Dana,

We long timers in the sport have tried to get AMA to help us...AMA has consistently rejected such involvement. They have pushed pretty much all of the administraton of pattern matters to the NSRCA with the exception of the contest board and collection of fees from Nats participation (in exchange for using the site and a few resources). They have also relegated all competitive endeavors to much lower importance than they deserve, in favor of the small toy park flying currently showing up all over their MA pages. The guise is that their membership is better served. We can understand some of that but not all.....Truth is that the competition piece is occupied by no more than 5% of the membership; but the developments we all enjoy generally come from competition types....go figure!

I came close last year, as I mentioned earlier, to get some stuff in the AMA website through Bill Pritchett who luckily is also involved in pattern. Somebody should pick that effort back up and push it...

Some of our leader members have put quite an effort in creating schedules through flight simulation video format. As a start, at minimum, placing these vids on the NSRCA website may serve noobies, I agree

I think that summary of a sportsman flight is pretty biased. Its like 3 sets of a few basic elements. At that level pilots are not perfectly setting up their out of box turn arounds, and if they are its probably with a banked 180 turn.

If two loops is hard for you, spent an entire day practicing. And add in your 1/2 Rev Cuban for turn arounds. Practicing 2 moves, not too tough. Next day, try 2 different moves. Every day you fly, pic 2-3 moves to practice. When you are comfortable, try linking a few together.

It is amazing how fast you progress, you just have to start.

Dear Matt, I must say that is one sad story about AMA. Oh well, Evan asked for ideas with this thread and so, as a relative newcomer to the sport, I have shared some here. We all must work within the structure and resources we have, however limited. Thanks for sharing.

Dear Joe, I don't understand your opening comment, please what do you mean by biased? I started flying Sportsman last season, practice when I can, have improved some, and will compete again this season. With that said, I still keenly feel what it is like to be new to all this and have tried to give voice to some of that here in this conversation. What I would caution those with a great deal of experience here is a dismissive approach to those who are newish to the sport. No doubt the experience was hard won with an enormous effort over a great deal of time so no disrespect intended and I admire those accomplishments; however, others experience and expertise does not invalidate my own or my contribution to this topic.

<br type="_moz" />

One thing I think we could do to increase participation is to totally change the Sportsman sequence and go back to what we had 20 years ago. Back then you could be competitive in "Novice" with a good .40 size sport plane. Unfortunately, we have added maneuvers that require a lot more power, such as the vertical upline on center. These maneuvers are tough for smaller, .40 size planes. It is definitely a significant advantage in Sportsman now to use a full blown pattern ship. While it was helpful back then, many contests were won with .40 size Kaos type planes. Back then, the 3 loops were the hard maneuver. They were hard to do well, and you learned a lot doing them, but they were not power hungry maneuvers. I would like to see a much less power hungry sequence, with even less "box" time. I would also like to see Intermediate go back in time and incorporate some of the older maneuvers in it. I bet many Advanced guys couldn't do 3 rolls now, even though the planes are bigger, slower, and roll easier. There will always be a jump between classes, and I think we need to accept this instead of trying to adjust every pattern to be a smooth transition. If you try to fly a new sequence and are not at all uncomfortable at first, then I think the challenge is not great enough.

Making pattern easier to fly with any airplane out there will help encourage participation. I know people will say that you can do it now, but the entry classes today, definitely favor larger ships. Making it to where a .40 size plane can be competitive would definitely encourage more participation. Teaching someone how to go straight up on center really doesn't accomplish a lot in my opinion. The key to the lower classes should be attracting people and making it fun.

Arch

What I observed at my field is that sportsman class pilots like to fly the plane fast during level flight, almost at full throttle. The plane just does not have extra power for loops or vertical lines. I would think it is equally important to provide training on the primitive elements of pattern flying. Flying slow and at constant speed is one of them.

Arch I agree whole heartedly with you. Funny....I tried doing three rolls last weekend! It was quite laughable! Funny you bring that up. Yea just coaching a newbie into doing centered manuevers we are introducing them to turnaround manuevers. I just think we shouldn't burden the novice competitor with scoring them at that level since it is hard for them to understand what is expected. The concept of a centered manuever is easy for one to understand who may have no coach or experience. Easy for us experienced pilots to think a newbie should be able to pull it off..... I'd love to see this sport get bigger and bigger and it won't if we don't change what we are doing. Here's a suggestion ...lets make turnaround manuevers centered manuevers then.

