NSRCA.ORG><BR>>> > Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 8:32
PM<BR>>> > Subject: Re: New Sequences<BR>>> ><BR>>>
><BR>>> >> How about if all "cross-box" type maneuvers were
designed with<BR>>"in-line"<BR>>> >> options, then we meet
correction and no-correction required needs. The<BR>>> >>
turnaround top-hat is a bit of an anomaly in that it forces you in
or<BR>>> >> out. The humpty with options is much more versatile
and pilot friendly.<BR>>> >><BR>>> >>
Regards,<BR>>> >><BR>> > >> Eric.<BR><BR>--
<BR>___________<BR>Jerry Budd<BR>Budd Engineering<BR>(661) 722-5669
Voice/Fax<BR>(661) 435-0358 Cell
Phone<BR>mailto:jerry@buddengineering.com<BR>http://www.buddengineering.com<BR>=================================================<BR>To
access the email archives for this list, go
to<BR>http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/<BR>To be removed from
this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm<BR>and follow the
instructions.<BR><BR>List members email returned for mailbox full will be
removed from the list.<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>