<DIV>There were a lot of Pylon race takeoffs.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It does help speed things up....but the pilot set now has pretty good t/o and landing skills do to prior scoring. I wonder how the years will see this change. Theres only one way to find out.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>One thing that could be done if its not scored is takeoff up wind of both pilot stations.<BR><BR><B><I>Verne Koester <verne@twmi.rr.com></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">Mark,<BR>As you know from our conversation at the Shootout, that's the approach I <BR>prefer too. I also noted how the 0-10 rule sped things up. There was no <BR>messing around with carrying planes way down the runway so the pilot could <BR>lift off right in front of the judges, no engines that quit out on the <BR>runway due to an idle being lowered too far to keep the plane from rolling <BR>on the pavement and so on. I also think it added a degree of safety, <BR>particularly to the pilot/caller/judges on the line upwind of a pilot taking <BR>off. We had a fairly stiff wind blowing out and I noted that virtually <BR>everyone was adding a little more rudder than necessary on takeoff to make <BR>sure that the pilot already flying on the other line didn't get buzzed from <BR>a plane crabbing in on takeoff. The time savings was significant since we <BR>had to fly until 8p to get everyone
4 rounds on Saturday. BTW, our take on <BR>the rules was to announce takeoff and get the thing in the air. As long as <BR>you didn't go off the edge of the runway, it was a 10. At the end of your <BR>schedule, you could turn around however you wanted as long as there wasn't <BR>any "showmanship", announce the landing and land. As long as it was on the <BR>pavement, it was a 10. I never got buzzed a single time as a pilot or caller <BR>and I can't remember the last contest where I could make that statement.<BR><BR>Verne<BR><BR><BR>----- Original Message ----- <BR>From: "Atwood, Mark" <ATWOODM@PARAGON-INC.COM><BR>To: <DISCUSSION@NSRCA.ORG><BR>Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 8:10 AM<BR>Subject: RE: Landing Direction<BR><BR><BR>Personally Jerry, I'd like to see us score landings and take offs for <BR>Sportsman and Intermediate. Given the k-factor of their total schedule it's <BR>a meaningful part, and the ability to land well in a high crosswind is <BR>something they'll need to be
comfortable with, so it's worth rewarding ann <BR>motivating the practice required to do it well.<BR><BR>Given that, I think those two classes should go back to what we had... Take <BR>off's from 0-2 meters, Landings starting at 2m. Forget all the sequence and <BR>box issues.<BR><BR>For the higher classes...all pilot's option with a simple guideline for <BR>getting into the box in an efficient manner (no practice or hotdogging).<BR><BR>Here's my suggestion for you... Take Ron's approach. Write it up...and <BR>submit it!!<BR><BR>-M<BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: discussion-request@nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request@nsrca.org] On <BR>Behalf Of Jerry Budd<BR>Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 1:30 AM<BR>To: discussion@nsrca.org<BR>Subject: RE: Landing Direction<BR><BR>Hi Mark,<BR><BR>I think you've pretty well captured my point of<BR>view on this topic. I don't consider takeoffs<BR>and landings to be aerobatic maneuvers, in fact<BR>we're pretty much the only
aerobatics<BR>organization that does.<BR><BR>Lets look at it another way. In the old "B"<BR>pattern there used to be a touch-and-go, which is<BR>a lot like a takeoff and landing rolled up into<BR>one. Does anyone think a touch-and-go is an<BR>aerobatic maneuver? I don't. Does it take skill<BR>to do well? Yes, a lot like the skill required<BR>to do a well executed takeoff and a proper<BR>landing. But the fact that it takes a lot of<BR>practice and skill to execute them well doesn't<BR>make them aerobatic maneuvers.<BR><BR>>My question is if no one considers Landing a<BR>>"aerobatic maneuver"İAn argument I'll save for<BR>>another dayİ Then why do we even score it at<BR>>all?? Let's face itİthe Zero or 10 rule<BR>>basically takes it out of the contest.<BR><BR>I (and it appears that I'm not alone in this opinion) don't think we should.<BR><BR>I've always felt that the reward for a good<BR>takeoff was that you got to fly that flight, and<BR>that the reward for a good
landing was that you<BR>got to fly the next flight.<BR><BR>>Buddy makes a good point here. IF we're not<BR>>going to make a change back to truly scoring the<BR>>T/O and landing, then just simply get rid of ALL<BR>>the crap, no scores except for maneuvers in the<BR>>air, and T/O's and Landings are completely<BR>>pilot's option. Get the thing up and down<BR>>safelyİwe'll score what's in the air.<BR><BR>That's pretty much the idea. The interesting<BR>part is how many people will be willing to<BR>honestly consider it.<BR><BR>Thx, Jerry<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>================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>================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><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>