Basic
11-10-2005, 06:37 PM
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Buffalo,
MN
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
The 2006 Basic Sequence has been approved, and published. Attached is the link. Time to start practicing...
http://www.mini-iac.com/Portals/57ad...7/bas-2006.pdf
http://www.mini-iac.com/Portals/57ad...7/bas-2006.pdf
11-11-2005, 02:32 AM
#29
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Burnsville,
MN
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
Oh yeah, there will be a guide at the imac site that explanes the manuevers, If you star with the 05 there is a current guide for that. They are not as hard to understand as they look, now flying them is a different story. Piper are you going to enter a contest this season?
11-11-2005, 10:07 AM
#30
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
ORIGINAL: piper28
So, is there an english interpretation of all the squigles?
Obviously I have a lot to learn if I can't even interpret the diagrams.
So, is there an english interpretation of all the squigles?
Obviously I have a lot to learn if I can't even interpret the diagrams.
Aresti Made Simple
Aresti Dictionary
Armed with these two very simple tools you will be reading Aresti in no time. It really is easy, especially for the lower classes.
11-11-2005, 11:41 AM
#31
RE: Basic
This past season for family reasons I did not get to compete so this next season I plan to compete as much as possible and here is what I did to improve myself to get ready for basic.
I asked my oldest daughter to video tape me as often as possible. This was a huge help. I thought my lines were OK and all but after seeing the videos I could very easily see the rotations issues I was having, the lines not being completely straight and the starting and end points on my loops not being in the same place. I practiced flat turns using rudder only both upright and inverted and in wind to get better on rudder control and learned to hover a nose heavy airplane to get better with all around stick control.
Now I know there is nothing like having an experienced pilot next to you but this is not possible at my club since we have no one that flies IMAC.
Next I practiced on a 4* 60. Yep, that's what I said. When I got everything looking right on the 4* then I went a tried it on my Gene Soucy Extra from Great Planes, My CG Sukhoi and my WH Ultimate. What a difference in the way it looked with the better planes.
I found I like the Extra and the Ultimate for rolling and snap maneuvers, and the Sukhoi for everything else. I'm partital to my Sukhoi so that is probably going to be my plane of choice for this year but I have to get used to the fact that it tends to over-rotate on snaps and rolls although this could be a control throw problem.
I have been flying the 2006 sequences on a sim since they came out and they are not that hard. I plan to get out this weekend with the Sukhoi and fly them to see how it does.
I asked my oldest daughter to video tape me as often as possible. This was a huge help. I thought my lines were OK and all but after seeing the videos I could very easily see the rotations issues I was having, the lines not being completely straight and the starting and end points on my loops not being in the same place. I practiced flat turns using rudder only both upright and inverted and in wind to get better on rudder control and learned to hover a nose heavy airplane to get better with all around stick control.
Now I know there is nothing like having an experienced pilot next to you but this is not possible at my club since we have no one that flies IMAC.
Next I practiced on a 4* 60. Yep, that's what I said. When I got everything looking right on the 4* then I went a tried it on my Gene Soucy Extra from Great Planes, My CG Sukhoi and my WH Ultimate. What a difference in the way it looked with the better planes.
I found I like the Extra and the Ultimate for rolling and snap maneuvers, and the Sukhoi for everything else. I'm partital to my Sukhoi so that is probably going to be my plane of choice for this year but I have to get used to the fact that it tends to over-rotate on snaps and rolls although this could be a control throw problem.
I have been flying the 2006 sequences on a sim since they came out and they are not that hard. I plan to get out this weekend with the Sukhoi and fly them to see how it does.
11-11-2005, 02:55 PM
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Buffalo,
MN
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
Well, I went out to start practicing the 2006 sequence this morning. All in all I think it went pretty good. I started by just flying the first 5 manuevers and then started adding the last half of the sequence as I got more comfortable with it, plus I didn't have a caller so I had to commit it to memory.
I flew the entire sequence 8 times, it doesn't seem that hard at all, but it is really hard to make it look good, I was also flying in a 90 degree, moderate crosswind. The only thing that I really have to make a conscious effort to set up for is the reverse shark's tooth. You have to really have some altitude so you can establish a nice vertical downline. The figure 9 is kind of fun, too.
