Spins -- Final Chapter

[madmax]

HAY! Both of you back to the deathmatch thread!!

[Judge]

	Quote: Originally Posted by paffy
	I think that's what I said . These posts are getting too confusing .... P.

Just agreeing and clarifying a bit.

[excelpoint]

	Quote: Originally Posted by KrisW
	We no longer have a box. The point is, are we going to start considering the rules as the ONLY thing we judge by? Or are we going to make the effort to get the rules to follow some semblance of intelligent response to thsoe circumstances outside what is written in black and white? Fred Johnsons admonition about "presenting the manuver in a proper manner" tends to trump blind loyalty to a few written words. Yes, the rules provide us with guidance for downgrades, and tell us what the manuver is supposed to look like. But, in the end, as in the case of the coasting stalled line, if the manuver is not presented as a "spin" but turns into a multi-segmented manuver that does not follow the prescribed manuvers shape, I feel it's time to use my better judgement. Thankfully, we are no longer tied to having to agree on Zeroes. Therefore, I can, with a very clear conscience, zero such a flagrant violation of the manuvers prescribed shape and flight path. Since no one has given me ANY guidance, I'll just have to let my conscience be the determining factor. . after giving the pilot every possible benefit of the doubt, of course.

Kris we do have a box, I believe it is 305m ever side of the pilot box and 305m out or close to it. We do have a zoneless box, perhaps that is what you are refering to. The box also has a height to it which I believe is the 60 degree rule above the pilot box.
I think everyone has answered your questions in the simplest form, its not that hard to understand. If you dont get it by now then perhaps it would be fairer to all the pilots if you did not judge at all.

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Shawn Berkheimer
	I'll delve into the "Performance considerations for Advanced IMAC Flight" part of the question as soon as Bill moves up to Advanced Class flying, or I shall merely rebut his meager attempt at pontificating with knowledge he does not have, since he has never competitively flown Advanced IMAC Flight. I suppose you can remember all 5 sequences, 3 to 4 scores while judging without a scribe but you can't remember typing the above? Shawn

Shawn, that is a JOKE thread. do you always try so hard to intentionally misinterpret things, or is this just a special occasion?

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by excelpoint
	Kris we do have a box, I believe it is 305m ever side of the pilot box and 305m out or close to it. We do have a zoneless box, perhaps that is what you are refering to. The box also has a height to it which I believe is the 60 degree rule above the pilot box. I think everyone has answered your questions in the simplest form, its not that hard to understand. If you dont get it by now then perhaps it would be fairer to all the pilots if you did not judge at all.

Please refer to Section 4 of the current F&JG. . . Aerobatic Airspace. There is no reference to "Box" size, since the "Box" has been done away with this year. As far as I have seen related in supporting documentation the "aerobatic Airspace" is supposed to be within a 2000x2000 foot area in front of the pilot, with no vertical limitation, but looking through the F&JG I cannot see any reference to a Box in this years rules.

As for answering my question, no one has done so, they have merely given an opinion. There are other considerations, as set forth in the rules, that apply, starting with 6.1.d, 6.2 (third sentence), and portions of 6.3.

I'm all for giving a pilot the "benefit of the doubt", but if the technical presentation of a spin does not at least closely resemble what a spin is supposed to look like, and deviates into something else, I see no reason to score it as a spin.

[excelpoint]

I dont see how the rules you quoted change anything. 6.1.d " The distinctly recognizable start and finish of each figure with a horizontal line" hasnt changed since last year and refers to the line in and out of the figure not the stalled portion in this case. The third sentence in 6.2 refers to FAI. Not relevent here. I personally cant see any reference that would be usefull to this discussion at all in 6.3.
Yes you are right that there is no reference to "box" but they have defined an area of 2000'X2000' which is the same to the left and right of the pilot but has doubled the distance out front of the pilots(those unlimited and Advanced rollers sure are going to be big now) as for the height thing well then I suppose we will have to issue judges all with binoculars and just hit pilots hard on their airspace scores.

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by excelpoint
	I dont see how the rules you quoted change anything. 6.1.d " The distinctly recognizable start and finish of each figure with a horizontal line" hasnt changed since last year and refers to the line in and out of the figure not the stalled portion in this case. The third sentence in 6.2 refers to FAI. Not relevent here. I personally cant see any reference that would be usefull to this discussion at all in 6.3. Yes you are right that there is no reference to "box" but they have defined an area of 2000'X2000' which is the same to the left and right of the pilot but has doubled the distance out front of the pilots(those unlimited and Advanced rollers sure are going to be big now) as for the height thing well then I suppose we will have to issue judges all with binoculars and just hit pilots hard on their airspace scores.

6.1.d does refer to in and out horizontal lines. If the plane stalls nose up to nose down well below the horizon, illustrates stalled flight, then recovers to a horizontal level line, it has entered and left the manuver. Some people will, of course, argue otherwise. We don't get do-overs in IMAC.

6.2, if not germaine, should not be in the F&JG. Since it IS there, and the F&JG reflects the IMAC flavor for aerobatics flying, it applies. I'm sure it can be removed if it does not apply, but for now it is part of the manual.

6.3 does contain the proper contextual language for addressing this figure.

[Dangerous Dan]

Shaun,
Whose plane is that in Your Avitar?

[KrisW]

	Quote: Originally Posted by Dangerous Dan
	Shaun, Whose plane is that in Your Avitar?

That is my 28 lbs 40% Comp Arf 3m Extra Dan, from 3 years ago at Joe Nall.

(with BME110 and canisters and a well balanced prop)

[1bwana1]

GEEZ guys I think this is all a regional/cultural difference. On the West Coast we need scribes because of the parties we attended in the 60's. I think we all toasted our memories. Apparently other parts of the country were not as exposed to the hazardous chemicals we were. I think this may have also affected how we see spinning objects. The order of things is important.

East Coast:
"A mind is a terrible thing to waste"

West Coast:
"A wasted mind is a terrible thing"

[excelpoint]

Kris, as much as I would like to continue this, I cant for now. Its 5.30am Friday morning here and I've got to go pick up one of you fellow countrymen Adam Bry then head off to our Masters, perhaps when we get back on Monday. Have Fun
Cheers Matt

[as722]

I'm voting for "The KrissW" for the next imac president.
In Kriss we trust !! Not !


The Albert