Welcome Guest! To enable all features please try to register or login.
3 Pages123>
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline tl3  
#1 Posted : Monday, May 15, 2017 4:55:53 PM(UTC)
tl3

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 335

Thanks: 61 times
Was thanked: 229 time(s) in 106 post(s)
Greetings IMAC pilots, judges, and enthusiasts.
Recent confusion and discussion regarding Rule 13.5 (legal turn-around figures) makes it clear that some review and clarification are in order. After much discussion, the IMAC Board of Directors and the Chief Judging Instructor firmly believe it is in IMAC’s best interest to stay consistent with what we have taught for years in judging schools from a local to an international level. What does that mean for judges and pilots? The only permitted turn-around figures are as follows:
• Turns;
• Half Cubans with only a single ½ roll on the 45 down line;
• Reverse Half Cubans with only a single ½ roll on the 45 up line;
The ½ roll is optional based on aircraft positioning required to enter the aerobatic airspace;
• Half loops up or down (Immelmann or Split S) with only one half roll on entry or exit;
• Single half roll to inverted immediately prior to entering the aerobatic airspace for the case in which an inverted entry to the first maneuver is required;
• Single half roll to upright immediately after exiting the aerobatic airspace for the case in which an inverted exit from the last maneuver is required;
• A vertical up or down line with a simple push/pull for entry and exit. A single 1/2 roll is allowed on this vertical line only if required to orient the aircraft properly for entry to the first maneuver.

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.
We are very aware that the textual ambiguity of the current rule leaves open the possibility for multiple interpretations. However, we also feel it is extremely important to maintain a standard that is consistent with how we have instructed over the course of several years. There is an established protocol for instituting rules changes, and deviating from that process could undermine the credibility of our organization. Rest assured that we will engage that process to address the exposed short comings of the current Rule 13.5.
Thank you very much,
IMAC BoD
Ty Lyman - IMAC Chief Judging Instructor
thanks 14 users thanked tl3 for this useful post.
Keith Cannon on 5/15/2017(UTC), Mark Thurman on 5/15/2017(UTC), Kevin Wilson on 5/15/2017(UTC), Earle Andrews on 5/15/2017(UTC), chymas on 5/15/2017(UTC), Bill Teeter on 5/15/2017(UTC), djmoose on 5/15/2017(UTC), Henny-the-Judge on 5/16/2017(UTC), Dangerous Dan on 5/16/2017(UTC), Gil R. Major on 5/16/2017(UTC), Krzy4rc on 5/16/2017(UTC), Highonthai on 5/16/2017(UTC), Big E on 5/29/2017(UTC), Orthobird on 9/3/2017(UTC)
Offline Orthobird  
#2 Posted : Sunday, September 3, 2017 6:24:42 AM(UTC)
Orthobird

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 175

Thanks: 138 times
Was thanked: 117 time(s) in 66 post(s)
For clarification purposes, can someone please review exiting the box?

For example, if the last figure is exit in inverted

and the pilot flies over one fuselage length to roll to upright:

1. is it necessary to call "out of the box"?

2. If the pilot flies 3 fuselage lengths, rolls to upright, calls out of the box, do you ZERO the sequence?

3. If you call "out of the box" after rolling to upright after exit of one fuselage length, is this not appropriate to do?

Thank you in advance for the clarification.

Sincerely


Cam
Wish I could fly everyday!
Offline Bill Teeter  
#3 Posted : Sunday, September 3, 2017 9:21:23 AM(UTC)
Bill  Teeter

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 178
Canada

Thanks: 12 times
Was thanked: 48 time(s) in 28 post(s)
Hi Cam - not sure what the real issue is but it is never necessary to call "out of the box". A pilot (or caller) must make a verbal declaration that they are entering the box, but the sequence is over once the pilot has completed the last maneuver and flies one fuselage length. The judges need to recognize this without any verbal declaration from the pilot or caller.

Many of us call out of the box by virtue of habit but it is not required. Whether you fly one fuselage length (blink of an eye) or 10 fuselage lengths is really not important. However if you exit inverted you must execute the half roll to upright before performing any other legal turn around maneuver.