Evan

OK, so here is another angle to consider: <u>Contest day and contestant judging</u>.  Encouraging those who show up planning to "just to watch," to enter and fly Sportsman (what happened to me and many others) is likely to continue...  With one or more of these unplanned entries per contest, what is YOUR workload at the higher levels on contest day?  I mean, you want to fly your class too; have to judge the class that is appropriate given your experience and knowledge; AND now you have me (ok not me, someone like me last year) hanging around who you WANT to coach into having a great first contest so that they learn something and will come back again to learn some more (or at least not lose their airplane today).  Maybe the salient question is what can be done to address your workload and make your multiple mission more successful? A lot of work for the upper level guys for a day that is suppose to be fun, from what I have seen.  I love that the experienced pilots like to teach as much as I like to learn, however, perhaps you are the guys who need some relief as well as ideas on how to grow the sport out of a hobby that has changed since you got started? Also related, on the topic of contestant judging, is the question of how difficult is it to get a new judge up and running?  I don't have much insight into that, but I imagine it is a question that would spark a healthy discussion.  Is there anything that can be done to make it more feasible for both the new contestants AND the those new to judging, to succeed?  After all, if I keep coming back year after year, at some point I may be asked to take a turn in the chair?  Good posting.  Dana

While I aree that there is a bit too much turnaround in the Sportsman pattern (used to be Novice until someone got their feelings hurt), but I don't understand, why all the complaining about 2 loops? You seem to really be harping on that one. When I started novice in 89 it was 3 loops, and I did it with my Eagle 63 trainer that I competed with. By the time I spent my last year in Novice I was regularly getting 9 1/2's and 10's on those 3 loops (with an Escape this time). Frankly, there is way too much social pressure that causes too many newbies to move out of Sportsman before they are ready, before they have learned the foundations that the sequence is supposed to teach, and even before the "rules" say they have to move up. If you want to reduce your workload, ask your caller to call the box entries and exits. A good caller can cut a pilot at any level's workload in half right off the bat. Figure out what you need from your caller, and make it known. Don't be shy. This is your flight, not his.

Dana, didn't mean any disrespect. I am new too, I just bumped from sportsman the end of last year. I just meant to say, don't be so concerned with your out of box maneuvers, or making things perfect.

Your first goal is to know the names of the moves, so you can fly them when they are called. You will soon feel a rhythm, and it feels good. So fly in a contest, look at your scores, and practice the moves that bring lower scores. In sportsman your competition is not nailing box entries, perfect circles, or throttle management.

Take your time, practice, and have fun. You will quickly get comfortable and know what you should be working on.

If it was easy to nail the sequence down in a year or two, we would all be flying masters. It takes at least 2 years to get to the top of your class, and they change the sequence every two years to keep room for improvement and change

Matt, I am glad you used that example, as that is my EXACT point as to why we need to go back. You could be competitive with a .40 size trainer in the day. The maneuvers were still technical, but they were much more pilot intensive, such as the 3 loops. We don't need giant turn around maneuvers. We need a competitive environment that can be fun with ANY airplane. That is what drew people in. If they are having fun with their .40 size sport plane they will stick around and progress. The issue now is that people can't be competitive with that type of plane and it is intimidating that they need to go buy a new plane. Our current pattern is all but impossible to do with a high wing trainer, or even an average .40 size sport plane. I got into pattern because I could fly my .40 size plane in Novice and it was fun. I knew that if I practiced I could score well as the plane wasnt the deciding factor. The maneuvers weren't hard alone, but trying to do 3 loops was a challenge, but it was a challenge that I could work on regardless of the plane. Giant vertical turnarounds require a lot more than that and can keep people with a lot of planes away.

