serious power

Doug,
I just read that Colombian blog - interesting.

Get a melting pot filled with, amongst other stuff, some confusion. Add a few pre-conceptions, and you get a lottery all-right - just some have more tickets than others .

Brian

serious power

Really !!
We could hardly discuss the outcome before the fact could we ??

Doug Cronkhite

My Feedback: (34)

I disagree Freddy. I don't think it's nitpicking to want to improve the overall quality of the events. Discussing things after the fact is the way things can be improved. The question should be how does this get improved for future events?

AmericanSpectre505

The schedules are fine in my opinion, as it helps drives new innovations. It's not whinning or nitpicking, this could have been going on from day one of the WC. The "big boys" make mistakes too, you earn a zero you get a zero. The impression judging has no place in the sport and it drives people away over time.

Did happen at the WC, who knows, seems to have some merit? I've had it done to me and it sucks, you feel robbed as a person and de-humanized. The bottom line, it doesn't matter how many sponsors a guy has only how he/she flies on that given day. Judging needs to be transparent, no names, no politics.

You have a point, what's done is done! I don't see the WC competitors on here complaing and you won't.

My two cents...

Bill

serious power

Hi Bill,
The schedules are fine, and these guys are capable of them - though that ke triangle sounds a bit dubious in the conditions that were prevailing.
They being unknown to the pilots is fine.

However they being unknown to the judges clearly is not.
2 out of 10 only seeing a big mistake is pretty bad.
1 out of 10 only seeing a big mistake is terrible, then only downgrading it heavily instead of giving the 0 is worse.

What about the pilots who did not make such mistakes ? This may have cost AJ a Silver medal and JS a Bronze.
If this had been caught by the judges at the time it MAY have caused a reset of any preconceptions that were in play (and there are always some) - then who knows !!! The dynamic in the comp would certainly have been different.

Maybe the judges should be given the unknowns on the Thursday morning and be taken away for some 'covert' training.

Whatever way you choose to view this you would have to acknowledge that 1 and 2 out of ten is unacceptable - that's a 85% mean failure rate - and these are the judges.
This is a tough one to solve satisfactorily.

Brian

AmericanSpectre505

Brian,

I agree totally.

cmoulder

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't there two "zero judges" in addition to the 5 maneuver judges at the Nats Finals? As I understand it, their sole purpose is to advise the maneuver judges if a particular maneuver is not flown correctly per the Aresti.

rcpattern

My Feedback: (45)

At the NATS, yes Bob. We also have a caller for each unknown. They do not do this at the worlds.

Arch

MTK

Brian you have hit this nail dead on. Judging is hardly ever practiced enough to truly develop competence. Other means of establishing a reasonable and correct score should be employed.....The current book specifies for example that judging is a sole endeavor. That a judge must be confident in what score he gives and leave it at that. The book has very little to say about Judges really knowing the whole maneuver sets possible with particular emphasis on unknown high K maneuvers. I would venture to say that some judges may not have even observed some of the K=6 maneuvers performed before the Tournament, let alone judge them.

Many years ago judges were encouraged to confer with the panel in regard to zeroes. Today the opposite is true...no conferences unless there is a protest.

At minimum, for zeroes at least, judge conferences and agreements should be re-established. I like what full scale does here: the judge scribes PZ for Perceived Zero and then the Chief Judge, after the flight and through conference, establishes HZ or Hard Zero. All judges score the maneuver the same. I think the Judge book is in need of revision on assessing zeroes and particularly in regard to the latest sets of complex maneuvers.

jonlowe

My Feedback: (12)

Yes we use 2 zero judges at the US Nats for the unknowns. I was one this year. And let me tell you, that doesn't guarantee perfection. We had one controversial call on a maneuver, which was supposed to be a "lay-down" humpty bump (pull to a 45 instead of a 90 degree line), and the pilot pulled to a 90. Both the up and down lines were supposed to be 45's and he did 90's on both. I did not call it a zero, because I said it was 1 point per 15 degrees, or a 6 point total downgrade assuming no other flaws. Others called it a zero. Unfortunately, the FAI rules are not clear what constitutes a "wrong" maneuver vs. a downgrade. Is a pull to 89 degrees a downgrade, but 90 degrees a zero? At what point does a wrong angle make the manuever become a zero rather than a downgrade? In this case it didn't matter a whole lot as the most the pilot could get was a 4, and he had other mistakes. This subject has become an article in the next issue of the NSRCA "Kfactor" magazine.

It gets a lot easier when someone does a snap instead of a roll or something like that. We correctly called several zeros that may not have been caught otherwise. Having the zero judges allows the other judges to concentrate on the maneuver elements.

As long as humans are involved in judging, there will never be perfection. We can strive for it, but there will always be room for improvement.

