(clop)
Keith:
While you are looking at Rule Book changes, would you mind clarifying the rule about tip overs during a landing. Those grass circles at the Nats were in awful condition. We all know the reasons. What matters is that there be a decision during the pilot's meeting as to how the rule will be enforced. I watched some very fine fliers struggle to get their plane on the ground and keep it upright. Many were simply not able to.
Just some thoughts.
regards
bill marvel
This subject has been covered recently in another forum and has been discussed any number of time on that and other forums. The matter is really quite clear. People just need to READ THE RULEBOOK.
In the General section for Sanctioned Events of the AMA rulebook, Paragraph 14, Terrain: "...Flight areas for CL events shall be smooth, to facilitate take-offs and landings."
Now go to the Control Line Precision Aerobatics rules for Landing, Paragraph 13.15. The section that describes errors states that a flip over "receives no marks" as in no landing points. The paragraph goes on to state: Any unusual circumstances outside the pilot's control, which may have caused one of the above mentioned errors will be taken into consideration by the judges." So when there is a tip over, or a flip over or the model bounces back in the air when landing on a grass surface, we have the unusual, extremely rare situation where the judge must make a subjective decision (tongue firmly planted in cheek).
Even well manicured grass fields can have irregularities in texture or divits that are barely detectable, if at all that can cause a model that has otherwise executed a good landing on the grass surface, is slowing down and settling its weight into the grass. Then, any number of things can happen. The model tips over on its nose, which under normal circumstances is grounds for point deduction, or the model flips over which would be grounds for a zero point landing, or the model bounces back in the air. (Ask Rob Gruber and Paul Walker about that one when they were flying some of the qualification flights in Valladolid.) If the model has executed an otherwise respectable landing that in itself would not give cause to expect a tip over, or a flip over or a bounce back into the air except for the grass surface, the judge can and should award the points otherwise warranted by the performance of that landing up to that point. In other words, if the tip over, or the flip over or the bounce was deemed solely as the result of the grass surface, no points should be deducted for that tip over, or that flip over or that bounce.
During a contest, some may argue that other models have executed completely acceptable landings on that grass field with the tip over of the flip over or the bounce. That does not negate the requirement that a smooth surface should be provided. And a grass surface does not present itself as a smooth surface that would "facilitate ... landings."
Others may argue that the landing gear configuration can be changed to reduce the possibility of a tip over of a flip over when landing on grass. This can be done by moving the wheels further forward and/or using larger wheels. Again, if a model is equipped to land properly on a smooth surface, it is not incumbent on the contestant to change the gear if only a less than smooth surface is provided at the contest.
So, the judge must make a decision if the grass caused the error or if it was a problem inherently caused by the model/pilot and award or penalize points accordingly. At judging clinics that I have conducted, I suggest decide in favor of the pilot unless it is obvious that the landing sequence would have caused further reduction of points even on a smooth surface.
I do not think that a change in the rules on this matter is really necessary. I think in the minds of many, that the current wording in the rulebook covers the situation. (It seems unfortunate that those at the Nats, including the officials, the judges AND the 100 or so pilots and observers did not call for the proper interpretation of the existing rules.) Or we could adopt the FAI rules regarding this which really result in the same findings. In either case, there is no substitute for knowing and understanding the rules. Unfortunately, even the judges in Valladolid did not understand the FAI rules regarding problems with landing on grass until after the qualification rounds were completed which used a grass field. Some low landing scores were recorded, completely inappropriately, by experienced FAI judges and with a rulebook that is quite clear on the matter during the qualification rounds on that grass circle.
Keith Trostle