ButcherFest II: The Butcher Strikes Back!

[McFueler]

	Quote: Originally Posted by whaturi
	Right on Mark.. But what about the option for a CD to use an alternate sequence? Like if it is a known problem field with neighbors gettibng rollers over them, the CD can use sequences with rolling loops instead.. that way it would only affect the areas that would otherwise have problems, and places that have ample room could stay with the rollers.

That could work and you would still have rollers where there was not a problem with size of the footprint .

[McFueler]

	Quote: Originally Posted by MattyMatt
	OR bring the box back and if you are outside of it .... ZERO. Sorry I missed it, this was one of the contests I really wanted to go to. That really sucks about Big Jerry's Airport.

Oh yea Zero's don't fix the problem at all , I can Zero the roller and still fly over the neighbor's land and that will cause the club to loose the field ,,,,,,, we need to stop from flying out so far and Rollers are the main reason we fly out far no matter if it get a score or not !

[prizzy]

We do have a hard enough time as is with the judging pool. This needs to be addressed though. Been flying giant scale at Jerrys for 5 years, and that one neighbor never complained. Until the rollers on the canted line went over her house.

Background: That line was canted due to overfly of a neighbor straight out.

[bubbagates]

	Quote: Originally Posted by whaturi
	Right on Mark.. But what about the option for a CD to use an alternate sequence? Like if it is a known problem field with neighbors gettibng rollers over them, the CD can use sequences with rolling loops instead.. that way it would only affect the areas that would otherwise have problems, and places that have ample room could stay with the rollers.

Yea, that could work, the CD would have to announce well ahead of time which sequence will be flown.

And as Pride mentions, the judges are gonna have to be up on both sequences

[Jonathan Ott]

What would the K-factor difference be if we stood it up to the vertical plane (making it a rolling loop) instead of leaving it on the horizontal? Would a letter writing campaign to the IMAC commitee do any good?

At least Col. Clank kept the panty-ripper below the tree-line, so that should have been disapated enough by the time the sound-waves got over to 'ole sour-puss' place.



This is what he said when Jerry and Pete went out to talk to him:

[McFueler]

Rolling loops are not a legal in IMAC because Full scale (IAC) do not fly them ,,,,,, so why do we do wind correction ??? Full scale do not fly wind correction and if they don't then why do we ?????? I thought we were supposed to do what they were doing .

[prizzy]

Mark, you sound a little fired up! I like that. IMAC is morphing into it's own beast, with it's own problems. I think rolling elements on loops (the sides, not just top and bottom) would be very cool. One way to make a challenging maneuver, without the footprint. Pattern does it.

[wmat7039]

	Quote: Originally Posted by McFueler
	Rolling loops are not a legal in IMAC because Full scale (IAC) do not fly them ,,,,,, so why do we do wind correction ??? Full scale do not fly wind correction and if they don't then why do we ?????? I thought we were supposed to do what they were doing .

Mark.... I think you are a little mistaken here. Rolling loops are not legal in IMAC because they are NOT in the Aresti Catalog & all of our legal maneuvers are taken out of that catalog. We wind correct because it's in our rule book.
Wayne

[McFueler]

	Quote: Originally Posted by wmat7039
	Mark.... I think you are a little mistaken here. Rolling loops are not legal in IMAC because they are NOT in the Aresti Catalog & all of our legal maneuvers are taken out of that catalog. We wind correct because it's in our rule book. Wayne

Well did our rule book come from doing what they do in IAC or did someone just pull them out of the air because they thought that would be cool ?

[ifly3d]

I think you will see this contest continue just not at big jerrys.

Josh

[wmat7039]

	Quote: Originally Posted by McFueler
	Well did our rule book come from doing what they do in IAC or did someone just pull them out of the air because they thought that would be cool ?

The real BIG difference is that we do not sit in the plane as the full scale do. The pilots in full scale have their gauges on the wing-tips to let them know that they are vertical/45 degrees etc. It would be very difficult for them to fly a wind corrected sequence sitting in the aircraft.

Conversely, we are standing on the ground & can see the vertical line. For those of you who do not know our history, when I joined IMAC 16 years ago & flew in Basic/Sportsman we actually did NOT fly wind correction. Because of that, when a contest was held in high wind conditions, pilots still had to hold a vertical line, ending up in the next county with the wind blowing them there. However, during the growing period of IMAC the rules were changed to make wind correction effective.

Maybe some history classes are in order?
Wayne

[McFueler]

	Quote: Originally Posted by prizzy
	Mark, you sound a little fired up! I like that. IMAC is morphing into it's own beast, with it's own problems. I think rolling elements on loops (the sides, not just top and bottom) would be very cool. One way to make a challenging maneuver, without the footprint. Pattern does it.

Prizzy ,,,, I am a little fired up because I feel like it is my fault Big Jerry lost his privite flying field due to the fact that All the unlimited guys (that I'm one of) flew a roller that went over the neighbors property line and we all thought we were not over the line until we put Jerry out at the line and we flew out until he had us pull up to see where it was at , Jerry was on the phone and told us when to pull up at the line and it was a lot closer than we thought . That is why I'm not happy about this whole thing !