Author Topic: nats 2012 flying (Read 3058 times)

john e. holliday · « **Reply #1 on:** July 30, 2012, 09:47:33 AM »

Now I wish I had not watched this video. Don't ask me why. Would have been better if I could have seen the other Open Top Five flights. But, the judges seen it their way and congrats to Doug Moon for the win. Also I don't care if it was an IC, 4S or E power. He had it together for that day and flight.

Randy Cuberly · « **Reply #2 on:** July 30, 2012, 12:33:50 PM »

Quote from: john e. holliday on July 30, 2012, 09:47:33 AM

Now I wish I had not watched this video. Don't ask me why. Would have been better if I could have seen the other Open Top Five flights. But, the judges seen it their way and congrats to Doug Moon for the win. Also I don't care if it was an IC, 4S or E power. He had it together for that day and flight.

Hey Doc...
Why do you wish you hadn't watched the video. I know you well enough to know that you didn't mean to denigrate anything but you got my curiosity up.
I thought it was a great flight. I saw a couple of minor mistakes but every flight has some...even by the best. Which is what Mr Moon certainly is right now!
Could you explain your comments so there is no misunderstanding?

Thanks,
A friend
Randy Cuberly

Derek Barry · « **Reply #3 on:** July 30, 2012, 02:01:14 PM »

Many people just do not understand how close of a contest the top 5 fly-off is. Most of the time it is won or lost by one or two mistakes. Everything counts, you can't blow the takeoff or landing, you can't bounce your wingover pullout, you cant miss the bottom on your hourglass (cost me in 2007). Any little mistake can take you out of the contest and I know from experience that winning two out of three rounds won't win it either. You have to be on top of your game for all three flights. Other than the Team Trials it is the hardest contest in the world, as it should be.

Of course everyone has little flaws in their patterns I picked flaws out of every top 5 flight I watched this year but it comes down to who makes the fewest. Dave and I watched the last two flights (Paul and Doug) together. At the end I couldn't call it, Dave thought it was Paul by a hair, and Bill Gruber who was standing close by (but not judging at the time) said he felt that Doug had won. Three people with three different opinions but all very close together, just like the judges saw it!

I think it is fair to say that in a contest that sometimes comes down to a fraction of a point, the judges usually have no idea who won till its over. They may have a general idea of who the top two or three are but I know that they do not know who is the winner until the scores are added up.

Derek

Bill Little · « **Reply #4 on:** July 30, 2012, 02:52:05 PM »

Like my little buddy Derek said, it comes down to the fewest mistakes. And whomever can hide a few mistakes along he way. I agree, there is little to no way that the judges can know who won until all the scores are posted.

It sounds like this year's Top 5 Fly Off was a great one for all involved, and it points to just how great a job Doug did to win! It sounds like it was obvious that any of those 5 pilots could have won. What more can you ask for?

I believe that beyond any doubt, winning the Walker Trophy is the toughest single part of all Model Airplane flying! Possibly only superseded by winning the World Championships in F2B!

BIG Bear
RNMM/AMM

proparc · « **Reply #5 on:** July 30, 2012, 03:28:44 PM »

Quote from: Derek Barry on July 30, 2012, 02:01:14 PM

Many people just do not understand how close of a contest the top 5 fly-off is. Most of the time it is won or lost by one or two mistakes. Everything counts, you can't blow the takeoff or landing, you can't bounce your wingover pullout, you cant miss the bottom on your hourglass (cost me in 2007).
Derek

Dead on Derek. The shootouts between Bob Lampione and Gene Schaeffer were danger close. Both of these guys had REAL strong wills, and would push pattern flying to the razors edge.

PJ Rowland · « **Reply #6 on:** July 30, 2012, 05:47:56 PM »

One Interesting observation...

It looked quite close between the Top guys..

The only thing I can take out of this was : How obvious the shapes were in the sky - with the exhaust plume being defined in the blue sky of Dougs Model.

Electric disadvantage ? Or are the judges abstract from this ?