The only acceptable exit from inverted under the current rules is the half roll to upright. You may not fly around and make turns inverted nor do an Immelman or any other maneuver before establishing an upright flight attitude.
thanks 1 user thanked Bill Teeter for this useful post.
Orthobird on 9/3/2017(UTC)
Offline tl3  
#4 Posted : Sunday, September 3, 2017 9:22:54 AM(UTC)
tl3

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 335

Thanks: 61 times
Was thanked: 229 time(s) in 106 post(s)
What a pilot calls or doesn't call after a sequence is of no consequence whatsoever. You can call your mom, call foul, or fowl if Wayne is there, you can shout whatever you want, or say nothing at all. There is not, nor has there ever been any requirement to say anything when the sequence is complete. It's over once the aircraft flies one fuse length beyond the exit of the final figure is. If that's inverted, then the pilot must do a half roll to upright, after which the rest of the legal turn around maneuvers are available to him or her.
thanks 3 users thanked tl3 for this useful post.
Orthobird on 9/3/2017(UTC), Terry Pellerin on 9/3/2017(UTC), Doug Pilcher on 9/4/2017(UTC)
Offline Bill Teeter  
#5 Posted : Sunday, September 3, 2017 9:23:59 AM(UTC)
Bill  Teeter

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 178
Canada

Thanks: 12 times
Was thanked: 48 time(s) in 28 post(s)
What Ty said - call your Mom
thanks 1 user thanked Bill Teeter for this useful post.
Orthobird on 9/3/2017(UTC)
Offline Silver Fox  
#6 Posted : Sunday, September 3, 2017 9:50:43 AM(UTC)
Silver Fox

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 434

Thanks: 73 times
Was thanked: 151 time(s) in 96 post(s)
In actual fact.... IMAC HAD a rule which REQUIRED the pilot to "wag" wings on BOTH entry and exit of a sequence. There was also a minimum height of 20 feet.
I am looking on a rule book for 1994 and it shows the information.
I will investigate further to see when that rule was dropped....

If memory serves me correct, I had done a similar investigation previously as that question was asked before.
Wayne
Timing........ has a lot to do with the outcome of a Rain dance.!
www.sewbusy.com
thanks 1 user thanked Silver Fox for this useful post.
Orthobird on 9/3/2017(UTC)
Offline Ron Graham  
#7 Posted : Sunday, September 3, 2017 12:55:28 PM(UTC)
Ron  Graham

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 274

Thanks: 30 times
Was thanked: 75 time(s) in 41 post(s)
It was brought to my attention recently (appropriately so I might add) that I was performing an illegal turn-around maneuver when exiting the box from inverted. Apparently, after finishing the 90 degree roller to inverted in the intermediate sequence, I rolled past upright (more than a half roll) to continue my turn and return to land. The issue being that the "only" acceptable thing to do is a half roll to upright and then make an additional acceptable turn around maneuver. I get it and I appreciate the heads up on the issue, but really??? So now when we judge INT we should be looking specifically for a half roll after the last figure and if it's not there then issue all zero's to the scorekeeper for the sequence ??? If so, then I guess that's what I'll do but I think it's just extending our footprint even further than what it needs to be by essentially requiring an additional maneuver to the sequence. This doesn't really follow the intent, spirit of the purpose as stated in the last paragraph of 13.5. Whats so bad about rolling directly into a turn and getting back to land?
Also, just for clarification, is it acceptable to perform an outside half loop to enter the box from inverted?
Offline Steve Stanton  
#8 Posted : Sunday, September 3, 2017 1:37:45 PM(UTC)
Steve Stanton

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 246

Thanks: 24 times
Was thanked: 119 time(s) in 57 post(s)
Yes Ron, I agree and I understand there is a rule change being initiated to change the 1/2 roll requirement.
I have asked the CD at my last 3 events to wave the !/2 roll requirement allowing for an immediate pushed 1/2
outside loop to return.
They have all willingly agreed to do so.
Steve
thanks 1 user thanked Steve Stanton for this useful post.
Ron Graham on 9/3/2017(UTC)
Offline Ron Graham  
#9 Posted : Sunday, September 3, 2017 2:02:59 PM(UTC)
Ron  Graham

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 274

Thanks: 30 times
Was thanked: 75 time(s) in 41 post(s)
Yeah, that's kind of what happened in my case. Good to hear it will get fixed. I guess we follow what Ty or the CD says for now.
Offline Bill Teeter  
#10 Posted : Sunday, September 3, 2017 5:08:44 PM(UTC)
Bill  Teeter

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 178
Canada

Thanks: 12 times
Was thanked: 48 time(s) in 28 post(s)
Personally I think we should be sticking with what the chief judge has stated and tried to clarify a number of times. Under the current rules only a 1/2 roll to upright is allowed.

