shannah

My Feedback: (5)

I like Doug's suggestion. More figures, single sequence. Lot's of positives with this.

Silent-AV8R

How would you score it?? With 3 Knowns and 1 Unknown there would be no drops, so each sequence would count (25% each). The Unknown would be 25% of the total then as well. Otherwise I see no problems with it.

Doug Cronkhite

My Feedback: (34)

Heh.. yep. And the worst part is the 8 point was perfect. Absolutely no deductions (except for the 2 extra hesitations )

sewbusy

Bill.... Speaking about "snap happiness"... It seems that your previous contests were guilty of your same perceptions..... Take a look at this sequence that was written for the Unlimited Scat series.... out of 10 maneuvers, 9 of them had "snap happiness" in them??
Wayne[img][/img]

Silent-AV8R

Hi Wayne. Nice to see you were watching so closely back then!!!! However, I did not write that particular sequence and I did not particularly like it so it has no impact on my point. And even if it were written by me, perhaps I have learned something since then and have changed my attitude about snaps. Lots can happen in a year.

So I take it that you feel my comments are unjustified or incorrect? Since you took the time to dig out and post a sequence that was flown at a contest I happened to CD over a year ago, that is all I can surmise.

PaulBK

wayne, should one day you decide to take on the challenge of a sponsored contest series with six to eight closely spaced contests with five classes, i suspect you will welcome the contribution of qualified help, especially those folks who offer to write unknowns -using the Aresti software, and with a working knowledge of the FAI catalog. if their writing may philosophically differ from your own you make the choice as to whether you do it yourself, or accept the help graciously. who actually wrote the sequence is unimportant, but had that sequence appeared during my stewardship it would have helped build the beliefs that I now hold, but that would in way taint my appreciation of his involvement.

Now...given that you have been involved in imac for some time, do you have something to add to what has been a stimulating discussion?

Windecker

My Feedback: (11)

Wayne writes unknowns every day for the national unknown program, think he is aware of the work involved.
BTW thanks for the effort Wayne, I have heard so much good about the program and personally feel it has helped everyone very much.
Will Berninger

3D Joy

For 2006, I can't see an Advanced guy go to Unlimited and feel ready for it. The gap is just too much. I have been flying Advanced for a little more than 2 years now and would like to try Unlimited as I place very well and consistently in Advanced.

I guess I will have to continue learning to fly... The sad part of it is that the only way (that comes to my mind) to fly these sequences good is to fly bigger to gain some time between figure elements. Not a good thing IMO.

rcplanefan

My Feedback: (2)

3D Joy,

What about Unlimited is keeping you from moving up?

Ken

matus777

Very educational discussion on this thread and it has brought me to a point where I would love to see both an animation and actual video footage of what is considered a "textbook" snap". Ideally this would be either from an IMAC authority or his/her approved source.

I think I undersatnd the concept but would love to see the real McCoy in the form of a "10" where the real footage matches the animation then perhaps we can all understand what seems to be lacking in language variance....thanks all for a great discussion!

wgeffon

My Feedback: (4)

I thought the Advanced sequence for 05 was almost as tough as the Unlimited.
Some of the Advanced Unknows were definately as tough. I dont see it as such a big jump at all.

MMcConville

My Feedback: (4)

I agree with Wayne on the difficulty of the 05' Advanced pattern. Though I havent been in the shoes of the pilot who had to fly it, to me the known and certainly some of the Unknowns seemed as difficult as many Unl. patterns that I have flown. I think those patterns would develop the skills of a pilot to be ready to start Unlimited.

In fact my thinking was more that the jump from Int to Adv was too big if anything.

Windecker

My Feedback: (11)

I also agree with you Mike and Wayne.

Actually one person I spoke with at Tucson was pretty upset about a negitive snap on a specific high K maneuver in Intermediate. Personally I feel that you had better have a few of them here and there because once you get above that class, your snapping all the time (which is another part of this thread already).

Also, since it is on a "known" everyone will have plenty of time to practice it.
I personally like having very hard knowns to have to fly, makes you a better pilot. I can chip away at practicing that known all year. Practice up high and with nobody around to laugh at me <LOL>
Will

Silent-AV8R

Well, I'd hardly call it upset. I was commenting on the design philosophy. Many pilots moving up to Intermediate are intimidated by the negative snap. It seems that it would be better to have it as a standalone figure rather than having it in the highest K figure in the sequence. If the idea is to teach the skill, what is taught by placing in such a way that if a pilot zeroes it he pays a very high penalty?? You have to consider not only what you put in a sequence, but where you put it.

I also disagree that "hard" sequences make you a better pilot. Well written sequences that emphasize the needed skills combined with effective practice is what makes you a better pilot. My philosophy has always been that a sequence, Known or Unknown, should be easy to fly, but difficult to fly well. There is nothing to be gained by writing overly difficult sequences that terrorize a pilot, especially a pilot who is moving up to the class.

See, not upset at all.

Windecker

My Feedback: (11)

Now I did not mention names <LOL>

Yes, hard to fly well is what I mean. Does not hurt to have it be complex, and by complex I do NOT mean a plane buster. I mean things that make you have to concentrate such as dependant roll directions.

I feel that for myself, I need that push to "have" to learn it in order to push myself into "trying" to learn it. May not work for everyone.
Will

quist

My Feedback: (198)

Mike,

I have to agree with you on the jump from Int to Adv. I know of 3 Int pilots in our district that now HAVE to move up to Adv. Those pilots have a lot of new things to prepare for. I hope the unknown writers in our district remember this, I hate to see a plane go in.