I flew the entire sequence 8 times, it doesn't seem that hard at all, but it is really hard to make it look good, I was also flying in a 90 degree, moderate crosswind. The only thing that I really have to make a conscious effort to set up for is the reverse shark's tooth. You have to really have some altitude so you can establish a nice vertical downline. The figure 9 is kind of fun, too.
11-11-2005, 09:13 PM
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: , MI
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
Piper are you going to enter a contest this season?
Aresti Made Simple
Aresti Dictionary
Aresti Dictionary
11-16-2005, 10:22 PM
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Big Flats,
NY
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
I thought about getting into this last year with my Somethin Extra, but never really got around to it. I live in NY and as far as I know there are no contests or anyone who flies IMAC for that matter. My somethin extra is no longer, but I am getting an Edge 540, so I may start messing around with the sequences and see where it goes from there.
11-17-2005, 06:16 AM
#36
My Feedback: (42)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Randolph,
NJ
Posts: 878
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
There have never been any IMAC contests right near your area around Elmira. The closest to you are probably the ones held in August in Milford, PA and in September in Marshalls Creek, PA, which I used to CD. Joe Bobeck is the CD for it now. There is also a contest in Maine and another in New Hampshire, otherwise, you are probalby looking at driving to Maryland. If you contact Rich Fletcher, the NE RD, he may have other information beside the historical stuff I gave you.
The Somethin Extra would work just fine for a Pattern contest in the Sportsman class. There are three Pattern contests within fairly close range to you. There is Hamburg, NY, held in July this past year. Also Westmoreland, NY, held in August. Closest of all looks to be Sayre, PA, held by the Aeroguidance Society. That club held it's 50th annual Pattern contest this past season. There are also pattern contests in Marshalls Creek, PA in late June (I CD this one), Goshen NY in early September and Jackson NJ in September. Pattern primers for Sportsman and Intermediate class pilots have been held at Floyd Bennett Field (Brooklyn, NY) and Hadley, MA.
If you want to stay current with Pattern contests in District 1 (That's the NSRCA district you are in, not the AMA district), you can go to: http://www.ocmrc.us/NSRCAD1/home.htm
The main NSRCA site is: http://www.nsrca.org/ NSRCA is the AMA SIG for Precision Aerobatics (AKA Pattern) , just like IMAC is the AMA SIG for Scale Aerobatics.
The Somethin Extra would work just fine for a Pattern contest in the Sportsman class. There are three Pattern contests within fairly close range to you. There is Hamburg, NY, held in July this past year. Also Westmoreland, NY, held in August. Closest of all looks to be Sayre, PA, held by the Aeroguidance Society. That club held it's 50th annual Pattern contest this past season. There are also pattern contests in Marshalls Creek, PA in late June (I CD this one), Goshen NY in early September and Jackson NJ in September. Pattern primers for Sportsman and Intermediate class pilots have been held at Floyd Bennett Field (Brooklyn, NY) and Hadley, MA.
If you want to stay current with Pattern contests in District 1 (That's the NSRCA district you are in, not the AMA district), you can go to: http://www.ocmrc.us/NSRCAD1/home.htm
The main NSRCA site is: http://www.nsrca.org/ NSRCA is the AMA SIG for Precision Aerobatics (AKA Pattern) , just like IMAC is the AMA SIG for Scale Aerobatics.
11-21-2005, 04:37 PM
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Big Flats,
NY
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
I hadn't really thought about pattern... since the somethin extra is no more 
would my new Edge work? Whats the main difference between IMAC and pattern?
would my new Edge work? Whats the main difference between IMAC and pattern?
11-22-2005, 07:16 AM
#38
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Burnsville,
MN
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
From what I can tell there isnt a whole lot of diference between the 2. Your edge would work well all the way to sportsman I believe. Your still just flying a sequences in a imaginary box.
