Setting Up Markers for Squares & Double Squares (Need a Geometry Brain to Help)

[Brendan Eberenz]

I need some geometry help. My son flies most of his planes on 60 foot lines. I have some yellow caution cones  that are about 2-3 feet high that I want to place outside the circle (maybe 5 feet) as visual markers for the corners of his squares. I know we are trying to place a theoretical square shape on the side of a sphere. If the bottom of the square is 5ft high, and the top is at 60 degrees, then how far apart should I be spacing my cones from each other (straight line) just outside the circle?

I understand that the method of getting the answer can get real technical, but I just want the dumbed down answer of how far the cones should be apart from each other (centered downwind of course).

For the geometrically gifted that figured out the answer above, check me on my next line of thinking. If I want to mark the intersection and far corners for the double square maneuver, I would think the intersection cone to each corner would be the same distance we just determined in the previous scenario. I just want to make sure that the geometry doesn't get wonky as we deal with a larger part of the sphere. Thanks for the help.

[Brett Buck]

I need some geometry help. My son flies most of his planes on 60 foot lines. I have some yellow caution cones  that are about 2-3 feet high that I want to place outside the circle (maybe 5 feet) as visual markers for the corners of his squares. I know we are trying to place a theoretical square shape on the side of a sphere. If the bottom of the square is 5ft high, and the top is at 60 degrees, then how far apart should I be spacing my cones from each other (straight line) just outside the circle?

I understand that the method of getting the answer can get real technical, but I just want the dumbed down answer of how far the cones should be apart from each other (centered downwind of course).

For the geometrically gifted that figured out the answer above, check me on my next line of thinking. If I want to mark the intersection and far corners for the double square maneuver, I would think the intersection cone to each corner would be the same distance we just determined in the previous scenario. I just want to make sure that the geometry doesn't get wonky as we deal with a larger part of the sphere. Thanks for the help.

  It's not at all complicated, the 45 degrees is a projected angle, so two of them is 90 degrees. I will do some geometry but it's entirely scalar trig.

    Brett

p.s.   If you lay the cones out on a radius r, the straight-line distance between cones should be 2rsin(45/2), or 2r(.383), or .765r. 80 foot radius = 61.2 feet, for example. Repeat for additional cones.

  I used to practice this way all the time (with sticks in concrete chunks) and we still occasionally set out the cones to see how we re doing.  Several things you will very quickly learn - it's really hard to see the cones while you are flying, 45 degrees is *way* smaller than you think, and maybe you really do need a PA61 in a Thunderbird to have a chance!   I don't think this is a very good idea for general practice, because unless you have absolutely best equipment in perfect adjustment, it will probably hurt you more than it helps. But I recommend everyone try it at least once, it will make a lot of what we talk about make more sense.

[Bruce Shipp]

Start with a 90 degree right triangle at the center of the circle. You can make this out of rope or plastic tape of some type. Put the apex of the 90 at the center and the two 90 degree legs pointing towards the outside of the circle. Make those legs 10 feet long and the hypotenuse 14’ long.  Then use these legs to sight to the outside of the circle to place the cones for the edges of the square 8.  Place your 3rd cone half way between those two. That will give you the size of the square loop. 

It’s tough to see the cones while flying.  Have your son stand at center circle and study where the cones are in relation to his body. Hat will give him a better reference for where the vertical lines should be. 

[Tim Wescott]

The tops of the squares should be at 45 degrees, not 60.  I wouldn't stress too much over the "how do I put a theoretical square on a sphere" -- it can't be done.  Instead, just make them look good to you from the center of the circle.  I judge flights where people overthink this and all they end up with is oddly tilted downward lines on their squares.

Putting markers every 45 degrees is a good idea, though.  If you're good at eyeballing, just put markers to the North, South, East and West, then put four more in between each pair.  That'll mark off the 45 degree points.  If you're not good at eyeballing, then I've done the scaly trig for you: a 45-67.5-67.5 triangle has a base that's 0.765 times as long as each of the arms.  If you want to mark that all out, then get a few hundred feet of string: tie a marker at one end, one 80 feet further on, one 61 feet 3 inches further on, then finally one 80 feet further on.  To lay out your cones, hold the two end markers at the center, then stretch the two corner markers out (this may take long arms, or a helper), then put cones on the corner markers.

If I got my math right and you get the string-stretching part right, then you should be able to set up 8 cones and have them 45 degrees apart.  They'll be on an 80-foot radius, which should allow room to fly the plane without accidentally crashing into one (the FAI sporting guide has you put up signposts on a radius of about 100 feet, and 1.5 meters up to mark the ideal altitude).

