Flying the Pattern discussion.

[Jim Pollock]

Fellow flyers,

I don't see a topic for discussion of flying the pattern on this board, maybe there should be one?
Anyway,  I would like to point out the excellent article in Stunt News about the solid geometry
associated with flying the pattern.  I have long known that a straight line across the top of the circle in
a hourglass figure would look like an arc from the vantage point of judges and spectators on the upwind side
of a circle.  I also knew about the distortion associated with the upper loops of a four leaf clover, but
was a little taken aback  a how much there really is.  Anyway, this article by Keith Renticle was one of
the best ever in any Stunt News, in fact, I believe it's akin to Bill Netzband's ground breaking article
Control line Aerodynamcs made Painless..... ?  Question mark is for me. Anyway, there is some outstanding
content in Stunt News recently.

Jim Pollock    

[steve pagano]

Maybe sparky could add a new area called CLPA or STUNT for people who compete and fly the full pattern. Think it would work?

[Warren Leadbeatter]

Ken Dowell has written a very good article about the "Judges View" on his website, www.victunt.com

Heres the link

http://www.vicstunt.com/Patterns/JudgesView/JudgesView.htm

Cheers

[captcurt]

If you have a capable computer, by all means get Keith's program simulator that runs the pattern--it will enlighten and amaze.

Curt

[john e. holliday]

That is where a coach comes in really handy.  You learn to fly the pattern so it looks good to the judges.  The easiest maneuvers to judge are: take off,  reverse wingover and landing.   If you fly the rest of them so it looks good to the pilot, they will be distorted to the judge.  Have fun,  DOC Holliday

[bill marvel]

Ken Dowell has written a very good article about the "Judges View" on his website, www.victunt.com

Heres the link

http://www.vicstunt.com/Patterns/JudgesView/JudgesView.htm

Cheers

This is a very good reference, Warren.  Thanks.  The more I read, the more I learn... and, the more I realize I don't know.

I do know the AMA Rules for CLPA are similar but not exactly the same as FAI.  For example, Ken's point about using a pencil is expressly forbidden in the AMA rules (Control Line Precision Aerobatics for Event 322, 323, 324, 325, 326; Section 14.15, sighting devices and terrain reference points:  "Hand-held sighting devices should not be used").  I would think that prohibits using a pencil as a sighting device.

I like Ken's emphasis on judges not moving around the circle.  That has always been one of my pet peeves.  Even at the Nats, that rule was specifically ignored.  There are plenty of "judgement calls" that judges have to make.  Why not eliminate those that are not judgement calls?  I would love to see the rule enforced or deleted from the rule book.  I don't care which.

regards,
bill marvel

[phil c]

Ty, as a judge, I'd much prefer a flyer make the second loop righter, if the first one was bad.  Starting the first loop at 10 ft and making it 60 deg high is bad.  Making the same mistakes in the second and third loops is really bad, but a common mistake.  To me not correcting the heights on the second and third loops implies you can't see you've made a mistake on the first loop.  I'd score 3 smooth, round loops that are too big and too high in the 15-20 range, depending on just how smooth they were and how well they tracked.  A big first loop with a correction, followed by two nice loops the right size and height would get in the high 20's.  Making the first loop the right size, but having some corrections( for wind, windup, etc) so you lose some of the concentricity and I can see some corrections, would get in the 32 range.  When I really have to start looking for slight corrections and tracking errors the score is up in the high 30's.

[Jim Pollock]

Phil,

That's a description of perfect judging in in my opinion.  Exactly as I would do it.  I have seen sets of 40 point loops done, but very, very rarely.  Oh yes, perfect loops look to small to a casual observer.

Jim Pollock    

[john e. holliday]

That is one of the things that Randi G. was pointing out to me.   A smaller maneuver is better looking than over size.  Another mistake we noted for most was entry into the 4 leaf clover.  They were entering too low and then climbing for the first outside.  Also not watching where the center is on the 4 leaf clover.   Have fun, DOC Holliday

[Randy Powell]

I'm with Ty. It's been my experience that consistency is, generally, better than absolute accuracy. Now, if you fly a really horrid first loop, obviously it's better to correct. But if the first loop is mostly OK, it's better to fly additional loops in the same track, even if they are not quite right. Judges tend to reward consistency.