Arch

Another observation is that many new guys see pattern as being all about Master's and FAI and often feel like they are given short shrift at contests. For instance, sacrificing flying the same number of sequences or figures in order to have time for the upper level guys to get their full sequence in. I do however agree that 17 figures is a lot for Sportsman. I can see cutting them to 10 and still being able to start the learning curve. This will likely not save much time at a contest, but it will save a bunch of anguish on the part of a new flyer learning an overly long sequence. I agree with Arch and a lot of what he is saying. But once you get the new guy, you need to make sure you keep him. Using them as the sacrifice to make time for the "real" classes will serve no useful purpose. When I was running the SCAT series I often mentioned that I could care less if I had anyone in Advanced or Unlimited (except of needing judges), but I would be very concerned if there were no Basic or Sportsman pilots.

In D7 this year there have only been 3 Sportsman and 2 Intermediate pilots post scores. That is in contrast to 15 Advanced pilots, 10 Master's, and 7 in FAI.
In 2011 those same classes saw 15 Sportsman, 10 Intermediate, 21 Advanced, 26 Master's, and 9 FAI.
Of course that was the full year and we are only half-way into 2012.

Just my 2 cents from the sidelines.

<span style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; ">I flew my first 2 contests last year in D7. With regard to participation, time and $ are scarce and getting scarcer all over. There's nothing to stop the increasing demands of life in the current economy from interfering with participation overall. My fear is that in changing the rules (weight, safety, custom-tailoring of sequences, etc.) you end up pushing potential participants away because you're creating a moving target - people don't know what they're getting into.</span><br style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; " /><br style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; " /><span style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; ">I bow to many of you and your long experience in the hobby and the RC aerobatics scene. But from my point of view, if it it were 2 years ago now and I was looking at flying contests next year, it would be a turn-off to see all this banter about changing the rules. I'd probably sit it out until all this chatter dies down and I can see what, if anything, the pattern community settles upon and then decide if it interests me.</span><br style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; " /><br style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; " /><span style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; ">Also, here's a point: no, the Sportsman sequence isn't easy. And it's not supposed to be easy for a newbie. If it were easy, we wouldn't have anything to strive for.</span><br style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; " /><br style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; " /><span style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; ">Just like music, skiing or anything else I've had a degree of success at, pattern is hard. That is one reason why I like it - because in doing something hard I distinguish myself from those who can only do easy stuff.</span><br style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; " /><br style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; " /><span style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; ">Let's keep the rules hard. Otherwise it's like grade inflation - it sucks the heart out of the endeavor.</span><br style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; " /><br style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; " /><span style="font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; ">Bill</span>

Gee Bill, its always going to be hard as the standard for each maneuver is perfection. Whatever the sequence schedule, each maneuver must be flown to perfection or downgrades will be applied. Rest assured, that is NOT going to go away anytime soon or in our lifetime! If we like doing difficult things repeatedly over time, pattern is sure to please us, year after year LOL! OTOH, I think we need to give some real hard thought to the issue that Arch has raised about what kind of model does well given the current Sportsman sequence. For example, last season I flew a 62" Osiris. This season I will fly a full 2m Vanquish. All things being equal (which they are not as I have improved since last season), I expect I will score better flying the 2m bird. What is hard are those credit card bills but that's my problem. Fortunately I have a loving wife who has come to understand just how important RC flying is to my overall well being, LOL!<div></div><div>Dear Joe M. Thanks for the kind words and encouragement. No worries about me, I merely shared some of what its like to be new to the sport by way of example. I think some have misunderstood this as me being discouraged in some way, not the case. I hope I have given voice to some who may not speak up or post on the threads.</div><div></div><div>OK, time to put my "two loop" comments into perspective. Apart from the balance of the schedule, I kinda sound like a crank going on about those two damm loops! I can have a good laugh at myself about how I must sound to some, LOL. So I'm saying "uncle" and sucking it up, really committing to doing those two loops all year long till I get that right. LOL. Heck, even my wife is reminding me to practice them now! The point that I hope is not lost in all this is that the current Sportsman schedule is a handful for a new pilot to put together on contest day (no matter how good one's caller is, the pilot still must fly the model). Any one or two maneuver taken out of context, sure that's just a matter of practice. The reality is, the test is to fly the entire schedule in front of the judges and that's when the whole thing becomes quite a handful for the first few contests, IMO. That is the take away I hope my readers got and if not, my bad for not communicating that more clearly. BTW, I can fly it LOL!</div><div></div><div>Anyway, its all good and I think this is a terrific thread, raising some vital issues for the sport as it is and as we would like it to be. At the end of the day, for the sake of those pilots who have not yet joined the pattern ranks, I hope something good by way of change can happen to improve the chances that newcomers try, succeed, and stick around for another contest and another season. Respectfully, Dana</div>

Thanks for the good thread,

I flew four out of seven contests last year with a Tower Kaos powered by an OS 46 AX. I won my first contest (against two other flyers), podiumed in two others and was fourth in another. I was flying against SebArt models, Osiris's, a certain 2M Abba, and the like.