[Tim Wescott]

If someone wants to figure out how to use it, there's GPS surveyor's apps for Android.  With luck, there's one that'll let you drop a waypoint at the center of your circle, then find points 100 feet away at N, NE, E, SE, S, SW, W, and NW.  With less luck, you'd have to work it out on paper and then use a precision GPS app to find the exact spots.

This just replaces the muss & fuss of strings with muss & fuss with technology, so you may not consider it to be an improvement.

[Ken Culbertson]

I agree that everybody should try this once, and if you still have a plane at the end of the session you will probably not do it many more times.  You will probably learn more placing the cones than you will trying to see them while flying.

This is strictly MY opinion, but I feel the only references you can truly trust are your own body.  Wind shifts all the time and as soon as you start using outside references for starting a maneuver the wind becomes your enemy when it should be your friend (except when it is trying to show you how hard it can blow).  I let the plane show me the intersections, not some predetermined point.   It is important to learn how to "feel" 1/8 of a circle with your body and control arm.  That can be learned using cones and after enough practice pointing at them with your shoulders square to the center of the maneuver you will be able to do it with your eyes closed.  Just don't do it with a plane attached!  Same with 45 degrees.  Find a place you can stand and use the fancy tools to mark a spot that is at 45 degrees.  Now practice pointing at it till you can do it with your eyes closed.   

We will still get out the cones from time to time, in fact we just had that discussion a week ago, but it was not for references to fly by.  It will be for references to judge each other by and to pass on to the flier - too big, too small, not same size, etc.   

Ken

[John Carrodus]

My simple mind says 60 degrees high, therefore 60degrees of arc, possibly less 55degrees to allow for start height??

[Brett Buck]

My simple mind says 60 degrees high, therefore 60degrees of arc, possibly less 55degrees to allow for start height??

   Where are you getting 60 degrees?  It's 45 degrees.

    Brett

[Lauri Malila]

Hi.

In my opinion the markers ALWAYS help, so use them whenever possible. Cones are difficult to see but markers made according to rule book are more useful.
Also it’s good, especially in beginning of season, to fly with slightly shorter lines. That way you have to work harder to squeeze the maneuvres small enough. L

[Ken Culbertson]

Hi.

In my opinion the markers ALWAYS help, so use them whenever possible. Cones are difficult to see but markers made according to rule book are more useful.
Also it’s good, especially in beginning of season, to fly with slightly shorter lines. That way you have to work harder to squeeze the maneuvres small enough. L

Markers are a different issue from cones.  I would really like them to be used more often but the difficulty of erecting and maintaining them is probably not practical for most of our contests.  At our site for example they would be centered at 7' from the ground due to the crown of our circles. (They do drain well after a rain though).  Not sure if they could remain erected either since they use tractors to cut the grass.  So, is it a good thing to practice with them and not have them at competitions?  Or the opposite?  Cones are at ground level and force you to seek them out which changes your focus instead of seeing them approaching through your peripheral vision on the same plane.  It is a natural tendency to drift whatever you are doing towards where your eyes are focused.  While you are seeking out that cone at 1' you suddenly find yourself flying at 3' about to enter a square 8.  No matter how you proceed from that point you are down points, better go around.  With the placards at the right height, you are pulled into flying at the right height and that becomes habit.  I think they are really there to benefit the judges.  The fact that they can kelp the pilots is secondary.  In my one and only run at the Team Trials back in the early 80's (which I never made due to family) I practiced with the F2B markers, and it did make a difference.

Ken

[John Carrodus]

Brett,
         Brendan said his son’s square was finishing at 60 degrees high. If its a square each side would be 55 degrees approx ( or 45 long if hes aiming for 45 high)

[Tim Wescott]

Brett,
         Brendan said his son’s square was finishing at 60 degrees high. If its a square each side would be 55 degrees approx ( or 45 long if hes aiming for 45 high)

If he's finishing that high he probably shouldn't worry, when you get right down to it.

[Tim Wescott]

... Not sure if they could remain erected either since they use tractors to cut the grass...

An RC club I belonged to put in pipe bases, level with the ground.  Posts could then be put into the pipes in a minute, with another minute to take them down.

I'm thinking of doing that in my back yard flying field (which would have heights ranging from 2 feet to almost 20, if I made them regulation -- it's a bit hilly).