Silent-AV8R

No worries. I was just upset that you said I was upset, which I was not, which was upsetting!! [&:]

I agree with your modified description. "Hard" to many sequence writers means more like "stump the dummy" and such.

Later.

Silent-AV8R

Tony - Unknowns are wirtten on a National level now by the ISC (IMAC Sequence Committee).

PaulBK

A lot of this discussion seems to just come back to the idea that the class skills and included figures need to be defined, (again), in my opinion starting with ten basic figures and a clean sheet of paper. there has to be the urge to resist at the end of year letting the classes get more difficult in the coming year because pilots want the challenge of more difficult figures without moving to the next class. i am by no means a pattern guy, but the emphasis in pattern, not precision, not variety, and i think slimming things down a bit should at least be considered. here are my two cents:

establish a fixed criteria for all classes that will include:

number of figures
highest K factor allowable for a single figure
mix of positive and negative flight
type, placement, and number of snaps
type, placement, and number of spins by class
type and placement and number of rollers
type and placement of point rolls per class

that's a start....P



P

3D Joy

What keeps me from moving up???

In the proposal#1 -> figure #1. May look like the figure 9 we had in advanced (upline with 2 of 4 followed by opposite direction positive snap, 3/4 outside loop with negative snap on top) but now we talk about 1 1/2 positive snap. Not sure my plane will keep up... In fact, every figure that has more than one vertical snap while going up are tough IMO.

In the proposal #2 -> figure #10. I am sure planes will go down with this one. If the pilot is not really concentrated, he will rush the beginning of the maneuver (one snap and 1/4 roll can be done real fast) and then pull 180 deg to an inverted 45 deg downline with lots of stuff to do AND THEN push 135 deg back to inverted level flight. This figure will be HUGE...

Proposal #3 is my favorite although it seems the most technical. My favorite because it seems less plane dependant and more pilot dependant. It has lots of point rolls in opposite directions. My understanding of the aresti in figure 9 is that, from inverted push to a 45 upline with 6 of 4 point rolls... Now keep everything straight with that!! It does not need mucho power and is more pilot skills than plane skills type of figure. I like it. Figure 1 is about the same with 2 of 4 followed by opposite 2 point roll on a 45 puline.

Now don't get me wrong, I like challenges and I like most of these sequences but I sure will vote and give my opinions on the IMAC website. It's too bad I can't try them out, my plane is stored for the winter...

In all, I would like to see sequences made for pilots, not 40%+ planes.

rcplanefan

My Feedback: (2)

3D Joy,

Thanks for the response. We are having an IMAC get together this weekend in Cincinnati to fly through all of these sequences. We'll keep your comments in mind as we work through them. In general, I would say that the decision to move up should not be based on the proposed known sequences, but rather the mastery of the fundamentals from the class in which you are currently competing. However, since you are in Canada, I know that practice time is probably limited (hard to believe it could be less than here!) so I can understand your hesitation. None of the sequences look bad to me on paper - but hopefully we can learn more this weekend.

Definitely leave your comments on the website!

Ken

RByrd

My Feedback: (3)

ORIGINAL: MMcConville

I like the direction this is going. At the Shootout Quique and I were discussing the same issue of too many snaps. Having both sat in the judges chair and flown the snap happy patterns in our classs, it because really clear. As a judge you find yourself looking at snaps so much that you dont look a closely at the rest of the maneuver as you should. As a pilot as well as in developing new pilot's skills, I think we are becomming so biased toward snaps that other more difficult and import flying skills are being overlooked and lost. There seems to be a loss in the overall quality of rollers as an example. Much harder to do properly, but not as important to the score. At the shootout, in most of our 5 knowns and 5 unknowns there were very few maneuvers that didnt contain at least one snap. Sometimes multiple snap elements.
I like snaps and they are important to be part of our schedules, but IMHO they are becoming too important and over emphasized.
[/quote]


I agree with you Mike. I guess since I flew pattern for 20 years that I like the geometry and the skill that it takes to perform the perfect sequence. I have flown IMAC the past 2 season and enjoy it very much, but I don't see the clean sequences that I would like to see. To pull off a clean roller to me is more impressive than watching a pilot struggle through a sequence and only hit the snaps. I do believe that snaps are a part of our sequences, but we are so involved in the snap that we miss the overall maneuver. It seems a pilot can miss a line, hit the snap and score 9.5. Nail the line, miss the snap by 10 degrees and score a 4.

Just my 2 cents,

Rick

fredo

I think the level of difficulty in each class should be kept consistent. If you feel like challenge just move up the class.

3D Joy

Keep us posted about this IMAC get together. I would like comments from people actally flying the sequences, especially in Unlimited.

In Advanced, there are 2 main points to learn IMO. Those points are negative snaps and rollers. Sure the other maneuvers get more complicated but those are the 2 BIG elements that seem very hard to perform at first glance. I do like the way my rollers look like and my snaps still need some work but they are at least good enough to score 95% of the time at least. Soooo I think I am ready for Unlimited but looking at proposals I am not sure...

We had snow this week... I can still practice my reflexes with a foamy and simulator...

matus777

"If the idea is to teach the skill"

OK back to the thread just a bit...in order to teach the skill don't we need to define and agree on what the standard is? First agree/define/demonstrate the STANDARD and then attempt to teach the skill?????