I flew for a week before my first contest to try to get all of the maneuvers in order, though I often flew around to get reoriented or started over in the middle. I didn't have a caller that week, did it by memory. Once at the contest, the fellow flyer upper-class callers were a big help and que's and hints were abundant and timely.

Performance of the model;
The best for the Kaos was when I went to an APC 12 1/4x3 3/4 C/L Tuned Pipe prop to keep the speed constant for the little piston engine and keep the torque up, the vertical was a bit better though it was never really bad with the 11x5 but I didn't have to saw the power off and on.
The first contest was in a 25 mph wind, steady both days. All three of us flew every flight, we egged each other on. One competitor had a Hobby King Extra 48 inch on 3S, I don't think that performance is a problem with the current sequence, we were at 4400 feet.

I went to an Osiris with 6S and a Hacker A50-16S and it was like night and day, but it didn't get me big wins. I could still blow it big time.

Changes to make it mo' better;
I wouldn't sweat the sequence, hell it's got two breaks in it. Divvy it up into three parts. If you sucketh at certain maneuvers and orientations (like we all have and some still do) work those out with a guy that knows. It's better to find an old Pattern guy in the crowd, (I found out that there were several that haven't flown Pattern in decades in the general group at several fields), or IMAC guy than a sporty type because the Pattern/IMAC know what a precision maneuver looks like and how to fly it.
Like the OP, promote, ask guys to try it. Break it down to the basics, build up from there.

Get more people;
Make the NSRCA more visible.
Add more contest flyers, and each district list the years events asap.
Get the CD's to include the contests in the MA contest section (this goes to all AMA members so when I read about the lack of AMA involvement and see no contest announcements in MA I figure Pattern wants to remain a secret).
Promote flying what you have or brought and how to get the model straight and true (like the download for the Pattern book from the 80's, good idea).
Promote Classic and SPA Pattern within the aerobatic community and add Classic events to current AMA contests. (I actually got into Pattern to fly Classic but found more contests to fly when flying AMA. Hence the Kaos.)

One problem I see with Pattern is that at fields with a hard 400 foot ceiling the 2M guys don't fly there, so the lack of Pattern flyers at some very popular fields is a problem with no cure. I fly close in and low, just to get in the practice. I also fly at the school yard with a 40 inch Rogue Bipe 3S model, anything to just do it.

Just to give you guys an idea of how boutique Pattern is, there were as many C/L Stunt contests in the D7 area as there were D7 Pattern contests last year. And D7 has a LOT of contests. C/L Stunt also has 150 entrants at the Nats every year. They do it by a strong SIG with a great magazine.

We can increase our numbers, but making it easy isn't the way. Promoting big, expensive models isn't either. Promote the contests we have, get them out to the AMA membership (MA, it's not just for the trash can), encourage "run what you brung" and develop the SIG magazine with good trim articles, how-to about batteries, how to make heads or tails out of all of the electric motor nomenclature, why my model flies bad except when Tony F flies it, you know.

I appreciate the thread, posters and ideas by them here, together a balance might be achieved and we may gain a few more pilots.

Chris...

No disrespect intended Bill, but I'd much rather see a Sportsmen flyer get an 8 or a 9 for two loops than a 1 or a 2 for a rolling loop. There's nothing in any of the Pattern schedules that's hard to fly with a modern 2x2 plane, but there's plenty that's hard to fly well.

IMHO pattern isn't about getting through a tough schedule, it's about achieving perfection (or as close as you can get) with what you do fly.