[Brett Buck]

Brett,
         Brendan said his son’s square was finishing at 60 degrees high. If its a square each side would be 55 degrees approx ( or 45 long if hes aiming for 45 high)

    Yes, i don't think that is a good way to use the markers. I would very strongly suggest that you use them only like a measurement gauge, not a "trigger", in which case you want to put them at rule book sizes. I will emphasize again that for 99.9999% of those who have every flown stunt at any level, *you cannot fly this size and be successful*. You may be able to hit the sizes once in a while, but you will not be able to hit them consistently without causing many other far bigger problems.

    Stunt is a compromise between the different elements, shape being at the top of the list, and avoiding obvious errors is second. If you try to hit the sizes without regard to the shape and the obvious errors you cause in other regards, you will lose every stunt contest you enter. Only at the very highest levels does the airplane, trim, power, and piloting skills sufficient to even approach the right sizes without other unwise compromises.

    That's not to say size (and it's even more seductive cousin, corners) doesn't matter, but that you have to consider ALL the elements, not just the one.

     Brett

 p.s. if necessary take my equation above, replace the "45" with "60" (or any other angle you want to measure), 60 degrees you can eyeball, sin(30)=.5, etc.

[Lauri Malila]

So, is it a good thing to practice with them and not have them at competitions?  Or the opposite? 
Ken

Isn't everything that helps the pilot to correct his mistakes, good? And also everything that helps the judges to see your mistakes, also good? I think yes. L

[Paul Van Dort]

I use a compass in the center to set my markers :-). a helper is handy to run around with the cones ....

[Ken Culbertson]

Isn't everything that helps the pilot to correct his mistakes, good? And also everything that helps the judges to see your mistakes, also good? I think yes. L

I agree completely with you for the large markers at 1.5 meters.  Cones are quite different - for me.  We all have different visual capabilities.  I cannot refocus as fast as say a fighter pilot would, so having to change my plane of vision to search for outside references destroys my pattern so I don't do it.  Some may be blessed with the vision of a hawk and the ability to track multiple mice and still fly in a straight line.  For them cones might work, even help. But I will bet that I am in the majority.

Let me add one more caution in using ground based references in the square eight.  Where is the plane when you need to make the turns defining the outer segments of the maneuver?  It is at 45 degrees, or at least should be.  Can you see the cones and still see the plane?  It can only distract you as you are trying to flatten out at 5' and prepare for the next turn.  I have flown with markers.  They are different, they tell you where bottoms are and one will always be in your peripheral vision anywhere under about 20 degrees.  Cones only serve to mark the vertical boundaries.  Very useful to judges, not so much to the flier.  Again, this is just my opinion based on my anecdotal experience.

Ken

[Dan McEntee]

    I experimented with markers and guides once, and might again. I agree with the premise that you can't use them as a trigger, just as a gauge or reference. You can't "look" for them or you will never hit your turns correctly. Place them well outside the circle in relation to the wind that day. Make them as big and bright as you can. AT first, just fly patterns and don't even think about them. As you fly like you usually do, try to take notice of them using your peripheral vision. You might find that you can barely see them as you whizz by. Learning how to "see" them and where you should be focusing is the tricky part. I think what skill level you fly at will make a difference also. A beginner or intermediate flyer that is still experiencing "tunnel vision" when they fly and focus solely on the airplane, might not even see a school buss if it was parked there. This discussion can go hand in hand with the :"Where Do You Look?" threads in the At the Handle section, as I think they have a lot to do with each other. I think using guides and makers can be a very individual thing, some may benefit and some may not.
  Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee

[Ken Culbertson]

I agree completely with you for the large markers at 1.5 meters.  Cones are quite different - for me.  We all have different visual capabilities.  I cannot refocus as fast as say a fighter pilot would, so having to change my plane of vision to search for outside references destroys my pattern so I don't do it.  Some may be blessed with the vision of a hawk and the ability to track multiple mice and still fly in a straight line.  For them cones might work, even help. But I will bet that I am in the majority.

Let me add one more caution in using ground based references in the square eight.  Where is the plane when you need to make the turns defining the outer segments of the maneuver?  It is at 45 degrees, or at least should be.  Can you see the cones and still see the plane?  It can only distract you as you are trying to flatten out at 5' and prepare for the next turn.  I have flown with markers.  They are different, they tell you where bottoms are and one will always be in your peripheral vision anywhere under about 20 degrees.  Cones only serve to mark the vertical boundaries.  Very useful to judges, not so much to the flier.  Again, this is just my opinion based on my anecdotal experience.