11-22-2005, 09:48 AM
#39
My Feedback: (42)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Randolph,
NJ
Posts: 878
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
Pattern rules require staying within 2 meters span and length, 11 lbs in weight. The only place they typically measure and weigh is at the Nats though. The airplane should be reasonably quiet too: 96 db at 3 meters. Again, I've only seen it measured at the Nats, but if you are blatantly loud, you will no doubt raise some eyebrows. Pattern airplanes are notoriously quiet and if you're obviously too loud, someone could easily challenge your entry.
Actually, there are several key differences between Precision Aerobatics (AKA Pattern) and Scale Aerobatics (AKA IMAC). In IMAC, although there is some description of a box of a certain depth, height and width, it does not exist for all practical purposes. That is because IMAC eliminated the 75 degree boundaries on each side and also dispensed with the concept of zones. Formerly, you could be penalized for box violations with anything ranging from a loss of points if the offending figure was partially outside, to a zero if it were entirely outside of the box. Zones were used as a way of framing the sequence, in particular for center zone figures. IMAC also dispensed with center zone centering points deductions. It used to be that your center zone figure had to be, well, centered in order to earn all the points possible. That is no longer the case. One last thing, IMAC also added something called a Presentation Score, which effectively is another 'figure' from a scoring standpoint. The judges will arbitrarily assign a presentation score after the sequences is complete. No one has ever been able to define how to objectively arrive at a score, so it's not something you can really practice for or predict. You get what you get based on each judges personal notion of what a presentation score should be. I'm not sure of the current status of the presentation score. It's been on again, off again. In 2003, IMAC was trying to force its use before it officially became a rule in 2004, then advised not to use it after it was official. Very confusing. It's still on the books, so I don't know what you can expect to run into for 2006.
Anyway, in Pattern, there is a box, 60 degrees each side. You get downgrades based on the percentage of the figure that is outside of the box, plus other normal downgrades. There are three zones and in the true spirit of flying precision aerobatics, you get downgraded if center zone figures are not centered. In other words, you are expected to exhibit control of where the model is when you perform the sequence and you get objectively downgraded if you dont do it as wel as the other guy.
There are other key differences, such as the use of 1 point per 15 degrees of error in Pattern vs. 1 point per 10 degrees of error in IMAC. No unknowns in Pattern, except in certain circumstances in FAI Pattern, such as the Precision Aerobatics World Championships. Another key difference can be noted in sequence design and in how often sequences change. IMAC changes sequences every year, Pattern changes every two years. IMAC sequences are very short these days, typically only 10 figures, whereas Pattern sequences are around 20 or more, depending on class. IMAC sequences place alot of emphasis on high K factors for each figure, especially in the upper classes and do it mostly by sprinkling snap rolls liberally into the figures. In pattern, the sequence design emphasis is much more oriented towards geometric design and flow. It is often said that Pattern sequences are easy to fly, but hard to fly well and it is true. IMAC sequences are generally harder to fly and are even harder to fly well. They are also much harder to judge objectively and in my opinion anyway, harder to objectively arrive at who the best pilot was.
Last thing, though it's not in the rules, you typically wind up in an equipment "arms race" from the very beginning in IMAC. It is very common to be competing against 35% to 40% models in Basic. In Pattern, though you can also spend a boatload of money on equipment, you don't need to overspend to get a size advantage. 2 meters is the limit in every class and even a good .90 size model is very viable in Sportsman. In 2004, our D1 Sportsman champion flew a .60 Kaos. That kind of equpment won't cut it beyond Sportsman, but you can be extremely competitive all the way through Masters with a $450 ARF and a $250 engine with a $60 pipe and a $40 header.