Influencing CD's to allow illegal turnarounds is something I think we need to be careful about. Some feel it is a safety issue, however I say it is more about throttle management going outbound. If fields don't allow the required space that is what Alternate sequences are for.

Also a push half outside loop is not a legal turnaround under the current rules. An Immelman or Split S is allowed but the 1/2 roll in those maneuvers is not optional. If the rules are changed in the next cycle so be it.

Edited by user Sunday, September 3, 2017 6:01:03 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Offline Brad  
#11 Posted : Sunday, September 3, 2017 7:27:26 PM(UTC)
Brad

Rank: Advanced Member

Medals: Board of Directors

Posts: 418
United States

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 85 time(s) in 43 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Ron Graham Go to Quoted Post
It was brought to my attention recently (appropriately so I might add) that I was performing an illegal turn-around maneuver when exiting the box from inverted. Apparently, after finishing the 90 degree roller to inverted in the intermediate sequence, I rolled past upright (more than a half roll) to continue my turn and return to land. The issue being that the "only" acceptable thing to do is a half roll to upright and then make an additional acceptable turn around maneuver.

Ron, I don't think the interpretation to roll to upright requires that you stop at the upright if you're simply rotating the plane to and through upright to perform a turn. Personally do not agree that doing so constitutes an illegal maneuver. I believe the interpretation is that you can perform an upright turn, but not an inverted turn. I also would contend that a roll from inverted of less than 180 degrees to position for an upright turn would also be legal.

Brad
thanks 2 users thanked Brad for this useful post.
djmoose on 9/3/2017(UTC), Ron Graham on 9/3/2017(UTC)
Offline Ron Graham  
#12 Posted : Sunday, September 3, 2017 9:52:03 PM(UTC)
Ron  Graham

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 274

Thanks: 30 times
Was thanked: 75 time(s) in 41 post(s)
Brad, will we have to wait out the rules cycle or can something more substantial be done ahead of that than what we have?
Offline Earle Andrews  
#13 Posted : Monday, September 4, 2017 6:49:58 AM(UTC)
Earle Andrews

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 221

Thanks: 141 times
Was thanked: 103 time(s) in 47 post(s)
So....you're over or under by 45 degrees on the 1/2 roll. Big deal....see worse during judged maneuvers.

Making a mountain out of a molehill, in my opinion.
thanks 1 user thanked Earle Andrews for this useful post.
Ron Graham on 9/4/2017(UTC)
Offline Silver Fox  
#14 Posted : Monday, September 4, 2017 7:57:49 AM(UTC)
Silver Fox

Rank: Advanced Member

Posts: 434

Thanks: 73 times
Was thanked: 151 time(s) in 96 post(s)
Education is ALWAYS the key!
Just this last weekend, an Unlimited pilot who was judging in a contest, told an Advanced pilot after the sequence was flown that he could have zeroed the sequence because the pilot called "Out of the box."

How rediculous!,,,, Yet still...... It happened.
W
Timing........ has a lot to do with the outcome of a Rain dance.!
www.sewbusy.com
Offline Brad  
#15 Posted : Monday, September 4, 2017 8:19:18 AM(UTC)
Brad

Rank: Advanced Member

Medals: Board of Directors

Posts: 418
United States

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 85 time(s) in 43 post(s)
To the best of my knowledge, the plan is to use the normal rules cycle. Its a clarification, not a whilesale change. In the meantime we continue to educate through forums, judging schools, and conversations. If you sit down and try to write it, you see how hard it is to make it foolproof. We're liable to make it worse if we rush it. Ty has been thinking about it, as have others.

Brad
3 Pages123>
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.

Notification

Icon
Error