If you could add a new maneuver to the schedule......

[John Hammonds]

What would it be? It was interesting reading Matt's post about favourite maneuvers. I noticed a few mentioned outside triangles etc. Not that I can even fly the full pattern yet but I was wondering if anyone purposely flies any maneuver not found in the current pattern which would make a good addition.

Me, I've always fancied an overhead cloverleaf or...

Completely made up but fun to fly, a 45 degree entry upwind right side up into 270 degrees of an outside loop straight over the top into another 270 degrees of an outside loop, recovery at 45 degrees level flight. I've done it (Sort of)  and it felt great. Any others?

TTFN
John.

[Brett Buck]

What would it be? It was interesting reading Matt's post about favourite maneuvers. I noticed a few mentioned outside triangles etc. Not that I can even fly the full pattern yet but I was wondering if anyone purposely flies any maneuver not found in the current pattern which would make a good addition.

 I fly outside pentagonal loops to unwind the lines.

    Brett

[Jim Pollock]

I fly outside triangles to unwind my lines.  Outside pentagons sound pretty cool too!
How about three consecutive maneuvers 1 outside triangle, 1 outside pentagon and 1 outside octagon???
Pretty cool I think!

Jim Pollock   

[Larry Cunningham]

How about a Mobius? They look a little better with the plane untethered, but are
still spectacular.

L.

"Yeah, I know I'm ugly... I said to a bartender, 'Make me a zombie.' He said 'God beat me to it.'" -Rodney Dangerfield

[De Hill]

The Upright Double Vertical Eight from the 1953 Mirror Meet pattern.     

[Peter Ferguson]

The Upright Double Vertical Eight from the 1953 Mirror Meet pattern.

And you have to come back to where you started using the same path.

[John Sunderland]

outside triangles

[catdaddy]

The Upright Double Vertical Eight from the 1953 Mirror Meet pattern.     

I thought about that one...How about the corkscrew wingover also from the 1953 Mirror Meet.

[Allan Perret]

Double wingover.  (replacing the reverse wingover)
At the bottom of a regular wingover where you would normally pull out to level flight, make u turn back to the vertical for the 2nd wingover. 
Possible modification >> from 45 deg point down on the 1st pass, fly a teardrop pattern back to the 45 deg point on the up line such that you retrace the flight path of the first pass with the 2nd pass.
I would rearrange pattern.
After take off,  inside loops first, then the double wingover recovering inverted, then inverted flight, then outside loops.  Rest of pattern stays same.

[Larry Fulwider]

 I fly outside pentagonal loops to unwind the lines.

    Brett

Some of us Intermediates fly those also, during and after the pattern. We call them "outside squares", though

Larry Fulwider

[Scott B. Riese]

OH I got one....The Inverted Landing....an automatic 40 pt. 

[Phil Coopy]

How about a reverse cloverleaf.....enter 45 degrees left to right inverted.

Phil

[Will Davis]

Outside triangles to balance the maneuvers

Will

[Steve Helmick]

There is some merit to adding the reverse figure 9 to the Beginner Pattern.  Steve

[Trostle]

Square cloverleafs will show how good your airplane is and how well trimmed it is.

The outside pentagram that Brett describes would add some "balance" to the schedule to eliminate the two loops in the lines that the official patten (usually) now ends up with.  And that outside pentagram would certainly require some concentration for the first few times it is flown.

I believe the question starting this thread is what maneuver could be added to the pattern.  The mirror meet pattern that the Tulsa Glue Dobbers have resurrected certainly has a number of "interesting" maneuvers.  For the time, there were two pages of diagrams showing a number of interesting maneuver in the April 1954 Air Trails Hobbies for Young Men.  These were suggestions made by several of the top stunt fliers of the day including Hi Johnson, Don Still. Lloyd Curtis, Jim Saftig, George Aldrich and Bob Elliott.  Some of those maneuvers were chosen by George Aldrich when he created to current "modern" pattern.

One thing to keep in mind regarding the consideration of adding a maneuver to our current pattern.  (I recognize that this thread was not necessarily started for actually doing so, but I am posting this just as a casual observation and as a point for consideration.) Any maneuver that can be described is nothing more than a series of loops or "square" corners or "sharper" turns (approaching or exceeding 120 degrees) which essentially is little more than what we already have in the rulebook.  (That pentagram would be a bit more demanding than any of the maneuvers we have in the schedule. Those points of the star, particularly the two bottom points turning approximately 144 degrees will certainly separate the good fliers with good airplanes from the rest of the pack.)