Ken

I want to add something based on Brett's post.  When I was in my prime I flew with two of the masters.  One thing I learned from them was that the pattern is a presentation from start to finish and every one would be different.  *Shape* was the most important thing to learn and sacrificing it to maintain size would lead to even more errors.  If the weather conditions dictated flying larger or smaller you need to be able to do that and still maintain the shape.   Cones don't help with shape.

[EricV]

My old flying partner Bill Rich had made up a set out of PVC, with a "H" type stand, so they were portable, and he had them painted bright safety orange between 4-6ft. He stored them at the field... they are probably still there, and no one (at least not the RC guys) probably even know what they are.

I used them a few times... yeah, humbling. My Nobler size planes, and my PA40 pipe plane would do it easier, but a 75 size plane with an 18" tail moment with a 13.5" 3B prop, well, it's going to take a lot of muscle, look cramped and feel rushed. Your flats in the squares will "feel like" they are 3 plane lengths long, heh.

I had got to where I could keep the width in there like with the SQ8, but I unconsciously ended up cheating the height to buy more time, and that totally distorted the shape into what Owen Richards used to call "butt cheeks"... I finally fixed it at the NAT's one year with the help of Fitton, over my Cell on a Bluetooth headset, with him watching and telling me "wider!" "Wider!" "WIDER!!!" as I did the SQ8 over and over and over until I got them proportionally square again.

My minds eye had gotten so used to looking at them wrong, that it took a lot of convincing to get me to believe that these MUCH EASIER to fly SQ8's were correct... but my scores that day instantly reflected the improvement, so there was no arguing it. The judges much prefer a very slightly larger but properly shaped SQ8 with good intersections and bottoms over a messed up smaller one, go figure, heh heh.

A few people I know could do it and make a rulebook SQ8 look "normal" or contest worthy because that's pretty much how they fly anyway, the rest of us mere mortals, well, yeah, tough stuff. I'll say one thing, to my eye, it's not "pretty". A rulebook pattern looks abrupt, and very workman like, but not graceful or pretty. A few guys I know fly pretty patterns, and they have a rhythm to them which I really enjoy watching, but are they 100% ruelbook? Nah... but I enjoy watching them better.

I think every serious competitor should try the markers at least once... maybe with a disposable ARF Flight Streak or something, and your ego in check, heh.

EricV

[Trostle]

Something to think about if planning to use markers or placards of any kind.  When first using them, they can/will be a distraction.  You might be trying to spend more time/attention to finding/using the things than your airplane.  Trying to use them is not much different than using background landmarks (like a tree or post, your helper, the edge of a cloud or even the sun ((use good glasses when doing this))) to maintain position/location of an intersection or the edge of some part of a maneuver.  With practice, the markers (whatever they are) will become part of your flight, not a distraction, and can become an important part of your routine.

With practice, you will find that you do not need to look directly at the markers during the flight, but you will be able to sense they are there, no matter what you are using for any kind of reference.  It just takes practice, consistently, like anything else involved with this activity of trying to master the stunt pattern.

I have watched the expert flyers when using placards (like to FAI standards).  It is amazing to watch.  Their 5' level flight cuts right through the 5' markers not only for the judged portion of their pattern (level flight and bottoms of maneuvers) but throughout the flight.  Their 45^o loops are dead on the 45^o spaces of the plackards.  Years ago, there were few who flew this well.  The ranks of these expert flyers are growing.

Keith

[jerry v]

Brendan,
We use Dyneema line made into triangle with 82 ft sides and 62.73 ft base. It has loops in the corners to put on the stakes. One stake in the circle center and two stakes on the outer circle to make first 45 degrees location. Then move one side of the base stake to make 90 degrees total angle on the ground. We use driveway paint to mark location. Orange cones are simple to use, but not the best.  We use the driveway markers for posts -6 ft long, 5/16 inches diameter, fiberglass. The markers  are coroplast sheets 24x8 inches. Black tape in the middle is located on the stake at 5 ft height level flight. The coroplast sheet can be 24x 24 inches, but it take some space. It is held by the zip ties to the stake. Stakes have supports by two more stakes, taped together. It’s good for use on the grass field.

Jerry

[Ken Culbertson]

Brendan,
We use Dyneema line made into triangle with 82 ft sides and 62.73 ft base. It has loops in the corners to put on the stakes. One stake in the circle center and two stakes on the outer circle to make first 45 degrees location. Then move one side of the base stake to make 90 degrees total angle on the ground. We use driveway paint to mark location. Orange cones are simple to use, but not the best.  We use the driveway markers for posts -6 ft long, 5/16 inches diameter, fiberglass. The markers  are coroplast sheets 24x8 inches. Black tape in the middle is located on the stake at 5 ft height level flight. The coroplast sheet can be 24x 24 inches, but it take some space. It is held by the zip ties to the stake. Stakes have supports by two more stakes, taped together. It’s good for use on the grass field.

