2011/2012 Master Short Aresti Wrong?
11-15-2010, 07:23 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: La Jolla, CA
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2011/2012 Master Short Aresti Wrong?
I have been flying the 2011/2012 Short Masters sequence a little lately. (No, Jarvis, I haven't decided to move up for sure yet. If I do, it will be purely a defensive move to make sure I don't have to judge Masters. LOL!) Coming from an IMAC backround I prefer Aresti to the written descriptions, so I downloaded the Masters Aresti version. Another Masters pilot saw me flying it, and said I was doing manuever #2 (Figure "M") incorrectly. In the Aresti it shows that in the figure M, on the first upline you do a 3 of 4 roll up, stall turn, and a 1/4 roll down. On the second upline the Aresti shows a 1/4 roll up, and a 3 of 4 roll down. In Aresti this is indicated by whether the rolls are placed above or below the horizontal line. The other pilot said that the two uplines are to be flown the same ie. 3 of 4 roll up, 1/4 roll down. This seems to match the abbreviated written description. The manuever can be made to work either way it is flown depending on roll direction. So, is the Aresti wrong, and if so, I think it should be corrected. In my opinion the Aresti is much more detailed than the written descriptions. That is the point of the Aresti language. What would happen at a contest if I showed up and flew it as drawn. Would I get a zero, would everyone else get a zero, or would they accept it both ways?
11-15-2010, 07:38 PM
#2
RE: 2011/2012 Master Short Aresti Wrong?
I'm gonna respond 'cause I'm learning Aresti and it's fun!
My thought: you are right, and the Aresti is drawn incorrectly. The score sheet says "3/4 point roll up" and that's what's in the written description. The Aresti has the second leg opposite like you said, and although I think that looks cooler, you would probably get tagged a '0' for following the Aresti unless you can fool the judges - it's been known to happen
I don't know if the way the Aresti is written (up leg vertical maneuver written above the horiz. line) changes because of the way they are linked.
My thought: you are right, and the Aresti is drawn incorrectly. The score sheet says "3/4 point roll up" and that's what's in the written description. The Aresti has the second leg opposite like you said, and although I think that looks cooler, you would probably get tagged a '0' for following the Aresti unless you can fool the judges - it's been known to happen
I don't know if the way the Aresti is written (up leg vertical maneuver written above the horiz. line) changes because of the way they are linked.
11-15-2010, 09:13 PM
#4
Senior Member
RE: 2011/2012 Master Short Aresti Wrong?
ORIGINAL: 1bwana1
I have been flying the 2011/2012 Short Masters sequence a little lately. (No, Jarvis, I haven't decided to move up for sure yet. If I do, it will be purely a defensive move to make sure I don't have to judge Masters. LOL! ) Coming from an IMAC backround I prefer Arresti to the written descriptions, so I downloaded the Masters Arresti version. Another Masters pilot saw me flying it, and said I was doing manuever #2 (Figure ''M'') incorrectly. In the Arresti it shows that in the figure M, on the first upline you do a 3 of 4 roll up, stall turn, and a 1/4 roll down. On the second upline the Arresti shows a 1/4 roll up, and a 3 of 4 roll down. In Arresti this is indicated by whether the rolls are placed above or below the horizontal line. The other pilot said that the two uplines are to be flown the same ie. 3 of 4 roll up, 1/4 roll down. This seems to match the abbreviated written description. The manuever can be made to work either way it is flown depending on roll direction. So, is the Arresti wrong, and if so, I think it should be corrected. In my opinion the Arresti is much more detailed than the written descriptions. That is the point of the Arresti language. What would happen at a contest if I showed up and flew it as drawn. Would I get a zero, would everyone else get a zero, or would they accept it both ways?
I have been flying the 2011/2012 Short Masters sequence a little lately. (No, Jarvis, I haven't decided to move up for sure yet. If I do, it will be purely a defensive move to make sure I don't have to judge Masters. LOL! ) Coming from an IMAC backround I prefer Arresti to the written descriptions, so I downloaded the Masters Arresti version. Another Masters pilot saw me flying it, and said I was doing manuever #2 (Figure ''M'') incorrectly. In the Arresti it shows that in the figure M, on the first upline you do a 3 of 4 roll up, stall turn, and a 1/4 roll down. On the second upline the Arresti shows a 1/4 roll up, and a 3 of 4 roll down. In Arresti this is indicated by whether the rolls are placed above or below the horizontal line. The other pilot said that the two uplines are to be flown the same ie. 3 of 4 roll up, 1/4 roll down. This seems to match the abbreviated written description. The manuever can be made to work either way it is flown depending on roll direction. So, is the Arresti wrong, and if so, I think it should be corrected. In my opinion the Arresti is much more detailed than the written descriptions. That is the point of the Arresti language. What would happen at a contest if I showed up and flew it as drawn. Would I get a zero, would everyone else get a zero, or would they accept it both ways?
However, I'm glad you caught the error in the Aresti diagram. Pattern only recently (last 10 years or so) has started to show Aresti diagrams. Even more recently, ribbon diagrams have been shown. The written description has been the guiding word so to speak, for decades
11-16-2010, 05:05 PM
#6
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Agawam,
MA
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2011/2012 Master Short Aresti Wrong?
I can see how having the rolls above or below the horizontal line easies readability, but I though the curve was all that mattered? ...fly into the cup (in which case it is correct.)
11-16-2010, 05:54 PM
#7
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: ToowoombaQLD, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 1,026
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
15 Posts
RE: 2011/2012 Master Short Aresti Wrong?
http://nsrca.us//images/stories/curr...ort_Aresti.pdf
http://nsrca.us/documents/judging/cu...8F3AAresti.pdf
When you compare the two Figure "M" maneuvers in the Masters short link and the preliminary P-11 (second page) you can see the aresti for the Figure M in the Masters Short sequence aresti is a bit shonky and needs to be fixed up.
http://nsrca.us/documents/judging/cu...8F3AAresti.pdf
When you compare the two Figure "M" maneuvers in the Masters short link and the preliminary P-11 (second page) you can see the aresti for the Figure M in the Masters Short sequence aresti is a bit shonky and needs to be fixed up.
11-16-2010, 08:51 PM
#8
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: La Jolla, CA
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2011/2012 Master Short Aresti Wrong?
ORIGINAL: Scott Smith
I can see how having the rolls above or below the horizontal line easies readability, but I though the curve was all that mattered? ...fly into the cup (in which case it is correct.)
I can see how having the rolls above or below the horizontal line easies readability, but I though the curve was all that mattered? ...fly into the cup (in which case it is correct.)
11-17-2010, 05:49 AM
#9
Senior Member
My Feedback: (4)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Agawam,
MA
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 2011/2012 Master Short Aresti Wrong?
ORIGINAL: 1bwana1
You are correct, you do fly into the cup of a roll symbol. However the whole point of the horizontal line in the Hammerhead figure is to define what happens up, and what happens down ,so in this case it is impossible to properly reconcile the two. It is a grammaticaly incorrect drawing.
You are correct, you do fly into the cup of a roll symbol. However the whole point of the horizontal line in the Hammerhead figure is to define what happens up, and what happens down ,so in this case it is impossible to properly reconcile the two. It is a grammaticaly incorrect drawing.
