Is Fig # 10 called a Inverted Rev Sharks Tooth?

Fig #3 Hammer - do the two radius changes on the entry 45 need to match the exit radius?

Fig #4 Vertical up line to horizontal - do radius on entry and exit need to match?


Thanks in advance
John

John,

Fig # 10 I like the name (reverse because the 45 is first) but would probably just call it an inverted shark to make it easier for the caller... Your call on that.

Fig # 3 Each radius should match. (figure 20 SCA-18 of the AMA rules guide from the front page link has a good picture)

Fig # 4 Entry and exit radius do not need to be identical but the rules do state you cannot create a "corner" or very sharp angle on the vertical upline. (figure 15,16 SCA-16 AMA rules guide)

Hope this helps... Are you going to the Toys for Tots fly-in this weekend?

Craig

http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/ScaleAerobatics2010.pdf

A link to the document I was referring too...

Craig

Thanks Craig for the sequence info.

Yes I am going to the fly in, see below for info on the event. If you are planning on going, give me a call so we can coordinate arrival.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gray, Georgia-- On Saturday November 20, 2010 Dixie Aeromasters, a local aeromodeling club, will hold its annual fly-in event to benefit the Middle Georgia area U.S. Marine Corp Toys for Tots Campaign. The event will be held at Commissioners Field (Overland Way, Gray, GA) with a noon air show. Hamburgers, hotdogs, and drinks will be available on site. Registration will open at 10:00am and is open to all AMA member Pilots. The fee is $10, with registration and concession proceeds benefitting children in Middle Georgia.

The show will open with the national anthem and feature our flag being flown in by a radio-controlled helicopter. The tentative schedule also includes: aerobatic demonstrations, delta wing planes, turbine jet planes, helicopter exhibitions, and a candy drop for the children.

Visit our website at www.dixieaeromasters.com for directions and more information.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not sure on the fly-in just yet, but I will give you a call if I decide to go.

I was thinking about your sequence question... On the vertical upline it is always better to match the radii on any maneuver just in case the judges don't realize they don't have to match. Any time you can eliminate possible judging errors by flying it neat and pretty you are better off... IMO...

Craig

Craig makes a very good point and is something I tell people when I am asked about radius issues. I try to explain what the exact rule is but always follow it with Craigs comment on making them all match

I fully agree with both of you. It can only help when you need them to.

John

Interesting point. Should we intentionally try to make a maneuver harder than it should be (i.e. matching top and bottom radii for entry and exit of a vertical upline), or should we try to find tools to help judges be reminded of the correct criteria for judging?

I would recommend that we could easily develop some standard notations that could be added to the judging sheets. For example, the flying and judging guide uses small circles with A, B, and C to indicate where turn radii may vary. These could easily be added to the judging sheets. For line lengths, we could use the old geometry notation of a small slash or two across a line segment to indicate lines that should be equal length (e.g. on either side of a roll or spin element, or segements of a combination lines).

Brad

Line segments must always match if I remember correctly.

As far as radii matching, it is all indicated on the Aresti sheet via the family numbers.

With that being stated, I do like your idea. Not sure if it would be permissible to modify the notations though as the Aresti program that is used is a copyrighted system/program.

What I am about to say in no way is meant to dimish anyones ability to judge.

Many judging instructors and CD's and RD's have gone to great lengths to help get judges up to speed. As good as most judges are they cannot remember everything unless they spend loads of time in the chair getting practical experience.

As a judge, we are asked to learn the rules and apply them as best we can. Every judge I have ever come across does his or her best to be fair and equal. All of them make mistakes at times, it is only human nature. as a judge, if you are consistent in your judging then, even if you may be applying the criteria incorrectly, you are still being consistent as you would most likely be doing it for everyone.

While it is always the goal to have every judge apply all criteria as written, it is just not always possible. So to that end, it is up to the pilots to show the judge the best flight possible. One of the major areas I have seen is most judges either forget about radius criteria or do not know which maneuvers require what radius criteria to apply.

So as a pilot, the best thing you can do is present all radii to be the same. Is it more work, yes, but as a pilot and knowing there is a problem like this, it is up to you to give the judge as little to ding you on as possible, besides, in the end, you will be a better pilot and as far as I am concerned, isn't that one of the things we promote about IMAC, how it makes you a better pilot!

Very well stated Mr. Bill

Posted By KnowCrashes on 18 Nov 2010 10:52
Line segments must always match if I remember correctly.

This is not correct.

Family one does not require that the line segments match...
Hmmm.
Family 5 would be the same.....

