Welcome Guest! To enable all features please try to register or login.
3 Pages<123
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Silver Fox  
#31 Posted : Sunday, September 24, 2017 3:03:16 PM(UTC)
Silver Fox

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 512

Thanks: 124 times
Was thanked: 223 time(s) in 137 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Curtis Cozier Go to Quoted Post
Nope.... the can was opened at contests this past year... Seems I am the only one looking inside....
I DON'T think you are the only one, Curtis.

I have ALWAYS been a stickler for the rules, Curtis. IMAC is either a competition organization or a ........... friendship meet. Maybe both. However, not adhering to the present rules is .......well??

Maybe that was one of the reasons why some disagreed with my leadership.
To know the road ahead........ Ask those coming back.! (Chinese Proverb)
Offline tl3  
#32 Posted : Monday, September 25, 2017 6:50:19 AM(UTC)

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 657

Thanks: 190 times
Was thanked: 461 time(s) in 196 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Curtis Cozier Go to Quoted Post
Didn't really want this here......but my emails to the RD and Pres. went un-answered. And this thread sat for 20 days..... so........Where does the IMAC organization stand on changing the legal turn around maneuvers at a pilots meeting the day of a contest?
Thanks for the attention to this

Forgive me, but I thought this entire issue was sufficiently addressed months ago. Please read the previously issued statement from the BoD, and me, paying particular attention to the bold text:
"For the purposes of further clarifying the issue at hand, and ensuring consistent application of the rules at ALL IMAC contests, all turn-around figures are considered to be positive in nature (initiating from upright flight). Should a sequence end in inverted flight, the pilot is to perform a single half roll to upright after which other legal turn around figures may be executed. Pursuant to rule 13.5, exceptions to these limitations may only be directed by the CD or line boss in the course of safely managing the airspace. Pilots are to follow any such directions and no penalty will apply."
The entire text of the statement can be read in the first post of this thread.
thanks 3 users thanked tl3 for this useful post.
Doug Pilcher on 9/25/2017(UTC), Earle Andrews on 9/25/2017(UTC), Bill Teeter on 9/25/2017(UTC)
Offline Curtis Cozier  
#33 Posted : Monday, September 25, 2017 10:10:46 AM(UTC)
Curtis Cozier

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 208

Thanks: 26 times
Was thanked: 73 time(s) in 49 post(s)
Again... I really didn't want this in the forums, but as my emails were unanswered....

I must ask...

In these specific examples... how was this a safety issue... for all pilots involved and for the contest in general?
Offline Brad  
#34 Posted : Monday, September 25, 2017 10:29:28 AM(UTC)

Rank: Advanced Member

Medals: Board of Directors

Posts: 740

Thanks: 18 times
Was thanked: 199 time(s) in 113 post(s)
For the only pilot that did this in North East contests, he was concerned about not being able to see the plane adequately after exiting the sequence inverted. Pushing immediately to an upline gave him a better visual aspect, and did that quicker than if he rolled to upright. Given the ambiguity of the current wording, at each contest pilots meeting, he requested the CD permit this action, without any objection from the other pilots.

thanks 2 users thanked Brad for this useful post.
Earle Andrews on 9/25/2017(UTC), Doug Pilcher on 9/27/2017(UTC)
Offline tl3  
#35 Posted : Monday, September 25, 2017 10:33:26 AM(UTC)

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 657

Thanks: 190 times
Was thanked: 461 time(s) in 196 post(s)
What Brad just said.
Offline Steve Stanton  
#36 Posted : Monday, September 25, 2017 1:01:43 PM(UTC)
Steve Stanton

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 351

Thanks: 55 times
Was thanked: 187 time(s) in 90 post(s)
I'm not sure which part of this issue we're talking about. If we're talking about a CD having the authority to waive a rule
at his or her event that involves a safety issue or the preservation of a contestants plane, I don't understand how that could be a problem.
If we're talking about the "exit rule" from a last maneuver in an inverted position, you will have to forgive me but I thought we discussed this at length previously and that the consensus agreed that a rule change was being initiated
to change the rule.
In my opinion, being required to perform an additional maneuver after exiting the box when your plane is flying away
from you and at a substantial distance dictated by the last maneuver, is not safe and endangers the contestants
Giving a CD the ability to waive the additional required maneuver and allowing the contestant to immediately begin a return approach with the plane seems like a reasonably intelligent thing to do. How can we have a problem with that.
PS The performance that you are being judged on ends when the sequence ends. Performing an additional maneuver after the sequence ends is of no value what so ever to anyone nor is it a detriment to anything. It serves no purpose what so ever.
Certain limitations on maneuvers required to enter or exit the box are designed to prevent a contestant to practice
prior to entering or exiting the box. This required exiting maneuver has nothing to do with that so why is it even
there to begin with?BigGrin
3 Pages<123
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.