Since most maneuvers that could be defined are really nothing more than a series of loops and/or sharp corners that our pattern already has, another interesting approach would be to lower the tops of any or our vertical maneuvers from the current 90 degree elevation to say 60 degrees, like 60 degree hourglasses, 60 degree vertical eights, 60 degree four leaf clovers.  Change the specifications of some of the maneuvers which for the most part can be described to be flown in 45 degree parameters to say 30 degree parameters.  To execute these kind of maneuvers in a recognizable manner would certainly put a premium on pilot skill and aircraft capability..

Keith

[James C. Johnson]

A Fun one that is easy but could put you out of the running ... a Touch and Go... takes more skill if you do a loop first... the "touch" would have to be completed during the same lap..

Extra landing gear inverted on profiles was fun doing an inverted touch and go... trike gear was the safest...

or a wing over touch and go... the "touch" would occur within a full lap with a gentle rise to level flight going vertical iton the reverse wingover... 

I also like Siamese lazy 8s ... two horizonal 8s touching in the middle..

Jim

[john e. holliday]

With the exception of the reverse wingover and overhead eight, put a limit to the tops of the maneuvers.  Say tops must be at or below 80 degrees.  That will tell which  planes can turn and still keep flying.  DOC Holliday

[Pinecone]

Looking from the outside (still building a Twister to try CL again, after some 30 years).

Why not look at a CL equivalent of the turn around pattern?  No 2 laps between manuevers.

Why not mix up the order of the manuevers?

How about having a Known and Unknown?  Known is the same for the current year, Unknown will be provided the morning the flights are flown (or night before).

Have a pool of manuevers, that the Known and Unknown are drawn from.  The manuevers mentioned here woud go into the pool.

Lower experience classes would fly Known only.  Higher levels would fly a Known and Unknown.

How about a freestyle?  Top class would have a flight of a sequence they want to fly.  Sequence would be provided to judges before hand, so they have to fly the plan.  How about making the freestyle round set to a piece of music?

The RC Pattern guys went this way, and they took it from the full scale guys.  Get out of the same stuff every flight, every year, for DECADES.  Jazz it UP.

As for a couple of manuevers, how about a humpty bump, start wingover, but at the top reverse direction.  Or 90 degree change at the top.

How about a wingover, but at the 45 degree point, throw in a loop (45 degrees in size) and continue they wingover.  DO the same on the downline.  Inside or outside loops.  Or one of each, so a figure 8 centered on the 45 degree line.

[Joe Yau]

How about a freestyle?  Top class would have a flight of a sequence they want to fly.  Sequence would be provided to judges before hand, so they have to fly the plan.  How about making the freestyle round set to a piece of music?

^ That would be interesting to see..

[John Miller]

I'm not sure we're ready for additional manuevers in the pattern. I haven't seen any perfect patterns yet, so they must still be a challenge. Sort of like golf I imagine.

Try as we might, no one has completed 18 holes in 18 strokes..

Heck I'd bet there's never been a game played with only 36 strokes for 18 holes.

Turn arouind style would be interesting, but, I'd rather see that flown as a seperate event.

Ok, My favorite non rule book manuever is the over head clover. Enter as you would the over head eights, but the first 3/4 inside loop is entered at 67.5 degrees behind your back. then cross wind across the top of the circle to that 67.5 degree location for the first 3/4 outside loop. Now you're back on the original course you entered the manuever with. Continue to that 67.5 degree spot where you enter the second 3/4 outside loop. Now, it's back across the circle, at right angle to the original course once again to that 67.5 degree location, where you now start a 3/4 inside loop. If you did it right, you are back on the same course you entered the manuever with, and you exit the manuver as if it were a wing over.

Plenty of spots for errors to occur, so it isn't a simple manuever to score well with.

[Steve Helmick]

John...That OHC makes my back hurt, just thinking about it! I don't think anybody could do it without moving their feet around, which would result in an ugly OHC. So, why not just make it two of them, so it would be DOHC's, for us gearheads? Hmmmm. That would be a problem for any old guys. You know any old guys who fly stunt?  Steve

[John Miller]

Yep, I know a few old fahts who still think they can fly stunt.

Actually the OHC as described can be flown with your feet planted. You twist at the waist to the vector of the loop you are flying. I do the same thing when I fly the over head eights. 