Thanks for the clarification Mr. Curts!

I should not say this.

As a beginner - I hear what everybody is saying but I have gotten different answers from different people (They were judges at events). I understand that we are all people and we make mistakes, but indicators / marks would clear things up.

Most beginners concentrate mostly on flying and have briefly read the rules (At least with me). I am just starting my second year and moving up to Sportsman and just now I am learning the family numbers and what they mean. We all do not have mentors to work with.

Just my thoughts
John

Posted By John Wolfe on 18 Nov 2010 16:36
I should not say this.

As a beginner - I hear what everybody is saying but I have gotten different answers from different people (They were judges at events). I understand that we are all people and we make mistakes, but indicators / marks would clear things up.

Most beginners concentrate mostly on flying and have briefly read the rules (At least with me). I am just starting my second year and moving up to Sportsman and just now I am learning the family numbers and what they mean. We all do not have mentors to work with.

Just my thoughts
John

Hi there John....Since "to err is human", it goes with saying that we will never have perfect judging anywhere in our system. No matter what we do!

What we CAN do, however, is to have available schools, on-line training, sessions etc. that can/will educate members & subsequently judges on the rules that we are all supposed to fly under.

Everyone, being different, does have various timetables and priorities. As such, time spent in learning these rules will also vary in direct balance to how each member prioritize their "IMAC time." Stepping up from Basic into Sportsman is a good period for members to really look into what is required for each family and IMAC has provided a comprehensive on-line training structure to meet the needs of its members.

Taking the time to start going through the material at one's own pace is certainly going to open the doors as to details of each family.

The link is here www.mini-iac.com/TrainingLibrary/tabid/121/Default.aspx

NOW is the time to really sink your "fangs" (as Silver Fox says) into the meat of the matter!!
best regards,
Wayne

Nothing is ever perfect. As an example, we, in the NE region, came up with additions to the SE regions excellent judging cheat sheet. We did our best to hand them out and include them into the notebooks we used at every contest, all of our primers, and asked everyone, judges and pilots, to look over them. One of the areas was radii and it's deductions and criteria as we felt it was one of the most common areas where mistakes were always made.

As an example, let's take the idea of putting markers on the Aresti to help the judges, I ask you this, how many judges are actually looking at the Aresti before, or during the sequence. One limiting factor is not having a scribe for the judges. This gives very little chance, if any, for the judge to look over each maneuver, see the markers and write the score and be ready for the next maneuver. Highly unlikely anyone can do all that. Now toss in a pilot that takes off, flies his sequence very fast and forgot about looking for markers at all. Ok so now I can hear you saying, well get scribes for the judges, that's easy to say, very hard to do. As the current RD for the NE and a CD myself, I pretty much told everyone at my contests that if you were not flying or judging, you were scribing and it mostly worked. In fact we got lucky and some of the wives even started helping out, heck we even put the kids to work so mom could have a "break"

Ok, so now you are saying, why can't the judge look over the sequence before the round starts, yep I agree, however most judges do not. I can say this for the NE region, in the last two years I saw new and long time judges head to the chair early to get a chance to go over the Aresti. This was impressive to see, but not perfect. I also saw the judges do this at the 2009 NATS. I can remember sitting at breakfast with Bobby, Chris, and a few others at the hotel on the first day refreshing our memories. I even witnessed these same judges (myself included) get the unknowns for each day and sit at dinner and work out the sequences just like the pilots would be doing.

I guess I am saying and agreeing with Wayne that all we can do both as pilots and judges is use every bit of information that is available to us to learn how to properly judge. I have witnessed as have others that the current BOD has done all they could do in the time they had getting better training for everyone. While I will not be a part of the next BOD, knowing most of the people that are coming on board, I feel that it is a safe bet that more methods for education are going to come down the line.

All ideas presented so far and in previous threads on here and FG are good ones, but some what hard to implement

Wayne very well said, I cannot argue with your Ideas and guidance. I think we call this very "Presidential".

PS: I am up to Family 7 on the On Line Judging School.

Bill, very good points I will try to keep them in mind when I start to judge.

And to everyone in the IMAC family I would like to say thanks. Everyone has always taken the time to answer my questions and help.

I think one of the statements I've heard most frequently that I take the most exception to is that "as long as the judge is consistent, it will all work out in the end". Unfortunately, I don't think this is a fair assessment. If a judge is mistakenly downgrading a figure for radii not being equal, then a competitor that is flying the figure per the criteria will be inappropriately scored. If another competitor is flying all the radii equal, then he is gaining an unfair advantage based on incorrect judging. Consistently wrong is still wrong, and we should be doing all we can reasonably do to prevent it, especially if we want to expand our sport. I know several people that tried IMAC and were very frustrated because of erroneous judging. Yes we're out to have fun, but its still competition. If a competitor trains to the rules, he should be judged to the rules, and we must hold ourselves accountable.