Actually, there are several key differences between Precision Aerobatics (AKA Pattern) and Scale Aerobatics (AKA IMAC). In IMAC, although there is some description of a box of a certain depth, height and width, it does not exist for all practical purposes. That is because IMAC eliminated the 75 degree boundaries on each side and also dispensed with the concept of zones. Formerly, you could be penalized for box violations with anything ranging from a loss of points if the offending figure was partially outside, to a zero if it were entirely outside of the box. Zones were used as a way of framing the sequence, in particular for center zone figures. IMAC also dispensed with center zone centering points deductions. It used to be that your center zone figure had to be, well, centered in order to earn all the points possible. That is no longer the case. One last thing, IMAC also added something called a Presentation Score, which effectively is another 'figure' from a scoring standpoint. The judges will arbitrarily assign a presentation score after the sequences is complete. No one has ever been able to define how to objectively arrive at a score, so it's not something you can really practice for or predict. You get what you get based on each judges personal notion of what a presentation score should be. I'm not sure of the current status of the presentation score. It's been on again, off again. In 2003, IMAC was trying to force its use before it officially became a rule in 2004, then advised not to use it after it was official. Very confusing. It's still on the books, so I don't know what you can expect to run into for 2006.
Anyway, in Pattern, there is a box, 60 degrees each side. You get downgrades based on the percentage of the figure that is outside of the box, plus other normal downgrades. There are three zones and in the true spirit of flying precision aerobatics, you get downgraded if center zone figures are not centered. In other words, you are expected to exhibit control of where the model is when you perform the sequence and you get objectively downgraded if you dont do it as wel as the other guy.
There are other key differences, such as the use of 1 point per 15 degrees of error in Pattern vs. 1 point per 10 degrees of error in IMAC. No unknowns in Pattern, except in certain circumstances in FAI Pattern, such as the Precision Aerobatics World Championships. Another key difference can be noted in sequence design and in how often sequences change. IMAC changes sequences every year, Pattern changes every two years. IMAC sequences are very short these days, typically only 10 figures, whereas Pattern sequences are around 20 or more, depending on class. IMAC sequences place alot of emphasis on high K factors for each figure, especially in the upper classes and do it mostly by sprinkling snap rolls liberally into the figures. In pattern, the sequence design emphasis is much more oriented towards geometric design and flow. It is often said that Pattern sequences are easy to fly, but hard to fly well and it is true. IMAC sequences are generally harder to fly and are even harder to fly well. They are also much harder to judge objectively and in my opinion anyway, harder to objectively arrive at who the best pilot was.
Last thing, though it's not in the rules, you typically wind up in an equipment "arms race" from the very beginning in IMAC. It is very common to be competing against 35% to 40% models in Basic. In Pattern, though you can also spend a boatload of money on equipment, you don't need to overspend to get a size advantage. 2 meters is the limit in every class and even a good .90 size model is very viable in Sportsman. In 2004, our D1 Sportsman champion flew a .60 Kaos. That kind of equpment won't cut it beyond Sportsman, but you can be extremely competitive all the way through Masters with a $450 ARF and a $250 engine with a $60 pipe and a $40 header.
11-22-2005, 05:23 PM
#40
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
I normally don't get caught up in these kinds of debates, because I think that pattern and IMAC have a tremendous amount in common. However, I do think that Ed's account of IMAC has been tainted by his experiences.
I would have to take exception to many of the comments in the above message, but most certainly in the statement that pattern is the "true spirit of precision aerobatics" because centered figures are required.
Actually, IMAC attempts to emulate full scale aerobatic competitions with some necessary deviations for models. Centered figures no longer exist in full scale aerobatics (so I guess these full scale airplanes do not fly in the true spirit of aerobatics), so they don't exist in IMAC either. You can get on your soapbox about why you don't fly IMAC anymore, but please don't try to prevent someone else from giving it a go.
Ken
I would have to take exception to many of the comments in the above message, but most certainly in the statement that pattern is the "true spirit of precision aerobatics" because centered figures are required.
Actually, IMAC attempts to emulate full scale aerobatic competitions with some necessary deviations for models. Centered figures no longer exist in full scale aerobatics (so I guess these full scale airplanes do not fly in the true spirit of aerobatics), so they don't exist in IMAC either. You can get on your soapbox about why you don't fly IMAC anymore, but please don't try to prevent someone else from giving it a go.
Ken
11-22-2005, 08:15 PM
#41
My Feedback: (42)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Randolph,
NJ
Posts: 878
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
Would you please point out anything non-factual in what I posted? Actually, my experiences qualify me quite well to answer the post. Please be specific and use facts in your reply.