Trostle · « **Reply #7 on:** July 30, 2012, 06:20:11 PM »

Quote from: PJ Rowland on July 30, 2012, 05:47:56 PM

One Interesting observation...
(Clip)

The only thing I can take out of this was : How obvious the shapes were in the sky - with the exhaust plume being defined in the blue sky of Dougs Model.

Electric disadvantage ? Or are the judges abstract from this ?

I think one thing that needs to be stressed in judges' training sessions or judging clinics is to advise to NOT pay appention to the exhaust plume that sometimes can be easily defined. The reasons that exhaust plume should not be used are:

1. If there is any breeze (as in wind), as soon as the exhaust leaves the engine, the shape of the plume starts to be distorted. Depending on perspective and wind direction, this distortion can vary from flight to flight, giving inconsistent readings as to the true shape.

2. Depending on location of the judge relative to the maneuver, the plume can give a distorted view of the path taken by the model, different from what the judge "normally" is to watch while tracking the path through a maneuver. In other words, a judge is ususally tracking the path as the model goes through a maneuver. If all of a sudden there is a plume there with a comparitively static presentation of the path flown, (given paralax problems and wind drift), the presentation of that maneuver is judged by a different standard than other maneuvers when there is not such a clear plume to observe.

3. Different models and different conditions will give different plumes to observe, from none at all to those that are very clear. This will lead to the need to used varying standards between models and conditions and flights,then leading to inconsistent scoring.

Hope this makes sense.

I will agree that they are fun to watch. Even when I am flying I have sometimes stopped watching the model and admired the plume. That is not a good idea and is not recommended.

Keith

PJ Rowland · « **Reply #8 on:** July 30, 2012, 07:29:37 PM »

I understand this Keith.. I wonder how much Judges can distance themselves from that. The plume was just so much more obvious.

Judging is one of the most difficult things you can do.

proparc · « **Reply #9 on:** July 30, 2012, 07:54:20 PM »

Doug just didn't do much of anything wrong,(trust me I was looking). His flight "flowed" nicely. This maybe controversial but, his speed seemed to somewhat more perfect than the other videos. It is as if, he set up his lap times so you could see what he was doing.

His flight was like Snapple, "nothing but good stuff".

Brett Buck · « **Reply #10 on:** July 30, 2012, 11:49:50 PM »

Quote from: Derek Barry on July 30, 2012, 02:01:14 PM

Many people just do not understand how close of a contest the top 5 fly-off is. Most of the time it is won or lost by one or two mistakes. Everything counts, you can't blow the takeoff or landing, you can't bounce your wingover pullout, you cant miss the bottom on your hourglass (cost me in 2007). Any little mistake can take you out of the contest and I know from experience that winning two out of three rounds won't win it either. You have to be on top of your game for all three flights. Other than the Team Trials it is the hardest contest in the world, as it should be.

Of course everyone has little flaws in their patterns I picked flaws out of every top 5 flight I watched this year but it comes down to who makes the fewest.

Most people outside the competitors cannot actually accept this as the truth. It doesn't matter what you fly, how it "presents", "what the judges are buying today", who has buzz, politics, etc - make fewer mistakes and you win, period, end of story. Actually, I told Doug this on SSW about 10 years ago when he was still flying advanced.

LOTS AND LOTS of people hang up on what they thought was getting ripped off, think they are flying perfect and the judges aren't paying attention, think they need some magic breakthrough moment, etc. EVEN IF YOU ARE getting ripped unfairly, it doesn't matter, you have to fly better before you will get a better score. Particularly at big contests, you can use your score as nearly ideal barometer of your performance. if you don't get a good score you need to improve something. What that is might be a different story, and hard to determine, but you can be sure that it is something.

Brett

Dennis Moritz · « **Reply #11 on:** July 31, 2012, 02:29:02 AM »

Anyone know who videotaped this flight? There was a gentleman in roughly the position of this videographer who videoed many of the top 5 flights. Seemed as though his aim was to video all top five flights. His camera set up on a tripod. Usually I positioned myself to his left to observe the flying. It would be instructive to see some of the other videos. Wait. I just looked at the end of the NATs coverage thread. Fred Krueger posted 3 videos. Could have been the person I saw.