Jerry

Those look great.  Hadn't thought about those cheap snow markers. I may make up a set we can keep in the shed at our site.  We could put pipes in the ground and assign them numbers.  With the slope we have it will take a laser level to position them the first time since our circle is quite crowned and it drops off on one side and rises on the other.  Curiosity point, without going to the rulebook and hoping to find an answer, are the markers allowed in AMA Open or PAPMA events?  I have never seen them used except for F2B.

Ken

[Brendan Eberenz]

Sorry I went dark for a moment. It was Angstrom's birthday yesterday and we had a VERY busy weekend. I will start by acknowledging my mistake of saying 60 degrees. We are still new enough at things that I haven't drilled 45 degrees into my head. I meant to use 45 degrees as our target height on squares.

Also, I see that there has been a lot of good ideas and thoughts provided. I've skimmed through them, but this will give us an excellent set of ideas to work through as we try to get closer in proximity to textbook maneuvers.

Finally, we are probably going to do some flying today and we are going to try and establish 45 degrees. In a previous post I believe Ted Fancher showed a picture of a right triangle with 45 degree corners taped to a line near the handle. I plan on helping my son know where that triangle runs parallel to the ground so he can identify height markers amongst some of the trees near the flying field. Perhaps I will snap a picture of the setup and execution to share on a later post. Thanks for all the help so far.

[Trostle]

  Curiosity point, without going to the rulebook and hoping to find an answer, are the markers allowed in AMA Open or PAPMA events?

Ken

Markers are allowed in AMA stunt events.  "PAMPA" events are AMA events.  Local contests using any other rules can essentially do whatever they want as long as the AMA safety codes are followed.

Keith

[Brett Buck]

Sorry I went dark for a moment. It was Angstrom's birthday yesterday and we had a VERY busy weekend. I will start by acknowledging my mistake of saying 60 degrees. We are still new enough at things that I haven't drilled 45 degrees into my head. I meant to use 45 degrees as our target height on squares.

Also, I see that there has been a lot of good ideas and thoughts provided. I've skimmed through them, but this will give us an excellent set of ideas to work through as we try to get closer in proximity to textbook maneuvers.

Finally, we are probably going to do some flying today and we are going to try and establish 45 degrees. In a previous post I believe Ted Fancher showed a picture of a right triangle with 45 degree corners taped to a line near the handle. I plan on helping my son know where that triangle runs parallel to the ground so he can identify height markers amongst some of the trees near the flying field. Perhaps I will snap a picture of the setup and execution to share on a later post. Thanks for all the help so far.

   Using the geometry and a 100 FT tape, it's pretty easy to just measure it out. Put a cone at 80 feet from the center where you think downwind will be. Then measure 61 .2 feet from that cone to the side, eyeballing where the 80 feet is, swing around and measure to make sure you are on the 80 feet, and you will get it within a foot on the first try. That's plenty close enough.

     I again emphasize - you will not be close to making the 45s, and if you are, that is probably hurting you tremendously in other respects.

    Brett

[Brett Buck]

  Curiosity point, without going to the rulebook and hoping to find an answer, are the markers allowed in AMA Open or PAPMA events?  I have never seen them used except for F2B.

     Not mentioned in the rulebook, so, A-OK, do it as you want. I have seen it done a few times, and did it once the morning of a contest - which I regretted immediately, because of all the intermediate and advanced guys spent most of the day nearly crashing to try to make the width.

   We frequently/almost always setup up height poles at the NATS, At one Team Trials we had all the markers and that was revealing, but not  disastrous.

    Only one person was routinely hitting the specified sizes - Matt Neumann - and most of the high finishers were, as Keith noted above, flying very near the markers from the judge's perspective. This shows a different issue, in that placing the markers accurately in terms of geometry, but 25 feet outside the circle, creates a parallax issue for the judges, and leads to them underestimating the angular dimensions. It just so happened that some of us, with some attention, happened to fly oversize by just enough to make it look like we were hitting the markers from the judges perspective.  In my case, this was not due to concerted effort or being clever enough to figure out where to fly to take advantage of it, but that my airplane setup at the time happened to favor me flying about the right size to line up.