[Keith Spriggs]

I wish they would do away with the level laps at the beginning. I have never been able to do them well enough to go on to step two.LOL

[john e. holliday]

Solve the whole problem,  require every one to fly the pattern in reverse.    LL~DOC Holliday

[Matt Colan]

What about a 3 leaf clover.  I remember in Control Line World, there was a diagram for that maneuver in a past issue.  You could start at level flight and make an oval like loop back to level flight, then climb slightly and a tight half loop into basically a lazy eight and then back out to level flight.

[PerttiMe]

Digging up another old thread, just because I have an opinion... or two  

I'm not sure we're ready for additional manuevers in the pattern. I haven't seen any perfect patterns yet, so they must still be a challenge. Sort of like golf I imagine.

Since when was the lack of a perfect score a reason not to adjust rules in a sport?

Why not look at a CL equivalent of the turn around pattern?  No 2 laps between manuevers.

I don't know about everyone else but all the level laps between "the moves" get a bit tedious to look at. Why are they there anyway? I know that flying straight is a skill in itself but I think there's more than enough of that.

   
The pattern contains lots of tight corners. Some seem obsessed with achieving the magic 5' corner.
Where are the big and smooth moves?
I just looked at some old time stunt descriptions and they contained something called overhead "S" : starting from level flight, big inside half loop to the top and big outside half loop back to level flight. Too easy? Continue to make it a Big Overhead 8. Still too easy? Make it a Big Overhead Cloverleaf.
 

[Trostle]

Digging up another old thread, just because I have an opinion... or two  

(Clip)

I don't know about everyone else but all the level laps between "the moves" get a bit tedious to look at. Why are they there anyway? I know that flying straight is a skill in itself but I think there's more than enough of that.

(Clip)

It appears that you have never judged a CLPA contest or you would not question the need for the two laps between maneuvers.  Unless you have some magical formula or process as a judge to determine a score after observing a maneuver, write that score down and then visually acquire the model as it is about ready to start the next maneuver, you evidently cannot comprehend what a conscientious judge does.

Devising new maneuvers can be an interesting exercise.  However, unless the new maneuver consist of say 30 degree diameter loops (instead of the 45 degree parameters that define most of our maneuvers), and/or 45 or 60 degree top elevations for the vertical maneuvers and so on, any new maneuver will consist of a series of loops and/or corners that are already included in our rulebook.  For the past 50 years or so, most seem adequately challenged to master the current pattern.

Keith

[PerttiMe]

It appears that you have never judged a CLPA contest

Correct.

some magical formula or process as a judge to determine a score after observing a maneuver, write that score down and then visually acquire the model as it is about ready to start the next maneuver,

Those (gasp) Radio Control guys seem to cope with that just fine. No magic in an assistant or recorder. C Cassettes will do fine.

For the past 50 years or so, most seem adequately challenged to master the current pattern.

If it was good enough for my grandfather (who bought the first tractor in town) it is good enough for me. Right....

Also there might be something to be said for making the sport interesting to watch. Somebody might take it up if it "looks cool".

Pertti

[Bryan Higgins]

Double Wingover  "concurrent"

[Trostle]

Correct.
Those (gasp) Radio Control guys seem to cope with that just fine. No magic in an assistant or recorder. C Cassettes will do fine.
If it was good enough for my grandfather (who bought the first tractor in town) it is good enough for me. Right....

Also there might be something to be said for making the sport interesting to watch. Somebody might take it up if it "looks cool".

Pertti

You at least admit to not ever judged a CLPA contest.  Does that mean you really do not understand how most CLPA contests are organized and what is expected of our judges?

Have you ever flown in a CLPA contest?  Have you ever run a CLPA contest?

You suggest assistants or recorders for the judges.  That is fine.  Having an assistant to record the scores is a luxury, but does not necessarily mean that less time is required between maneuvers.  (I had a recording assistant at one of the World championships I judged.  It was nice in that I did not have to divert much attention from the model during its flight.  However, even though the FAI rules suggest using recording assistants, they are seldom used at the several world championships that I have attended.)  Why don't you organize a contest and show us how easy it is to get people to do that.  Why don't you organize a contest and have your tabulation crews transpose cassette recorded messages by the judges to a score sheet, with guarantees that they are recording the correct numbers for the right maneuvers and to do it in a timely manner.  You should be able to then tell us how easy that is to get people to do that and then how easy it is for the tabulation crew to do that.