Another observation is, it's better to fly with good shapes, bottoms and intersections, even if overall the maneuver is too big. As you get better, you can close things down, but here, accuracy is more important than size. If you can do both, great. But if not, shape and location is better than making stuff rule book size.

One last thought is, a pattern is a presentation, regardless of rule book. As a judge, I am more impressed with a flight that "hangs together" than one where there are a few brilliant maneuvers accompanied by several botched ones. A pattern that is consistent and flowing tends to be more impressive. I once heard it said that the pattern isn't 15 seperate maneuvers, but really only one maneuver.

[Steve Helmick]

I'm really tired of seeing 95% of the triangles with 90 degree corners at the top. C'mon...it makes it HARDER to do the other corners. PLEASE figure it out! 

Several guys I know open up the last 1/4 loop to exit the H8. Every time! The H8 ends at the intersection of the inside & outside loops. Hitting the bottom of the outside isn't the finish...keep flying your plane...concentrate! FWIW, it looks a lot better if the exit tracks to the top of the outside, 1/4 loop past the finish, not that it can affect your score, ya understand...

It's my opinion that a lot of guys are too busy sitting in the pits, getting a bad view of the better fliers doing the pattern. Get out there and see how they do it, and think about how differently you do it! 

No corners at all at the top of the Hourglass just isn't right. Yes, the view the Judges see is an arc across the top, but there has to be a couple of corners up there. Line tension...which comes from power & trimming...is required. Steve

[Greg L Bahrman]

<No corners at all at the top of the Hourglass just isn't right. Yes, the view the Judges see is an arc across the top, but there has to be a couple of corners up there. Line tension...which comes from power & trimming...is required.  Steve>

Yes, we often see an hourglass that just looks like another vertical eight.

[phil c]

Ty, as a judge, I think making the same mistake 3 times is much worse than making a mistake and correcting it on the following figures.  Making the first loop egg-shaped is a big error(although if you look at the simulator, correct loops will look tall and narrow to the judges.  Loops that look perfectly round to the judges are too flat and wide).  Making the next two loops track it gives you three big errors.  However, if you fix your problem on the second and third loops you've only made one big error.  So, in my book, three egg-shaped loops would be in the 15-20 range.  One egg-shaped loop followed by two good ones would be in the 25 range.

I know a lot of judges mistakenly downgrade for corrections and prefer to see smoothly tracked mistakes.  If that's what they are looking for go for it, but realize you are making mistakes and may need to do it differently next time.

[steve pagano]

Hello all;


     As an intermidiate flier, I have been flying for 4 1/2 years now and in my best contest i have come in 2nd with a score of 512 with my a.r.f nobler. My question is when being judged is your score base on you category or is it broken into sections?

     As an example, Should a score range from between 0-200 for beginner and 200-300 for intermidiate and so on.....  or should it be 0 to 600 (or what ever the total is forgetting 40 points on every maneuver?)


 Does my question make sense?

                                             TIA
                                                -Steve

[Steve Helmick]

Steve...that's a topic that's a bit controversial, since Judges all vary in their generosity or stingyness in points awarded. Most will at least try to give equal points for equal maneuvers, whether in Beginner or Expert. Some think that the points cost them cash, or something. Another important factor, and one that really should give the contestant the idea to move up, is consistency over a series of contests.

Without seeing you fly, and in spite of all the previous dialogue, I'd say that 512 points with no appearance points, either means the Judges are being very generous, or you need to move up. If you moved up for a contest and got trampled, or felt out of your league, feel free to step back down.

Sometimes we only have one who wants to enter Beginner or Intermediate, and in those cases, we try to convince the entrant to move up a class, so he isn't automatically taking one of our highly prized (and spendy!)1st place trophy folding chairs! In my experience, they never move back down, and often end up mid-pack in the higher class. It's also why we usually allow Beg./Int. fliers to just scratch off tricks they don't want to attempt, and still get pattern points, if what remains is properly completed, in order, 8 minutes, etc. This seems slightly unfair to the others, who can do the whole program, but losing the two or three tricks that are scratched off makes the pattern points pretty insignificant. Often, they still don't get PP's for various reasons.  Steve

[Randy Powell]

I can tell you that Steve is a critical judge. And I'm glad for that. He doesn't "give" many points away. And always has helpful comments. Listen to him.

[steve pagano]

I can tell you that Steve is a critical judge. And I'm glad for that. He doesn't "give" many points away. And always has helpful comments. Listen to him.