  Interestingly, the parallax is reduced the longer the lines are (WRT the markers) so some people were favored and some were impacted by their line length choice.

    I had a long post about this on SSW, but bottom line is that you want to probably set out markers occasionally to see where you are, e.g.. how far oversize you are (because you will not be too small!). It is not a good idea to try to fly to the markers, because almost no one's airplane it set up well enough to hit the sizes AND still fly a good pattern at the same time.

      Brett

[jerry v]

Happy birthday Angstrom! Best wishes to your success in precision aerobatics!
Brendan, your son improved his flying skills a lot since he took the first place in the beginners in Easton 2019. You have a correct approach to the training of the horizontal square eight. Precision aerobatics is about shape, size and position. If rule book describes the loop as a circle - it supposed to be a circle 45 degrees wide and 45 degrees high. On the sphere described by the circle center where pilot’ s feet are, arm length ( from kings nose to the finger tips = 3 ft) plus center to center line length ( distance from handle center to model center - maximum 70 ft) If add a half of wingspan of full-size stunter for outer wing - 30 inches or approximately 2.5 ft we will have total maximum distance 3+70+ 2.5 = 75.5 ft from pilot’s feet to outer wingtip. Center pilot’s circle diameter is 5 ft . If pilot’s feet are on the edge of it we add 2.5 feet to the 75.5 ft =78 ft . If you make your marker / cone position at the 80 ft and if pilot will wander over the pilot’s circle- there is a good chance for marker crash. That’s why we make our tracing markers position at minimum 82 ft =( 25 meters FAI )on the small fields. In our club field we have two circles 200 ft apart center to center. Each circle has 8 PVC pipes 2 inches diameter pushed into the ground, with PVC caps on top, flush with the ground to be safe for lawnmowers. Caps have oversized 5/16 hole for inserting the fiberglass rod. Markers/caps located on the radius 92 ft from the circle center =(28 meters) All markers are laser  leveled against the pilot’s circle center feet position to be 5 ft high. Numbers are calculated and recorded. Usually we install four markers to deal with the wind change.
About precision aerobatics- it is precision, not rhythmic aerobatics, not ballet dance aerobatics, not pilot’s or judje’s own artistic vision /interpretation of the loop circle seen as ellipse, egg or spit on the wall.
Brendan, if your son will learn to fly square between two 45 degrees markers and between the level flight and 45 degrees on top - he can handle anything else. It’s hard to trek the flying model against the markers. But it depends on the persons ability of peripheral vision. It’s easier to see a tree in line with the marker, or any object in a distance.

Jerry

[frank williams]

We surveyed / measured /aligned / and planted markers per FAI book.  We set 2 foot pf PVC pipe in concrete.  The markers go into the permanent holes.

Like Keith says,  using them is like using a cloud edge, a tree , a building. or a person standing on the side of the circle.  But, practicing, sometimes you just get used to mailing it in.  The placards do, with practice, get you to pay more attention to intersections and maneuver placement.  Not that you try to exactly hit a marker, but the relative placement of the maneuver becomes more apparent. 

[Brett Buck]

We surveyed / measured /aligned / and planted markers per FAI book.  We set 2 foot pf PVC pipe in concrete.  The markers go into the permanent holes.

Like Keith says,  using them is like using a cloud edge, a tree , a building. or a person standing on the side of the circle.  But, practicing, sometimes you just get used to mailing it in.  The placards do, with practice, get you to pay more attention to intersections and maneuver placement.  Not that you try to exactly hit a marker, but the relative placement of the maneuver becomes more apparent.  We surveyed / measured /aligned / and planted markers per FAI book.  We set 2 foot pf PVC pipe in concrete.  The markers go into the permanent holes.

   Exactly, and if you just practice alone, with other buddies who don't routinely compete at the NATS and other large contests, what tends to happen is that you fly bigger and bigger without really noticing, because it's much less demanding on the airplane and pilot. Even at local contests without NATs qualifiers or experienced competitors, this gets rewarded because big and smooth reduces the number of obvious errors, and the judges don't know either. Then, they go to a big contest with "name" competitors, fly nice and smooth like always, but get killed in the scores, usually without realizing why.

    One year at the Northwest Regionals, I was judging Advanced and more-or-less the scenario described above happened. A bunch of local fliers all flew, they usually scored about the same, and expected to be very close. One pilot who was usually at the bottom of their local results *blew them away* - the majority of them were clustered in the mid 400s, and one guy was in the low 500s. Afterwards one of the 400s screwed up hercourage to ask why it came out as it did, and I told her - you guys are all flying 60-70 degrees, and your winner was flying 50. That's at least +3-4 points per maneuver, he was making other mistakes as a result, but not enough to drag him down to even.