Many, many years ago (pre-IMAC when Scale was Scale) a friend of mine was chucking his Scale job all over the sky, buzzing the strip etc and we were laughing and joking and the subject competitions came up, so I asked him to fly a simple rectangular circuit, constant height, 90deg corners, something he'd need to do in a Scale comp. It turned out it was all too hard to do something that simple properly, so he went back to chucking his plane all over the sky and we never spoke of it again. We're still friends and he fly's IMAC now, not too badly either.

Agreed. My sense is that the true purpose of the schedule is to gather the manuvers that are key to establishing the pilot's skill at each respective level of accomplishment, in a format where the pilot can demonstrate those skills to the judges in a few minutes at a contest. Should we now ask if the schedule itself is expected to do anything more than that <u>at the entry level of achievement</u>? And should reducing the length of the Sportsman sequence be considered as an aid to participation...

On the one hand we have some who have mastered the Sportsman, gone on to Intermediate or higher, or who can fly the current schedule and wish it to remaing as is because they enjoy the challenge it poses. From these points-of-view we do not get much sympathy for the <u>hypothetical noob</u> (who just needs to practice more and get over it). What can be done to increase participation in the sport is much the same as has been done to date, just more of it: Advertise, recruit, train, coach, encourage practice, compete, critique performance, repeat, etc. What we do not hear about are those who try but do not continue, are lost along the way. We just assume this pattern stuff is not for them, not fun at all, or they don't want to do hard stuff. Fair enough.

On the other hand we have some who are also beyond the Sportsman, CDs and Judges perhaps, who remember the Sportsman as a kinder and gentler schedule flown when smaller craft prevailed and many tried their hand, when glow fueled flight times were not limited by single LiPo capacity. When the current Sportsman sequence is examined in long form, we see that while the right manuvers are in the mix, <u>the schedule itself</u> stands to get in the way of the skill demonstration for the new competitor due to its lengthy complexity. The question here is do we need so many repetitive elements in the demonstration flight to judge the Sportsman's skill level; repetitive here as evidenced by entering and leaving the box 3 times; 2 straight flights; both a half Cuban and a REV half Cuban; a 45 downline and a Cobra without rolls; double-I and an Immelmann; or a vertical upline when one of those is already performed as part of the Stall Turn? And then there is the question of all-centered manuvers vs. the current turnaround format. In the end, the benefit of reducing the schedule is not that it will become easier to fly; rather it will allow the new and nervous pilot to focus on executing a few key manuvers as well as can be done, without the distraction of managing a longer flight over extended airspace.

On to more ideas and suggestion. Would it make sense for the Sportsman pilot to fly a full Cuban-8 as a centered manuver? A well done one seems like it would be a good first step towards mastering turnarounds and it can be done with less altitude change for the judges if it is not an end-box manuver. One concept that can be challenging to the sport pilot is the box itself. Perhaps retaining one pair of end-box manuvers, without a centered element, is a good way to demonstrate flying in the box? Is a stall turn on one end and an Immelman on the other enough to demonstrate box skills? The Immelmann can come last which gives the nervous noob altitude and space to set-up for landing (or deadstick if the flight was mismanaged). A lot of experience on this thread, would be interesting to hear if there are any other ideas along these lines. If flying pattern is all about making improvements to ones performance; then it should be the same for the sport itself and we should not shy away from a critique of what we are using for any part of it, including the schedule. Good discussing! Dana



<br type="_moz" />

My take is that we need to define the skill set first for sportsman class and then go to pick the elements. Constant, leveled, and centered are the three key elements of pattern fly and should be demonstrated in the sportsman class. If you want to take any one of them away, you really do not achieve anything in pattern. Beyond that, there is the element of thinking ahead. That is, position the aircraft well during the exit phase of the current maneuver for the next one.

Now on the actual elements in the sportsman.

1. Enter and leave box. I would think more the better because it gives the pilot more time to position the aircraft.
2. 2 straight flights. If you count in the wing direction, there is no repetition.
3. half Cuban and reverse half cuban. They are different maneuvers. Each requires different strategy to fly it well.
4. 45 downline Cobra without rolls. Agree there is some repetition here but minor.
5. double-I and Immelmann. no repetition, and is also different from the stall turn (straight line up and down).


