Divesplat

My Feedback: (7)

I'm a little confused here. I understand the concept of the zoneless box, but how will this keep pilots from flying outside of the given Aerobatic Box area???

I mean, for those pilots that always flew outside the box, what is to keep them inside the box. Penalties, education, warnings, threats by AMA at the Nats couldn't keep a number of pilots inside an already HUGE aerobatic area. I was at a contest where the LAW showed up with complaints from the neiboring housing community where a Pilot was flying directly over someones house. The response by some pilots was "screw them" when we were requested to fly a little smaller on the backside of the box. Of course, the field hasn't been able to hold a contests since either. Realize, IMO the most common reason for flying "BIG" was to give the pilot more time to set up for whatever was next, or "BIG" scored better, even though some of it was out of bounds.

The same holds true for the backside of the box. Over the years flying IMAC, many pilots ventured outside the backside but again, no penalty and add to that the "cool" factor to doing TOC size rollers(clearly out of the box) adding on occasion, a higher score.

So, we are back to the original question, If current rules and application of these rules couldn't promote compliance with the rules, will the zoneless box work for the hoped results. I tend to think a resounding NO!! Whether a pilot has a end manuever shark's tooth with 8 pt roll at end or simply a sharks tooth, I believe the pilots that have stetched the box limits(prompting this proposal) will still fly out of the aerobatic box for either manuever, simply stretching the box on the opposite side for whatever manuever is there.

Why not simply zero any manuever flown outside the box, or another thought to zero the portion of the manuever outside the box. IMO, until the penalties are stiff enough to loose contests due to this style flying, IMAC will be faced with the same fly-over imprint it is now.

Am curious on everyone's opinions.

Ed

Diablo-RCU

My Feedback: (1)

Here's a way to guarantee that pilots fly smaller and in close. Use a stop watch. For each sequence, give a bonus based on the lowest elapsed time from start of the sequence to end of the sequence.

Geistware

My Feedback: (16)

When we had zones, many of the maneuvers had to be extended out so that the pilot had enough time and position to perform the center box maneuver. Now you don't have to be directly in front of the pilot for any particular maneuver.

T Wheeler

My Feedback: (1)

Ed,
There are more than a few reasons why pilots have been flying sequences well beyond what is our legal aerobatic box. Some stems from a Pattern heritage, were they were taught to “stretch it out”, “fly it big” and so on. But a great deal of the problem is because we have been flying our sequences in a box that has been divided into three zones. What makes this a problem is that the center zone figures must be centered in that zone or its downgraded 1- point for every ten degrees. And that’s a big hit because it’s off the base score before it is multiplied by the K factor. As a pilot you want to make sure you have room and time to center that figure, so you stretch those end zone figures out. The end result is often an overflight area of 3000 to 4000’, not the 1800 ft box we have as part of our rules.

Now there are and have been penalties regarding flying outside of the legal box, but the problem is trying to enforce them. Its hard enough getting scribes at a contest let alone having 3 to 4 boundary judges. And in many cases it would simply be impossible to have boundary judges out there because of the flying fields surrounding landscape.

OK, so how does the Zoneless Box change this issue and create a smaller footprint? With Zoneless sequences there is no need or requirement to center an individual figure, the entire sequence as a whole is now centered in the aerobatic box. The sequence is now a flowing event with consistent brief pauses with horizontal flight between each figure. There is not the need to do long “trans-zones” flight from one extended end zone to the other. Part of the incentive to keep your sequence with a consistent rhythm and centered within the box is the “Positioning Score”. This class based K factor score is given by the judges when you complete your sequence and judged on how well you centered and presented your sequence.

All of this is much more difficult to explain then it is to experience. Everyone who has made the effort (and please do) to fly the proposed Zoneless sequences has reported that indeed these are easily flown well within are legal box. They also report that it becomes quite evident soon that the pacing, flow and rhythm of the sequence express’s a whole new level of enjoyment and challenge in sequence flying.
I feel very strongly that the Zoneless Box will dramatically reduce or eliminate our overflight problem. We will look back at this next year and wonder why we didn’t make the change when CIVI and IAC did back in 1999.

Tom Wheeler
IMAC President

Divesplat

My Feedback: (7)

Hey Tom. I really hope you are right. Will have my Extra ready to fly soon and will fly it then.

I disagree that enforcing a box is difficult. Simply have the judges look down the box LINE. Easy enough. Simply put, in the past no one wanted to enforce some of the rules. Same at the Nats in 2001 when we were asked not to fly over the road to the west, by the AMA, and still some did without penalty. I see this simply as an attitude issue. This is of course from several years ago, so this attitude issue may not be there anymore as it involved the noise issue also and that has improved greatly.

Am still interested in more opinions.

ed

Jonathan Ott

My Feedback: (25)

I like the zoneless feature. I have never competed, but I have flown the sequences each year, and since I did not have any formal training or coaching I always strung the manuevors together with short lines between each. I thought it flowed better and the times when I had a friend calling and we were practicing, I felt that his flying the long lines to each zone time consuming. I have always thought of IMAC flying more along the lines of airshow flying. You never see the pilot fly a figure, then take a long line to the next (it may happen in IAC comp's, but I've never been to one of those either...) each figure flows into the next.

I'm happy to know that I can now string my figures together with as short a line between each as to signify the end/start of each one. To me it just feels better.

Jon

ilikeplanes

I suspect that keeping your airplane close-in will be encouraged in the pilot's meetings. Set-up for each maneuver will be more a matter of end maneuver than center maneuver. Maybe a 0, 5, 10 bonus point system will be used to encourage close-in flying at fields where this may be a concern. It could work like a noise bonus. Subjective but effective (somewhat).

Geistware

My Feedback: (16)

While I am in favor of the zoneless box, I am not in favor of any points or bonus system. I have seen here I was downgraded for flying a 180 degree box when the rule stated a 150 degree (I think) box. I then saw people flying out so far that if they didn't have a 40% plane then they would need binoculars to see it. I think all the existing rules need to be enforced. With this done, everything else will fall into place.