Now for your new maneuvers to the pattern idea,

Since you admit that you have not judged a contest, I have a really great idea for you.  Why don't you come up with a new pattern, organize a contest, advertise well in advance of the contest of what you you are doing at that contest and then run the thing.  After it is all over, give us a report on what worked, what did not not work and how improvements can be made.  I really like the idea of not requiring the two laps between maneuvers.  (It will shorten the conest significantly.  Patterns should be completed in less than 4 or 5 minutes.) Also, I like the idea to have a box full of cassettes being transported between the judges and the tabulation crewsafter each flight so scores can be correctly determined and posted in a timely manner.  I am sure you are not thinking that a judge will record all of his scores for every flight on one cassette and hand it over to tabulation after the last official flight.  It will take the tabulation crew as long to decode this mismash of numbers as it did to fly the official flights.  I am glad that you are able to think these things through based on your vast experience.

Who knows, something like this might catch on at the local level and get some interest to seriously start thinking about somehow changing our pattern.  However, I can almost guarantee to you that there will be no proposals accepted of any kind regarding any changes/additions to our pattern without some grassroots movement showing that such a thing works at any level or deserves any such attention or interest at anything beyond a local level activity.
 
Making our pattern more interesting to watch is a worthy goal.  To the uninitiated, our pattern is a series of turns, loops, square corners and such.  Any more or "different" maneuvers will still be a series of turns, loops, square corners and such.  I do not see how that would make it "more interesting to watch" for the uninitiated or even for more experienced observers/enthusiasts.

Yes, we can come with some maneuvers that are more difficult than any we now have in our pattern.  I could describe several maneuvers that can be done with a combat ship (however poorly) that would essentially be impossible to do with our current stunt designs.  But so what?  This is not an event meant to destroy airplanes.  And as John Miller suggested, until even the most expert fliers can fly a perfect pattern, what is the need to change what we have?  I agree, that to those uninitiated, or even those who have an ingrained interest in this event, watching our current pattern does not warrant a lot of interest.  However, even if our pattern was changed with some new and even "challenging" maneuvers, it would not generate a lot more interest to watch.  What might prove interesting if some new maneuvers were announced at a contest without prior announcement and without any maneuver descriptions.  The judges would not have a standard to assess the new maneuvers and the pilots would certainly have a challenge to interpret what was expected with I am sure unexpected results.  That is NOT what our CLPA event is.

Now, I know the Tulsa people and maybe others have organized some contests using parts or using entirely the Mirror Meet pattern.  These are "interesting" and I am sure that those who participate are having a good and worthwhile experience.  On the other hand, there has not been an ground swell of interest to do these contests across the country.  I do not mean for this to be disparaging to the Glue Dobbers in any way.  Their efforts are to be applauded.

Keith

[PerttiMe]

...You should be able to then tell us how easy that is to get people to do that and then how easy it is for the tabulation crew to do that...
...
To the uninitiated, our pattern is a series of turns, loops, square corners and such.
...
Yes, we can come with some maneuvers that are more difficult than any we now have in our pattern...

OK, I'll comment on the quoted sentences, or clarify what I was trying to suggest, and then let it be.

I don't even know how the R/C pattern guys get the scores on paper but they do. In big and small contests. They don't have all that much time between the center and turnaround maneuvers either. Better ask them. Also, I am not saying that all the level laps must be removed. I am suggesting that maybe there should not be so many.

To the uninitiated, the pattern is not a series of turns, loops, square corners and such. It is a series of level laps, with loops and corners once in a while.

I am not suggesting "more difficult" maneuvers. I am suggesting that it would be nice if there were some "large and curvy" moves in addition to all the sharp corners.

[steven yampolsky]

I think whenever considering adding a maneuver, one has to take into account "judgeability" aspect. Some maneuvers are extremely difficult to judge due to geometric distortions of the sphere in which we fly. Case in point: overhead 8's vs. horizontal 8's. Horizontal 8's have tops, bottoms, shapes and intersections that are easy to see and therefore judgde. With exception of the intersection and 45 degree sides, there is very little a judge can see on the overhead 8.

From my experience maneuvers the following things are difficult to judgde:

1)  maneuvers that do not use 0,45 and 90 degree reference lines
2) angular maneuvers that have other than 90 and 45 degree turns
3) maneuvers that do not repeat at least twice (clover and hourglass)

If I where to pick a maneuver, I'd go for either: triangle(or loop) inside a square or square left/round right horizontal 8. There is also nothing wrong with repeating an existing maneuver. I tend to fly outside squares at the end.