11-22-2005, 10:00 PM
#42
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
My experiences also qualify me quite well to speak on behalf of IMAC. But I have a better idea. Instead of *****ing about centered figures and the now defunct presentation score, let's try to help the Basic pilots with the questions they have asked. This is why I usually don't enter these debates and why I will now refrain from continuing it.
Ken
Ken
11-23-2005, 12:26 AM
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Buffalo,
MN
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
There is nothing non-factual, Ed, but you do paint a dim picture of IMAC versus Pattern with the overall tone of your post. This thread is just newbs looking for help, and discussing...
11-23-2005, 05:26 AM
#44
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (6)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Burnsville,
MN
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
ORIGINAL: NJRCFLYER2
Would you please point out anything non-factual in what I posted? Actually, my experiences qualify me quite well to answer the post. Please be specific and use facts in your reply.
Would you please point out anything non-factual in what I posted? Actually, my experiences qualify me quite well to answer the post. Please be specific and use facts in your reply.
11-23-2005, 08:35 AM
#45
My Feedback: (42)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Randolph,
NJ
Posts: 878
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
Ok guys, no more. This started out by trying to help the guy find some contest venues that didn't require a 6 hour drive from where he lives. Note that I originally gave him facts about IMAC contests that have been held in the region and pointed him at the RD for more info. Then I felt it would be helpful to correct the erroneous post alluding that Pattern and IMAC flying are about the same thing. If you experienced IMAC guys think that's a problem, sorry about that. Seems like no one can be specific and deal with facts as requested, so let's end it and not scare off the guy we were trying to help, OK? Have a nice Thanksgiving holiday.
11-23-2005, 09:11 AM
#46
Senior Member
My Feedback: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Johns Creek,
GA
Posts: 7,457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Basic
true..they are technically different....
but come on!!! they ARE about the same thing.........Sheeeeeesh
take your bitter pill and move on!
I'm starting basic this next year too...any Michigan flyers around.
Might try my hand at pattern too... since they are so similar...
but come on!!! they ARE about the same thing.........Sheeeeeesh
take your bitter pill and move on!
I'm starting basic this next year too...any Michigan flyers around.
Might try my hand at pattern too... since they are so similar...
11-23-2005, 09:13 AM
#47
Senior Member
My Feedback: (13)
RE: Basic
ORIGINAL: budgetdude
I think we were just talking about getting to a place where there is good guys to get started in sequence flying. At this level competition I don't see a real difference in getting a plane in the air and flying in a straight line with the wings level.
I think we were just talking about getting to a place where there is good guys to get started in sequence flying. At this level competition I don't see a real difference in getting a plane in the air and flying in a straight line with the wings level.
When I began the hobby in 1986, I briefly looked into Pattern. I found a general prima-donna attitude and big-time NIH Syndrome; hence the brief exposure. I told myself then that I'd avoid organized competition like the plague, in order to keep this a HOBBY.
IMAC intrigues me because it will undoubtedly make me a better pilot. I'm sure Pattern would too, but the Pattern style airplanes leave me cold. IMAC planes make good knock-around sporters in addition to competition mounts.
I'm preparing myself to compete against MYSELF; I have no illusions of being a contender. Also, I well remember the thrill when I was shooting in organized competition; participating in a couple of IMAC contests will give me a taste of that.
ABOVE ALL, most all IMAC guys I've communicated with seem to be like most heli guys; genuinely interested in helping a newbie succeed, and they're not worried about what brand name gear you have; or don't have.
NJRCFLYER2, you speak of arbitration in IMAC judging. Well, duh... ANY judged format is going to be open to the interpretation of each judge. I too am singularly UNqualified to understand most of what you wrote; but I am no virgin to high-level competition, having been a nationally-ranked PPC shooter. So I understand the difference between subjective and objective scoring.
Anyone who submits himself to the whims of a panel of judges, whatever the endeavor, should understand that he might get an unfair score; perceived or otherwise. Welcome to life. Do I detect a whiff of sour grapes?
And to us rookies, IMAC and Pattern ARE basically the same thing, using different airplanes.