   The cones and other references are useful just to give you some idea where you are, so you don't just grow the sizes to make it easier yourself without other references.

    I would also say, this is about size, but one of the things that is relatively easy to pick up points by *hitting 5 feet* reliably. Getting bottoms down is generally much easier and gives you a much better improvement in the scores than trying to shrink the sizes. because it is no more demanding on the airplane than flying at 15 feet. So, merely seeing where 5 feet is using a reference will generally yield much quicker or almost immediate improvement, because it is easily visible to a judge. Lots of judges will give you good scores for 60-70 degree high loops (because they might not see it as easily or seriously downgrade size errors) but everybody can see when the bottoms are way above eye level and always deduct for it.

   Brett

[Trostle]

 
  Lots of judges will give you good scores for 60-70 degree high loops (because they might not see it as easily or seriously downgrade size errors) but everybody can see when the bottoms are way above eye level and always deduct for it.

   Brett

If you are serious about improving your scores, you need to pay attention to what Brett explains above.  I have seen judges who would give significant downgrades if maneuver bottoms were at 7'or 8' feet (2' or 3'above the desired 5' altitude) but somehow 60^o or 70^o loops were OK (10' to 15' above the desired altitude) and he would not give any significant downgrade. 

Keith

[Dennis Adamisin]

Trying something new.  We are hosting the CL Stunt "Rustbuster" contest Saturday 5/27 and in preparation we painted a center circle and outer circle (75')  Then I used the compass app on my phone to locate a N-S and E-W crosshair through the center.  Then we measured across and split the difference to locate 45 degree cross hairs.  They are visible to the pilot through peripheral vision, but I'm planning on putting some cones about 10' outside the outer circle to make it easier to see. 


Attached a pix, the main cross hairs run to the center circle, the 45 degree lines only run from 60'-75'  In the picture is the short line is roughly centered in the space above the center circle.  The visual feedback is that you have to match a short line and a long line to achieve 45 degrees.

I will not be flying but will be judging so I'll be learning about the parallax issue.  Little to no chance that the crosshair lines will align to the wind, and even less certain where pilots will actually fly the maneuvers relative to the wind and the marks.  Frankly it could be a waste of time!  Still, kind of curious what kind of feedback we will get.

[Ken Culbertson]

Trying something new.  We are hosting the CL Stunt "Rustbuster" contest Saturday 5/27 and in preparation we painted a center circle and outer circle (75')  Then I used the compass app on my phone to locate a N-S and E-W crosshair through the center.  Then we measured across and split the difference to locate 45 degree cross hairs.  They are visible to the pilot through peripheral vision, but I'm planning on putting some cones about 10' outside the outer circle to make it easier to see. 


Attached a pix, the main cross hairs run to the center circle, the 45 degree lines only run from 60'-75'  In the picture i is the short line is roughly centered in the space above the center circle.  The visual feedback is that you have to match a short line and a long line to achieve 45 degrees.

I will not be flying but will be judging so I'll be learning about the parallax issue.  Little to no chance that the crosshair lines will align to the wind, and even less certain where pilots will actually fly the maneuvers relative t the wind and the marks.  Frankly it could be a waste of time!  Still, kind of curious what kind of feedback we will get.

I think this is a great idea.  We tried something similar back in the day and I remember it helping.  Cones not so much. If you are cruising around at about 5' you will see the stripes.  They may not align with the wind but they sure will help you pick your centers.  Cones never helped me.  I filmed a flight today in hopes of checking the alignment of my RWOM.  I was going to use the tripod as my reference - never saw it!

Ken

[John Carrodus]

Dennis
I'd be interested in feedback after the event. We found flying on a soccer field recently very informative . We flew from the halfway centreline. This line gave useful reference for judging and coaching feedback to the pilot. We were also still using other conventional markers, trees, poles etc in addition. It was simple and effective.The remarks here from others about height is sooooo true. 45 degrees is way lower than most people think!!

[Brett Buck]

If you are serious about improving your scores, you need to pay attention to what Brett explains above.  I have seen judges who would give significant downgrades if maneuver bottoms were at 7'or 8' feet (2' or 3'above the desired 5' altitude) but somehow 60^o or 70^o loops were OK (10' to 15' above the desired altitude) and he would not give any significant downgrade. 