[FLOYD CARTER]

OK.  Time to get serious.  As equipment and designs get better, more pilots are able to do a very decent job on the modern pattern.  So, contests seem to be getting top-heavy (lots of expert entries, and not so many in advanced). Whatever changes to the pattern are anticipated, the level of difficulty should increase by at least 25%. Some good suggestions have been given, and the most difficult are good candidates.

A change in pattern difficulty is better than adding yet another "Masters super class".

Floyd

[RandySmith]

OK.  Time to get serious.  As equipment and designs get better, more pilots are able to do a very decent job on the modern pattern.  So, contests seem to be getting top-heavy (lots of expert entries, and not so many in advanced). Whatever changes to the pattern are anticipated, the level of difficulty should increase by at least 25%. Some good suggestions have been given, and the most difficult are good candidates.

A change in pattern difficulty is better than adding yet another "Masters super class".

Floyd

HI Floyd

Good post, I agree with you ,  however that will do nothing to add more to advanced ,and out of expert.
 Most every contest I see has advanced flyers that enter into open/expert, when they really are and should fly advanced.
I think if you do make a new super hard pattern , it will still have a lot of advanced flyers that will enter expert

Regards
Randy

[steven yampolsky]

A change in pattern difficulty is better than adding yet another "Masters super class".

Floyd,

I don't think pattern difficulty will keep people from entering in class they are not ready for. Fact of the matter is, it feels good to say "I'm an expert" flier. No change in pattern nor new class will fix one's ego.

[Howard Rush]

"Also there might be something to be said for making the sport interesting to watch. Somebody might take it up if it 'looks cool'."

That's why we have appearance points. 

[RandySmith]

"Also there might be something to be said for making the sport interesting to watch. Somebody might take it up if it 'looks cool'."

That's why we have appearance points.  

and  little widgets on our flaps and stuff  

[Paul Taylor]

OK.  Time to get serious.  As equipment and designs get better, more pilots are able to do a very decent job on the modern pattern.  So, contests seem to be getting top-heavy (lots of expert entries, and not so many in advanced). Whatever changes to the pattern are anticipated, the level of difficulty should increase by at least 25%. Some good suggestions have been given, and the most difficult are good candidates.

A change in pattern difficulty is better than adding yet another "Masters super class".

Floyd

I am not sure I agree... I think if you make it harder as you go up, more people will not move up.
I have not been to alot of contest, but I the few context I have been to I have seen more people that should be in different class then the one they sign up to fly.

[steven yampolsky]

and  little widgets on our flaps and stuff  

And cool engines that work!

[Howard Rush]

My engines don't work.  I want passers-by to think that there's some challenge to stunt.

[john e. holliday]

I am not sure I agree... I think if you make it harder as you go up, more people will not move up.
I have not been to alot of contest, but I the few context I have been to I have seen more people that should be in different class then the one they sign up to fly.

I think rootbeard has hit the nail on the head.  Maybe instead of flying every one by the class they entered, lets put all the names in the hat and draw for flying order in front of the judges.  As they complete their pattern they go fly in front of another set of judges for their second round.  Then total the scores.  After all is said a almost done, separate out the individuals according to the class they entered after the scores are posted.  Two circles and two sets of judges and one big score sheet.  be interesting to see how an Adv flier would score flying after and Exp.  According to the draw you could then have an Int following an Int followed by an Exp, etc, etc. R%%%%Have fun trying to figure out what I am thinking.  DOC Holliday

[Tom Weedon]

How about a Diamand Inside Loop.     That is a square loop on edge, where the plane rotates 45 deg's from level flight, then flys to an elevation of about 45 deg. performs an inside square corner, proceeds to 90 deg. (directly overhead) does another inside square corner and repeats again on the down side with another square corner and then recovers at the original altitude with a 45 deg corner and returns to level flight.   

[Derek Barry]

Outside triangle done like an outside square! Start a 45 with the point at the bottom.

[Bob Reeves]

Hate to rain on everyones parade but give it up, adding anything to the pattern ain't gonna happen. At least it won't happen till it's someones idea that has the influence to get it through the board.