On reducing the complexity of the sportsman. My argument is that though you could find more sportsman pilots entering a contest but it becomes difficult to
1. differentiate the skill level for the top ones
2. transition to the next class

Interesting discussion. I only flew Sportsman for one season before moving into Intermediate the following season. It was probably a bigger step than I anticipated, but my measure of success was pretty simple, try not to come in last. So far, I have only partially successful and I fine with it.

At any rate, my first foray into pattern was with a somewhat underpowered Extra 330 S. The plane would fly the sequence well, except for the vertical upline; however, if I kept it short (say 100 ft for the straight segment) the plane managed OK. I never felt that the turn around maneuvers were particularly power hungry so I am not sure about the comment regarding the tall turn around maneuvers.

In order to make the Sportsman sequence more accesible, maybe the sequence should be flown with a normal sport plane (ie Kaos 40, a SIG 4*40, or something similar) before the sequence is decided upon by the NSRCA.

I have been "helping"a few of the guys in my club start flying sequences (IMAC). One of the biggest issues I have seen seems to be power management. Either they fly with the throttle full forward all of the time or they start the manuever before bringing the power up, thus running out of steam. This could be a reason why the planes appear underpowered.

Maybe, as part of a contest, an informal training session could be held on the Friday night before the contest to give the Sportsman pilots a few tips.

Teo

So...Dana what are you going to do about the next couple events in our area? There is a one day contest in May in Jackson and a two day at Poconos in June. Come out and have fun. We are all there to help

Thanks Matt, I plan to fly at least those two, maybe one or two more. Was disappointed that we lost Conyngham this year. Best, Dana

We've been flying a "Club Class" at our contest in Menomonee Falls, WI for the past five or six years. It's a one-day contest with an entry fee of $10 and consists of a simplified sequence that's flown twice in succession. Flyers can fly on either Saturday, Sunday, or both - with awards at the end of each day's flying. We usually get two or three flyers each year and several have progressed up into the Sportsman ranks. Up until this year, Club Class was restricted to members of our local club, but we're going to open it up to any current AMA member. Your plane only needs to be AMA-legal to fly. Our winner last year was flying an Electro-Streak (no-gear). Judging landings was interesting.

Send me a PM if you want any additional info.

Joe Burzinski, CD
Tamarack - Bud Weber Challenge
September 15, 16, 2012
Hosted by: The Flying Electrons - www.flyingelectrons.com
Menomonee Falls, WI

Dana, this is a good thread. I moved from D1 last year, great group of guys. With respect to your question about coaching a new pilot, people have been very interested and generous and willing to help me, and I would give a new pilot all the time he needed. There is enough down time at a contest, just don't expect much time from those running the show (CD).

I flew a Phoenix dolphin at my first event. It handled sportsman just fine. I changed props half way through the second day, people thought I was nuts but the larger diameter prop was noticeably better to me and those watching.

I don't get why people think the end moves are so bad. They are a challenge, but that's the.point. sportsman should try to put the roll in the middle of the line. That's 90% of the Rev Cuban. The angle of the line is subjective anyway. And most judges wont blast you for being out of the box, maybe just make a suggestion when its over.
I don't like 'soft judging' now that I'm in intermediate, but it was nice when I was starting out in sportsman.
Hey Dana, take a look at the intermediate schedule. I find the top hat and humpty bump to be easier than a half reverse Cuban 8 for turn arounds. Verticals are easier to see that 45s, and these are turns that let you Shuster your line in or out. Of course only if you think you're up for it, but I really had fun with them when I learned about them.

I taught my son to fly pattern years ago by telling him what to do not the manuver. If we needed to do a hump with 1/2 roll up I would tell him to pull vertical and do a 1/2 roll. then push to vertical down and exit upright. It worked so well that when we fly the unknowns at an IMAC contest that is how we do it. You don't have to remember the manuvers just to listen to your caller. You can even add corrections in this to help the manuvers look better.

I taught my son to fly pattern years ago by telling him what to do not the manuver. If we needed to do a hump with 1/2 roll up I would tell him to pull vertical and do a 1/2 roll. then push to vertical down and exit upright. It worked so well that when we fly the unknowns at an IMAC contest that is how we do it. You don't have to remember the manuvers just to listen to your caller. You can even add corrections in this to help the manuvers look better.