As I understand it, for the WC finals, there are 20 judges in 3 groups: 5 assigned to left maneuvers, 10 judging the center and 5 on the right. Not every judge does every maneuver. It would seem, on the surface, they could break out a couple of those judges to be zero judges. But it would take a rule change to do so.

Freddy

My Feedback: (3)

Not really: make life simpler again like at the prior worlds and only fly F's and do away with unknowns in F3A. I think we are making it harder on ourselves than we need and maybe trying to copy IMAC. Generally the standings of the top 10 do not change much after the semi's so how about they count their best semi and fly two more F's in the final and then pick the winner based on the best F and the semi score? Or something similar. This should make it much easier for the judges as they will know what to expect. Even at a worlds level judges are only humans.

Now if you want to make this fun and innovative how about adding one round of Artistic aerobatics freestyle with music in the final and count that one as part of the total score?

Doug Cronkhite

My Feedback: (34)

I like that the finals is a new contest. It ensures the final results come from all pilots flying in the same conditions.

MTK

Freddy,


Shhhhhh!..... Be veweey veweeey quiet.....Don't tell Shulman ....

But seriously, Judging at any level is never practiced anywhere near as much as necessary. Never will be I suppose.....

Could it be improved by the FAI if it wanted? As I suggested recently, why not have a team of 50 Judges with proper credentials from all over, some of who get go to the major meets worldwide to judge F3A semis and finals only. FAI pays, of course. The real issue is minor (TIC) ----- logistics and money: can FAI budget the necessary $250-300K annually to send a 10-12 judges to the 3-4 major meets every year? How about 5 or 6 judges? How likely is it for FAI F3A support to come from hobby companies? How 'bout corporate sponsors?

Red Bull throws about 2 1/2 billion US green backs to sponsor all sorts of wild sport stuff. Would they throw a couple hundred K at something like this? That's just pocket change. We'll never know if we don't ask.........

When you really think about it, we are not all that well organized or funded but we are really motivated. We can do better!!!

J-P

My Feedback: (1)

Enjoy some videos by Josep Chou

http://jp-f3a.blogspot.fr/

JP

Dean Pappas

To which Dick Hanson replied:my response ...


AMEN, Dick!

Regards,
Dean Pappas

apereira

I hope no one take me wrong as my comment is based on all the years I had interest in and involved in F3A.
F3A is like others had said the Formula 1 in aeromodelling , so as such it will have schedules created to be more challenging which will push manufacturers to develop better equipment and pilots with better skills, so this moving forward can not be slowed down by people's own interest in equipment or abilities, it is discussed and approved by delegates of many nations who think pretty much the same way, and that is the power to move forward on this specialty.

That is why it is so important for countries to have their own classes and schedules like AMA, which maintains the interest of pilots who love pattern but do not want to invest or change their equipment to fly what they love and how they love it.

bjr_93tz

Just as soon as the plan for the Galactik or Asyuler Bipe is available in MAN I'll be in my shed, covered in dust with a grin on my face.

Until then, the only option I have is to buy one of these multi$$$ ships, reverse engineer it and build my copy better.......

flywilly

My Feedback: (121)

Maybe Dick Hanson would consider designing an airplane to meet the current aerodynamic challenges.....

apereira

Liked that one LOL

Zeeb

My Feedback: (41)

Oh man, I cannot let this one go: whatever you think of Dick Hanson he was a major force in the development of pattern competition in the USA and you ought to have your mouth washed out with something significantly stronger than soap for those comments. He now suffers from macular degenation and the fact that he can fly or use the computer at all is something of a miracle and I can call you a horse's ass without any remorse.....

Zeeb

My Feedback: (41)

Yup and it's all publically available equipment as has been mentioned above in this thread. The key is how it's set up and you'll have to ask him if he wants to tell you that....

AmericanSpectre505

That's all Classied above Top Secret and you will have to fill out the proper request paperwork and submit it to the pattern God's. They will evaluate you're request and see if you qualify for the inner circle of information. Water boarding still remains the most effective way to extract information. I have a great rate for the catch and release program, including the bucked, the extra thick wash cloth, "special H2O and a secure location...LOL.



BHolsten

flywilly

My Feedback: (121)

Zeeb,
I have great respect for Dick and was unaware of his visual impairment which I am sorry to hear about. I have not spoken to him in more than 10 years, but I was a great fan of his design philosophy as evidenced by the litany of his kits that I have built and flown:
1 wood .60 Dalotel, 3 glass Runarounds, 2 Zlins (1 wood, 1 glass), 2 Elites (I think that was Guy's design), 3 Excesses, 1 wood 1.20 size Dalotel.

jonlowe

My Feedback: (12)

I took flywilly's post as a compliment to Dick's abilities, not a dig. If you re-read it, I think you will come to the same conclusion. I have a Runaround that is a great flying airplane even by today's standards.

Jon

mithrandir

My Feedback: (2)

I would own a Dick Hansen designed plane!!

as long as he puts the stab in the right place!!!