Brad

I agree Brad so at the next contest you go to be sure to make the CD ONLY let guys that know ALL the rules sit in the judging chair!!! Boy the few guys that know the rules are going to have a long day and you are going to be lucky if you get to fly one round !

Brad,

No doubt wrong is wrong, as I mentioned and so have many others over time, a person has to want to judge and has to want to learn how to do it properly. IMAC has many people like this. IMAC also has people that all they want to do is come to the contest, have fun and hopefully win a few times.

The hard part is the ratio to judges and non-judges is quite high in regards to pilots that do not want to judge. So finding qualified judges at a given contest is a very hard thing to do. Also, new judges must be given time in the chair to learn. You can read and read and read all you want and it helps but time in the chair is where it really counts, if it didn't, then we would not be having this conversation. I personally know several pilots in our region, myself included, that come to contests just to help out, including judging. These folks did not have to do that but are dedicated members of IMAC and want to see IMAC progress.

So to that end, I have a few suggestions. You mentioned about notations on the Aresti, I really like that idea and so do many others, so go to Aresti's website, every page on the IMAC website has a link to it, and purchase the Aresti software, then, if you do not already have a copy of Microsoft Visio, get a copy of that. Ask the IMAC Sequence committee chairperson if you can have the electronic copies of the current Aresti's in the Aresti software format and then see if you can add the notations on them so that it is quick to read and makes sense. I would do it myself, but I quit using Windows a long time ago and and Microsoft does not make a version of Visio for MAC and I have not found a good piece of software that works well with the Aresti software.

Personally, as your current RD, if you make a suggestion to me, then I am going to say "go do it and show me the results" I know you have not made this suggestion directly to me but I am putting it to you because if you can pull it off, you will have certainly helped to improve judging.

My second suggestion would be to talk to experienced Contest Directors, for the NE region or any region, the most experienced ones for the NE would be John Banks, Tony Bonanno, myself, Troy Wallace, Brian F., Dave Michael, Matt Fortin and his Dad, Jake Ruddy, Mark McQuaide and for that matter Mark McClellan and Kent Porter in the SE region, and a few others I cannot think of at this time. I would ask them about finding good judges from the list of pilots that are actually at the contest, not the pre-registration list, and what it takes to get them to judge. Then if you can come up with a way to help that process, then you really would have helped solve an ongoing issue.

Please understand, I am not picking on you, to me, if you make a suggestion then you need to follow it up. I learned that years ago working as an Intern for NASA and where I currently work. If we make a suggestion for an improvement, you just took ownership of that suggestion and are required to follow it through to whatever end may come of it.

I'll be more than happy to help you out in anyway I can, if it improves judging and IMAC as a whole, I'm all for it

The only way the judging will get better is if we as pilots take that part of the sport as seriously as we do flying. Some people will spend countless hours practicing the sequence, but not spend any time reviewing and refreshing themselves on the rules. You will find that knowing the rules will help your flying and keep you from practicing something incorrectly.
Judging definitely gets easier with more time in the chair, and unfortunately there is only one way to get that. I also think it is a good idea for CD's to pick the unknown judges the day before, and give them a copy of that unknown so they can study it.

Great point guys, this exactly what is needed talking about it and asking question would only make us better judges.
Something that helps is to take some time and fly all the sequences with a stick plane and apply the judging criteria to each maneuver, as a judge you have to know what the PLANES attitude should be in each maneuver. This was very helpful to me the last two years, especially judging advance and unlimited.

So instead of watching SWAMP PEOPLE on TV go study.

I understand how hard it is to get people to judge fairly and correctly. I think many longtime participants have gotten used to some accepted thinking regarding "consistency" and I'm trying to challenge that thinking and get others to challenge it as well.

What we're dealing with is human performance, and human performance is error prone. Human performance improvement involves finding ways to reduce those errors. Did you know the average person make up to 12 errors every hour? (well, maybe not my wife - just ask her) Since we're relying on judges familiarity with the criteria for judging, and we don't have a multitude of experienced judges at each contest, we need tools that will quickly remind less experienced judges of the appropriate criteria immediately before or during the sequence that can be instantly referenced.