I deffinitly will listen, I'm the type of pilot that after every flight i usauly got to the expert flyers of our club and ask them what i did wrong and how can i improve.

[Steve Helmick]

Actually, I gave Buzz Wilson 40 points for a 20 point takeoff, and something like 38 points for a 22 point WO (in Beginner). But he was the only entrant in Beginner, so no biggie. Then, I was digusted with his H8 and gave him what he deserved...ewwww!  The guy's not a bad combat flier, after all! Steve

[Mark Scarborough]

I like to fly in front of Steve most times too, appreciate the comments and feedback, cept for last weekend didnt get none, so studying my score sheets wasnt as fruitfull as normal. IT is very interesting to me though that sometimes I fly a manuever that I think rocked and getting 18 or 20 on it,, and another I wasnt so sure about getting much better, really shows I need to work on what my perception of correct is huh?

[Randy Powell]

Mark,

Rule  one of flying in contests. Judges, judge and fliers, fly. I have many times flown a maneuver and thought it was spot on only to get scores that were, hmm, less than I hoped. And vice versa. Just the nature of the thing.

[john e. holliday]

To all, if you want to learn how a judge scores a pattern maneuver, go sit with a set of judges in a class you are not flying in.  Randi and I had a beginner that is very anxious to learn the pattern and what a judge looks for.  He was also the score runner.  He would listen to comments we made about a maneuver and write down a score on a separate score sheet.  Then numbers were compared after the final score was written down.  None of us knew what score the other was writing until the pattern points were put down.  If there was a big variance Randi would ask him why he scored it that way or what he saw that we didn't see.  Round maneuvers do not look round when done at the top if it is round to the pilot.  Do like someone did years ago,  get a clear ball and draw the maneuvers on it.  Then look at the drawing from the opposite side.  Have fun,  DOC Holliday

[Mark Scarborough]

Randy,
yeah I know, I have heard you say it enough, I hear it in my head in YOUR voice, sigh,,,,,
Pat and I talked today, hopefully one weekend after he gets back from the nats we are going to get together and fly about 14 hours a day for two days!
He did help me though, I talked to him this afternoon right before I went flying, he suggested doing square 8 to practice my outside squares,, (yeah thats the one, lets see, three airplanes and counting) logic being, when you get to the outside part, the plane is a bit slower, by gumbo he was right! I flew two flights of basically nothing but sq 8s,, while still long ways off, I can tell my nerves getting calmer, leave it to Pat,,

[john e. holliday]

Ty, I agree whole heartily.  I moved to Adv just because some of the judges in this area seem to think Int should not be scored as high as Adv.   I guess that is why I judged at SIG so that the Adv flyers would be judged by what they do, not what class they are in.   Myself I could care less about who is in the circle or what the plane looks like.   I want to see a pattern flown according to the book.  At SIG we did allow for the sudden stop nose up at the end of some landings.   Did have one flip over.  Have fun,  DOC Holliday

[Steve Helmick]

Mark's comment about the Sq.8 is interesting. There certainly are ways to work into a maneuver, that makes it much easier. My own story pertains to the triangles, something I just fell into while flying at a Fun Fly. Start by doing a wingover. Then put a 90 at the top of the circle. Then make it a little smaller, and a little smaller, and make all the angles 60 degrees, and by jove, you've done it! In my case, I learned to do outside triangles, but hey, it's triangles!  Outside ones are no more difficult than inside ones, IF.....

I want to emphasize, however, that having the model trimmed is the key to doing the pattern and getting away with it. How many good combat fliers keep dorking stunt models, because the lines go slack? Plenty! It's not because of their flying ability, it's because their model isn't trimmed, and they're asking too much of it, in its current state. With combat models, sheer power overcomes a lot of bad karma. Duh!  Getting the model to turn the same both directions is large part of the solution.  Steve

[Doug Moon]

I'm with Ty. It's been my experience that consistency is, generally, better than absolute accuracy. Now, if you fly a really horrid first loop, obviously it's better to correct. But if the first loop is mostly OK, it's better to fly additional loops in the same track, even if they are not quite right. Judges tend to reward consistency.

Another observation is, it's better to fly with good shapes, bottoms and intersections, even if overall the maneuver is too big. As you get better, you can close things down, but here, accuracy is more important than size. If you can do both, great. But if not, shape and location is better than making stuff rule book size.