  And to emphasize the point, 70 degrees is a *huge* mistake, and *should* be incur a large deduction. That it sometimes doesn't is, however, just a fact of life. It will all work out great until you look over and see guys like Keith and I, or any of the very experienced pilots judging, then you will get killed (and as noted above, sometimes no know why).


  If nothing else, flying the bottoms at 5 feet gives you more room to maneuver, so the tops don't have to be so high. I see a lot of guys flying reasonable sizes that still end up with the tops at 60 degrees because the bottom is 20 feet.

Brett

p.s.    BTW, for the impending Northwest Regionals competitors, you will have Paul, David, Chris, Joan, and myself at various times over the weekend - and I guarantee we know where 5 feet and 45 degrees falls.  So do the judges at the NATs - so be forewarned.

[Brendan Eberenz]

I have really enjoyed the perspectives and thoughts on this subject. I can't wait to put up some markers and get Angstrom's thoughts on the strategy. We did fly the other night and practiced keeping the lines at 45 degrees. I have attached a picture where I circled the right triangle we taped to the downline. Unfortunately, the paper was kind of flopped around initially, so I had to tape a washer to it to keep it down. Wish I would have taped a little bubble level to increase precision. I prepared Angstrom that people advised that keeping a loop between 5ft and 45 degrees is extremely challenging and will likely compromise other needed components. He tried several flights and maneuvers with this new perspective and was really surprised at how low 45 degrees is and how difficult the textbook maneuver is. It was a very eye opening experience.

[Brendan Eberenz]

It dawned on me this evening that I forgot to upload the picture on my post. See attached.

[Dennis Nunes]

BTW, for the impending Northwest Regionals competitors, you will have Paul, David, Chris, Joan, and myself at various times over the weekend - and I guarantee we know where 5 feet and 45 degrees falls.  So do the judges at the NATs - so be forewarned.

Thanks for the warning! I'll try to remember to bring some extra $$$. What's the going rate? $100 a foot? 

[Ken Culbertson]

It dawned on me this evening that I forgot to upload the picture on my post. See attached.

One thing you might consider doing.  Set up a place where you can film a flight and get all of it into the frame without moving the camera.  My cell phone does that at about 40' from the edge of the circle.  It doesn't matter where the wind is from.  Now fly level at what you consider 45 degrees and film it.  Fly a bit higher and a bit lower and get at least two laps on each.  Hold your arm as you would if you were getting ready to do an outside square.  Now fly a couple of laps at 5'.  It helps to have the camera on a tripod and level.  Now take that video and play it back on a monitor in slow motion.  You should be able to stop it when the plane is parallel to the screen.  Take a 45 degree triangle and put the corner on your shoulder and the long side right through the wings.  This method eliminates all of the factors like the lines bowing or drooping.  When you find the path that has the bottom of the triangle level get some tracing paper and tape it to the screen and draw a line that traces the path of the plane for an entire lap.  Do the same for the 5' level laps and also mark where you are standing.  Now, as long as you camera is the same distance from the edge of the circle, you have an overlay that tells you everything.  We tried the triangle thing back in the 70's and found out (a week later when the film came back) that with line drag and gravity the plane was actually at about 50 degrees when we photographed it from the side.

Ken 

[Dennis Adamisin]

Update to my Post #31 above

As stated in the earlier note I marked the circle with 45 degree segments painted on the circle.  These are quite visible from the Pilots point of view but nearly invisible to the judges view.  I put cones aligned with the line segments, 10' outside the 75' circle, thus 85' from the circle center.  Before official flying I made a point to explain the markings & cones to the flyers.  I have not flown on the marked circle yet, but have judged with the markings in place.

Preliminary feedback:
> The flyers were completely indifferent to the markings.
> From the judges POV the markings are WORSE than nothing. Because of parallax issues the there is ZERO correlation between what the flyer sees, and what the judge sees.  If the flyer is right on the lines, the judge will see a maneuver that is too small.  If the judge sees the maneuvers as aligning with the marks than the maneuver MUST be too big.  The amount of error will also vary with the length of the flying lines.; for those flying on shorter lines the errors are greater than for those flying on longer lines.  Furthermore, the amount of error will vary - judge A will not see the same thing as judge B standing 3 feet away.
> Judges MUST ignore the markers: bad information is worse than no information.

Not really unhappy that we tried this - does not hurt to try new things even when they are unsuccessful.  But this exercise was a waste of ground marker paint!!!  (of course your mileage may vary, but I doubt it)


Other than that, the "Rustbuster" season opening meet was a success, see report in the "Contest Results" forum.