I understand your frustration Bill, and trust me, I was already working on an example. I've been giving this a lot of thought since my last contest, and trying to find a workable improvement.
I am experimenting with a PDF notation software that allows me to enter notation on the PDF versions of the sequences. I'll do a markup on the 2011 Sportsman sequence with some recommended markings, and put it up here for all to see exactly what i'm talking about, and see if it would be helpful for the judges.

Brad

Posted By Primo Rivera on 19 Nov 2010 9:59
Something that helps is to take some time and fly all the sequences with a stick plane and apply the judging criteria to each maneuver, as a judge you have to know what the PLANES attitude should be in each maneuver. This was very helpful to me the last two years, especially judging advance and unlimited.

Hey Primo... Please remember that we don't judge the aircraft's "attitute"- We judge the track... Two different things.
Wayne

Brad, I am always on the lookout for good ideas! Give it a "go" and if it works out maybe we can incorporate the result into the online training program.

Bobby
IEC Chairman

Has anyone tried any of the open source alternatives to Visio in connection with the Arresti software? I'm going to buy the Arresti, but Visio is pretty pricey if an open source alternative works.

Brad

I purchased a Visio Student Edition, fully functional, new, on Ebay for $ 80. Use it for a variety of "fun" including mounting templates.

Example attached.

I already have a drawing program that I use for plans and engineered drawings, and I don't use Visio at work or for any other purposes. There are several open source programs that are free. Since I haven't used the Arresti program, I'm not sure how it interfaces with Visio. Does it just create a file that is printed and edited in Visio, or does it run simultaneously layered on top of Visio and use the Visio interface?

Brad

Alan Cassidy's Aresti Software is a Visio "plug-in", meaning it's another set of templates, design graphics and macro's that run on the Visio backbone. So you can not run it alone or with some other software.

Tom

Hey guys I was just wondering if you could tell me what your going to have yalls caller say for each maneuver. Im not sure how to write it down for my caller to where it makes sense for each maneuver.

Posted By Jason Meadows on 24 Nov 2010 12:26
Hey guys I was just wondering if you could tell me what your going to have yalls caller say for each maneuver. Im not sure how to write it down for my caller to where it makes sense for each maneuver.

Jason if you post or PM me your e-mail address I will send you a PDF file that has the names of manuevers and a description of each added to the ARESTI. This is my first draft so is kind of wordy. I would post it here but it is slighly larger than the maximum allowed file size.

Mike

Thanks Mike! my email is meadowsjason@ymai.com

No problem. Should be in your inbox. Let me know if it helps..

If you like, you could email it to me at
curtis @ thepeaks.com

and I can host it on my server with a link and also double check it for accuracy....

Thanks
Curtis

Posted By Mike McIntyre on 24 Nov 2010 13:26

Posted By Jason Meadows on 24 Nov 2010 12:26
Hey guys I was just wondering if you could tell me what your going to have yalls caller say for each maneuver. Im not sure how to write it down for my caller to where it makes sense for each maneuver.

Jason if you post or PM me your e-mail address I will send you a PDF file that has the names of manuevers and a description of each added to the ARESTI. This is my first draft so is kind of wordy. I would post it here but it is slighly larger than the maximum allowed file size.

Mike

If you like, you could email it to me at
curtis @ thepeaks.com

and I can host it on my server with a link and also double check it for accuracy....

Thanks
Curtis

On it's way. Let me know what you think.. I am also working on a commented Basic sequence for judges. So that when I am called on to judge I will have all the criteria and downgrades shown by each element. Probably to much to luck at while actually judging but a great review before starting. I post something when that is done.

Mike,

I already have the commented judging sheets mostly done for all classes. I am just putting some finishing touches on them and will be posting them over the weekend.

I've been doing them for 2 years now in our region and they are a huge hit

Mike, sorry I didn't receive it due to a typo in the address I gave you. If you could please send it again I would greatly appreciate it. thanks the email is meadowsjason@ymail.com

John, you have a pm.

Posted By Bill James on 25 Nov 2010 11:51
Mike,

I already have the commented judging sheets mostly done for all classes. I am just putting some finishing touches on them and will be posting them over the weekend.

I've been doing them for 2 years now in our region and they are a huge hit

I would sure like to see them when you are finished. I am sure that yours are better then what I have and you have got them for all classes which I am sure would be appreciated by everyone.

It's on it's way again. Hope you all have a wonderful Thanksgiving..