One last thought is, a pattern is a presentation, regardless of rule book. As a judge, I am more impressed with a flight that "hangs together" than one where there are a few brilliant maneuvers accompanied by several botched ones. A pattern that is consistent and flowing tends to be more impressive. I once heard it said that the pattern isn't 15 seperate maneuvers, but really only one maneuver.

BUT, you dont get to put a score on the end of the pattern for the overall presentation.  In reality it is 15 separate maneuvers.  In my opinion I get scored the best when my "in between" is near perfect.  People say those laps dont count but they contribute to the continuity of the pattern.  That gives the judge the feel Randy is talking about.  It gives off the "in control" at all times look.  You should ALWAYS be at the perfect normal level flight height at ALL times between maneuvers.   Not only will it help you look better it will also help you learn to see when you are exiting high or low on your maneuvers.

Consistency wins because typically if you are botching few maneuvers and have a few good ones the botched ones end up scored lower than the good ones will score high.  Therefore you fall back.  You get the inconsistent tag and you are out that day.  Consistently wrong will not move you up the ladder.

[Doug Moon]

Ty, as a judge, I think making the same mistake 3 times is much worse than making a mistake and correcting it on the following figures.  Making the first loop egg-shaped is a big error(although if you look at the simulator, correct loops will look tall and narrow to the judges.  Loops that look perfectly round to the judges are too flat and wide).  Making the next two loops track it gives you three big errors.  However, if you fix your problem on the second and third loops you've only made one big error.  So, in my book, three egg-shaped loops would be in the 15-20 range.  One egg-shaped loop followed by two good ones would be in the 25 range.

I know a lot of judges mistakenly downgrade for corrections and prefer to see smoothly tracked mistakes.  If that's what they are looking for go for it, but realize you are making mistakes and may need to do it differently next time.

Yes the rule book wording about repeating maneuvers has caused and HUGE issue that has gone on for years and it pushed by some of the top judges.  "If you make a mistake you better overlap it next time, the rule book says so!"  WRONG!  One must always know the RB is talking about properly flown maneuvers.  It does say common error is second maneuver is not in the same flight path as the first.  BUT it is not saying that the errors on the first flight path must be committed on the second.  It is saying that a mistake would be if a proper maneuver is flown and the second one is not flown on the same flight path as the first PROPER one it is a mistake.  In my mind that was the intent of the rule.  I can not see how the rules makers would want someone to repeat mistakes.  That makes no sense.  One should always be striving to fly it correct. 

Sad truth is you never know what you are going to get as a pilot.  Sometimes I can beat em correcting as I go and others like it overlapped even if it is wrong.  This is a HUGE issue that needs to be made clear in the RB.  Could clean up alot of the differences you get as a pilot when you travel contest to contest.  Simple wording can get all the judges on the same page in that department.

On another note,

Always fly your pattern to look correct to you.  If you try to fly it wrong so it looks right to the judges you will score lower EVERY TIME!!!  You are only looking from your point of view.  If they are off even by a few feet up wind and you fly something crooked on purpose to make it look right to them and you they are off it will look WAY WRONG!!  Always fly the plane to the cleanest looking pattern you can fly from your perspective.  It is your job to fly and their job to judge. 

Also if you have some botched moves in there but you have some smokers as well.  Keep after them as well as the stinkers during practice.  Dont let up on them because you think you have them wired.  Small bad habits will creep in and ruin them and you have to learn them all over again.  If you look across your sheet and your scores are all about the same you got loads of work to do.  TO Level flight, inverted flight and landing should NEVER be below 35.  Any average adv flier can make these maneuvers number one priority and go to the front of the line, because others just give away points all day long.

I also see judges just give the same numbers all the way down.  It boggles my mind that a judge can say that one's sqr eight has the same amount of mistakes as the inverted flight.  Think about it.  Anyone with any concentration can put in a stellar inverted flight, TO level flight, and or landing.  Not to many can pound out a sqr eight to match it. 

TO is a bit more tricky, the plane should only be 2' off the ground when 180 degrees from TO.  If you take off down wing the judges should be looking DOWN on your plane as you fly by them!!!!  Most lower level fliers give points away because they are at 5' half way around.  Then they see their score and they cant figure it out.  That is a very slow rise.  Dont give it away!!