If you want to look at a few difficult manovers look at the old Mirror Pattern. If you want to see a bunch of stunt ships turned back into kits try the last half of the Mirror pattern. Tulsa tried to bring it back to the limelight but after trying it for 4 years we gave up from lack of participation. The pattern is simply too difficult and takes too much time to learn. In 4 years we only had 3 people that were able to fly every manover.

[PerttiMe]

Perhaps it is difficult to change The Pattern.

What about another angle, a different contest already mentioned in this thread:
A separate event for "Freestyle".

An entertaining "own choreography", not judged move by move at all. Just for Artistic Impression.

Music is a possibility but I do not really subscribe to the idea that my ears should always be filled with music to keep me "pumped up".

Admittedly, this would be an adaptation of what the R/C guys (especially the young ones) do.

Feel free to try it out. I do not have a C/L scene within easy reach.

[Trostle]

Perhaps it is difficult to change The Pattern.

What about another angle, a different contest already mentioned in this thread:
A separate event for "Freestyle".

An entertaining "own choreography", not judged move by move at all. Just for Artistic Impression.

(Clip)

Neat idea, BUT --------

So what criteria would judges use to asses what they see?  Should they be looking for "Artistic Impression" whatever that means.  How would that be defined for putting together a continuous sequence of loops and turns?  Or is there to be a certain dare devil aspect for all sorts of as yet to be defined whoop-te-doos?  Or is the pilot to show how close the airplane can pull out above the ground (which would not be acceptable to any AMA safety criteria)?

Whatever any CL aerobatic free style event might evolve to, the maneuvers that would be performed would still be a series of loops, sharp turns, pullouts 5 feet from the ground, and/or variations of what is already in our pattern but in some sort of different sequences.  Saber dances and such are more a novelty when done in CL than something that could be considered artistic, even if a pilot could somehow add some elan or flair to the program.

Yes, the RC 3-D crowd do some really great stuff, and with music.  It is "interesting" to watch, but just like watching our CLPA pattern, it starts to become redundant, even when watching world class 3-D pilots with their impressive machines and even being able to detect differences in style and ability.  Their situation is a bit different because they do it in a 3-dimensional domain, not in the essentially two dimensional surface of our hemisphere generally limited to a maximum of a 70 foot radius and throttle control for CL aerobatic flight would be problematic with equipment and technology currently available..

I think there is a message in the comments above about the experience the Tulsa Glue Dobbers have had with the Mirror Meet pattern.'


However, just to show that people were thinking about various maneuver a few years ago, here are two pages from Air Trails Hobbies for Young Men, April 1954

[Matt Colan]

Hate to rain on everyones parade but give it up, adding anything to the pattern ain't gonna happen. At least it won't happen till it's someones idea that has the influence to get it through the board.

If you want to look at a few difficult manovers look at the old Mirror Pattern. If you want to see a bunch of stunt ships turned back into kits try the last half of the Mirror pattern. Tulsa tried to bring it back to the limelight but after trying it for 4 years we gave up from lack of participation. The pattern is simply too difficult and takes too much time to learn. In 4 years we only had 3 people that were able to fly every manover.

What was the Mirror meet pattern?

[john e. holliday]

Their used to be a big contest that was held annually.  They had their own pattern maneuvers as I don't beleive George Aldrich was given the job of coming up with the AMA pattern yet.  At that time in that contest it would take two flights to do all the maneuvers.  They also had super prizes.  Have fun,  DOC Holliday

[PerttiMe]

Neat idea, BUT --------

So what criteria would judges use to asses what they see?  Should they be looking for "Artistic Impression" whatever that means.

Sorry, I have never judged Freestyle R/C, Freestyle Skiing, Freestyle figure skating, or Freestyle Bicycle contests either.
I am pretty sure it would have to be some sort of an eliminator system:
- everybody does one flight and the judges pick a suitable number for the next round.
- in some formats, the participants judge each other. Obviously, you cannot give a grade or vote for your own flight. Would that work? Why not?
- the flights would have to be relatively short.
- judging would have to be subjective, as in "stunt" too.

What would "Artistic Impression" be?
- difficulty (perceived or real) would play a role.
- the "moves" would still probably be lines, corners and curves, even if someone goes for things like hovering... so you could still judge accuracy, although not for individual maneuvers but as a whole.
- an original "move" would give additional points

If you have not noticed, I am throwing ideas in the air, not at all sure if anyone thinks they are feasible.
Again, feel free to try out or discard.

[Bob Reeves]

Most of the Mirror pattern is in the diagrams posted above.. Double vert eight is the hard one..