Mike and everyone,

Here is an example of the 2011 Basic judging sheet. I have to go back to refresh my memory on the RCP regarding changing the K values for the Sound and ACS scores and all of them will be done

Please feel free to recommend changes

Bill those are nice score sheets. What I was refering to is the aresti with notes concerning possible downgrades for each manuver. I.E. .5 points for each 5 degrees off heading or over-rotation in the case of a roll. Roll visibly not centered -1, 1:2 -2 greater than 1:2 3 points, etc. I will post the sheet I am talking about on Monday. I don't have it on this computer.

As we were talking about beforfe, here is a quick modification that we could provide to the judges to help clarify the radii criteria. Radii that have the red circle in the figure must have equal radii. As I understand it, each variation in radius is a one point deduction (loop rule).

Brad

I like that. It's simple and easy to read. Great job...

Very nice Brad, really really nice

In Sportsman manuver #3, the Hammerhead, does the change from 45 deg. to 90 deg. upline need to be centered?

Posted By Lin Andresen on 28 Nov 2010 11:40
In Sportsman manuver #3, the Hammerhead, does the change from 45 deg. to 90 deg. upline need to be centered?

Hello there Lin... No, the up lines on this particular maneuver do not have to be equal nor is the change from 45 deg. to 90 deg. have to be in the center.

The only thing in this particular Hammerhead that has to be equal as far as lines are concerned, is that the roll on the down line has to be centered i.e. the line before & the line after are the same length.

All three radii have to be the same. Please take a look at Figure 21 in our rule book.
regards,
Wayne

Brad, how did you put the circles on the PDF?

Posted By Gil R. Major on 30 Nov 2010 7:30
Brad, how did you put the circles on the PDF?

Crayon....

Crayon! Only a grossly uncouth troglodyte would stoop to using Crayons in this day and age. The truly sophisticated use Sharpies!

Seriously though, I have a PDF annotation program I picked up that allows me to make callouts and graphical notations on a PDF document. I use it for making my caller sheet as well. Ultimately if we adopt this type of annotation, it would probably be easy to develop a script for Visio that would add them automatically to the judging sheets. I'll be working on that in the coming weeks if I can convince my lovely SO to give me a copy of Visio for Christmas.

Brad

Here is a sample of a Judges crib sheet. I know it is busy, very busy!! Definately not something to call from but perhaps a reference for the judges. Probably made available in the judges book for their review prior the start of flying or something like that. What do you think?

From a newbe - I like what you have starterd. For someone new it gives you a quick refresher.

I'm loving it! This type activity is exciting.

Thanks!

Posted By Brad on 27 Nov 2010 16:51
As we were talking about beforfe, here is a quick modification that we could provide to the judges to help clarify the radii criteria. Radii that have the red circle in the figure must have equal radii. As I understand it, each variation in radius is a one point deduction (loop rule).

Brad

Brad, how are you putting the circles on the sheet. I think this would be great for the Basic & Sportsman to just be published much like the Power Point done for the Basic & Sportsman. That way they would have the info at the field.

Just like everything in life, there probably isn't a perfect solution. I like the concept of having a nice quick summary of the various deductions available for the judges, possibly to review before the round. I suspect there are certain deductions that we can assume everyone is very familiar with because they apply universally (.5 for 5 degrees on lines, all three axes, and for rolls, 1 point for change in roll rate, 1 point for every additional 1/2 wing span on stall turns, 1 point for every change in radius on loops, centering criteria for roll or spin elements on lines). Other criteria, such as snap or spin entry really just have to be known as they cannot be graphically represented.

Where we run into difficulty is when the Arresti doesn't symbolically represent the judging criteria, such as the half cuban, humpty, or gold fish, where what is represented on the arresti is a 45 or 90 degree angle, but the judging criteria is that part loop radii must be equal. Hence the circles on my presentation.

The other area where confusion may exist in my mind is the line length criteria. For example, the Sharks Tooth is a combination of lines, but does not require equal radii on the part loops or equal length of the lines. Other figures, such as a square loop or pyramid do require equal length line segments. This could be represented by a single or double slash on each equal line segment in any given figure.

These two additions would provide a clean, easy to look at during the sequence reminder to the judges, along with the other criteria that are easier to remember.

Brad

Here is another reference that may assist you:
www.mini-iac.com/Portals/0/activefo..._Guide.pdf


Arrgh.. the website automatically adds the http.. so it doubled that up...

Fixed now

And here is another..

www.mini-iac.com/Portals/0/activefo...judges.pdf

Curtis can you check the links, the newbe is having problems again.

John

fixed

Somehow I missed these. I remember seeing them once when I first started in IMAC, but had forgotten about their existence. The guides are really just what is needed.

The annotated aresti is a great idea too....

the more tools/options the better