I have heard of the minus-point system a number of times. How does it actually work? Is it part of the judge training? In a cursory way I had it described to me in passing. For each mistake (bobble, wrong angle on the corner, high bottom, and so forth) the judge deducts a point from the maneuver. This would coincide with Brett's comments. Make less mistakes. Your scores will go up. Does anyone know exactly what this system is? Is there a system? Again, how is the process described to the judges?

Dennis Moritz · « **Reply #12 on:** July 31, 2012, 02:50:01 AM »

Excuse this, I hit the wrong button.

PJ Rowland · « **Reply #13 on:** July 31, 2012, 04:24:20 AM »

Does anyone know what was scored for the Overhead 8 + Clover ?

From the camera angle they both looked ... well let me just say it - I had a tough time faulting either. If I was Judging 38 + for both... Might have been 40 but the camera moves slightly.. Excellent 2 Manouvers.

Derek Barry · « **Reply #14 on:** July 31, 2012, 08:27:12 AM »

I can only speak for myself, but I paid no attention to the smoke trail.
Dale Barry

Joseph Patterson · « **Reply #15 on:** July 31, 2012, 08:46:02 AM »

I have been judging DVIII contests for about 15 yrs and never even noticed exhaust contrails. My eyes are stuck on "De Plane". Now yawl done brought it up and made me aware of dim plumes and I'm libel to get "plume fixation"!! Why did yawl do dat to me!!
Doug

Bill Little · « **Reply #16 on:** July 31, 2012, 09:41:41 AM »

Quote from: Dennis Moritz on July 31, 2012, 02:29:02 AM

(SNIP)
I have heard of the minus-point system a number of times. How does it actually work? Is it part of the judge training? In a cursory way I had it described to me in passing. For each mistake (bobble, wrong angle on the corner, high bottom, and so forth) the judge deducts a point from the maneuver. This would coincide with Brett's comments. Make less mistakes. Your scores will go up. Does anyone know exactly what this system is? Is there a system? Again, how is the process described to the judges?

HI Dennis,

I am a bit confused about that, too, as I have heard mixed explanations as to "major mistakes" and "minor mistakes" and how much to deduct for each........

HELP!

BIG Bear
RNMM/AMM

FLOYD CARTER · « **Reply #17 on:** July 31, 2012, 09:58:04 AM »

We should realize that good judging is just as hard as good flying! Nobody ever criticizes a pilot after a flight, but the judges come in for a bunch of harsh words. (yes, I'm guilty).
Floyd

Trostle · « **Reply #18 on:** July 31, 2012, 10:16:29 AM »

Quote from: Dennis Moritz on July 31, 2012, 02:29:02 AM

(Clip)

I have heard of the minus-point system a number of times. How does it actually work?

(Clip)

Is there a system? Again, how is the process described to the judges?

I use an error counting system. I am not saying it is better than what I think most people use when they observe a complete maneuver and assign a number on how the maneuver appears.

There are two components in the system I use. If there is an error, I count a point. If it is a bad error I count more points, so if there is an error, the "degree of error" is also factored in. For example, if the bottom of one triangle is at 7 feet (instead of being 4 to 6 feet) that is an error. If that bottom is 10 feet, more points come off. So when a maneuver is started I start counting when there is an error, if the error is "significant, I count faster. When the maneuver is completed, subtract the number from 40 and bingo, there is a score. It takes some practice so that you end up with a score for a specific maneuver that truly represents how well the maneuver was flown. To me, I think it is more consistent as you do not have to remember how you scored a particular maneuver flown similar to one you observed 3 hours earlier. When you first practice this, I think you will generally award lower scores. In practice, if your scores are too low in your opinion for the flight just flown, then adjust your degree of error rate count. If you use this system, you should practice over a period of time observing a large number of flights before actually judging at a contest. (But this should be the case no matter what system is used.)

There are other systems, but I think it is important to factor in the degree of error.

And this discussion should be in the Judging secton of this forum.

PJ Rowland · « **Reply #19 on:** July 31, 2012, 11:26:01 AM »

I must confess after both Barrys said something I had to thinking about it.......and......... Whilst watching other contests I don't really pay any attention to the smoke trails either.. Your following the plane.

I think its just more pronounced and obvious on the Video footage.