Interesting Joe! Got me thinking so I took a look at my raw scores from last Saturday's IMAC Basic to see if I did better on the humpty than the Half Cuban: on average, it came out about the same. (If we take the REV Sharkstooth as a proxy for the REV half Cuban, then your observation holds in my data from Sat.) FWIW, we flew 3 rounds of 2 sequences each (6 times total through the 10 manuver schedule). Here is the data taking the simple average of all scores from both judges without dropping any:

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="199" style="border-collapse: collapse;width:199pt"> <!StartFragment> <colgroup><col width="36" style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:1536;width:36pt" /> <col width="91" style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:3882;width:91pt" /> <col width="36" span="2" style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:1536; width:36pt" /> </colgroup> <tbody> <tr height="15" style="height:15.0pt"> <td height="15" class="xl64" width="36" style="height:15.0pt;width:36pt">Avg.</td> <td width="91" style="width:91pt">Manuver</td> <td class="xl64" width="36" style="width:36pt">Min</td> <td class="xl64" width="36" style="width:36pt">Max</td> </tr> <tr height="15" style="height:15.0pt"> <td height="15" class="xl63" style="height:15.0pt">7.2</td> <td>Immelmann</td> <td class="xl63">6.0</td> <td class="xl63">8.5</td> </tr> <tr height="15" style="height:15.0pt"> <td height="15" class="xl63" style="height:15.0pt">7.1</td> <td>Roll</td> <td class="xl63">5.0</td> <td class="xl63">9.5</td> </tr> <tr height="15" style="height:15.0pt"> <td height="15" class="xl63" style="height:15.0pt">7.0</td> <td>Sharks Tooth</td> <td class="xl63">5.0</td> <td class="xl63">8.0</td> </tr> <tr height="15" style="height:15.0pt"> <td height="15" class="xl63" style="height:15.0pt">6.8</td> <td>Loop</td> <td class="xl63">4.0</td> <td class="xl63">8.0</td> </tr> <tr height="15" style="height:15.0pt"> <td height="15" class="xl63" style="height:15.0pt">6.7</td> <td>Half Cuban 8</td> <td class="xl63">3.0</td> <td class="xl63">8.0</td> </tr> <tr height="15" style="height:15.0pt"> <td height="15" class="xl63" style="height:15.0pt">6.6</td> <td>Humpty Bump</td> <td class="xl63">4.0</td> <td class="xl63">8.0</td> </tr> <tr height="15" style="height:15.0pt"> <td height="15" class="xl63" style="height:15.0pt">6.4</td> <td>Teardrop</td> <td class="xl63">5.0</td> <td class="xl63">8.0</td> </tr> <tr height="15" style="height:15.0pt"> <td height="15" class="xl63" style="height:15.0pt">5.8</td> <td>Rev Sharkstooth</td> <td class="xl63">4.0</td> <td class="xl63">7.5</td> </tr> <tr height="15" style="height:15.0pt"> <td height="15" class="xl63" style="height:15.0pt">5.5</td> <td>Stall Turn</td> <td class="xl63">0.0</td> <td class="xl63">8.5</td> </tr> <tr height="15" style="height:15.0pt"> <td height="15" class="xl63" style="height:15.0pt">0.5</td> <td>Spin</td> <td class="xl63">0.0</td> <td class="xl63">6.0</td> </tr> <!EndFragment> </tbody></table>
My spins were a train wreck as I did not really practice them over the winter and totally forgot that I have to switch to mid-rates to get the break correctly on my 70" EF Extra (8S). I didn't get the final normalized score, but I did finish 5 out of 10 pilots for the day and the CD remarked that it was a very tight cluster of scores. Was a great learning day getting coached by some mid-level pilots and watching others fly. Incidentally, if you consider that we repeated the 10 manuver Basic schedule twice, that meant that we only had to enter/exit the box a total of two times. The single break in the "middle" if you will is reasonable after flying the 10 manuvers, however, it is not necessary for entry level pilots to enter/exit the box 3 times during the flight, IMO. Hope this is helpful in the context of what we have been discussing here this week, truly great input from so many diverse viewpoints. Thanks Guys!<br type="_moz" />