Unknowns flying in our circles........

[Jerry Leuty]

I am beginning to get the gist on this whole BOM thing. I just finished reading Bill's paragraph in SN. BOM is fine with me. I can use it or not. Bill's articles did leave me in question about ARC planes. It seems his ideas pertain to covered models. Well the truth is if I ever attend the Nats it will be either as an observer or possibly a judge in one of the lesser skilled classes. Too many controversies for me to deal with at the Nats. But while in the hospital this week I got to wondering; If an unknown pilot flew a near perfect pattern for their official flights could they possibly have a chance to win? Be in the top 20? Fly for the Walker cup, etc.? I mean can an unknown win the Nats? Or does one have to pay their dues in order to be considered a well earned score? No controversy here, just curious. Don't beat me up too bad. I just got out of the hospital from having surgery and I am still sore.

Jerry

[Howard Rush]

Orestes did.  He wasn't unknown, but he got to the top very rapidly.  Doug Moon made a similar splash.  Flying well seems to be the key.  That's what's held me back.  

The Nats is a humdinger of a stunt contest.  It is well run, and the organizers go out of their way to be fair and give everybody a chance.  Bill is doing his best to ward off any controversy in advance.  I recommend the experience.  You'll see some pretty airplanes and some good flying. 

[Brett Buck]

I am beginning to get the gist on this whole BOM thing. I just finished reading Bill's paragraph in SN. BOM is fine with me. I can use it or not. Bill's articles did leave me in question about ARC planes. It seems his ideas pertain to covered models. Well the truth is if I ever attend the Nats it will be either as an observer or possibly a judge in one of the lesser skilled classes. Too many controversies for me to deal with at the Nats.

Don't let the "spirited discussion" mislead you - there really aren't a lot of controversies and they aren't very big or important in the scheme of things. The *only* place you see it to any degree is on internet forums - I can count the number of BOM discussions in real life one the fingers of one hand. If you go to the NATs, build your airplane, fly it,  and don't worry about the rest of it.

But while in the hospital this week I got to wondering; If an unknown pilot flew a near perfect pattern for their official flights could they possibly have a chance to win? Be in the top 20? Fly for the Walker cup, etc.? I mean can an unknown win the Nats? Or does one have to pay their dues in order to be considered a well earned score? No controversy here, just curious. Don't beat me up too bad. I just got out of the hospital from having surgery and I am still sore.

   I certainly see no reason why not. Despite what you might see discussed, all l have ever seen is if you fly a better pattern, you get a better score, no matter who you are or what you fly. Richard Oliver was competitive right away, and when he showed up no one knew who he was or where he came from. They did by the end of the week. Bart Klapinski won in his first attempt, but he also had endless experience from his Disney days and also competed in a very tough local scene in Los Angeles.

   The opposite is also true - I certainly had a high profile in 2007 as the defending champ. And when I was flying well, I got good scores. When I started making mistakes, I instantly got appropriately poor scores. Similar in 08 and 09.

    The problem with your premise is that unless you have a standard to work to and competition, it's awfully difficult to know how to fly good patterns. Plenty of people have had the idea that they are going to practice really hard and fly in a lot of local contest, and then go to the NATs and blow them all away. But then they go and are not competitive. That's because most people have no idea how difficult it is to fly at the level of the regular suspects at the NATs, particularly for 4 full rounds in all sorts of weather and under tremendous pressure. Aside from a few areas, you can win all the local contests but still not have enough challenge to get to that final level. So for the most part, you have to fly at the NATs multiple times to learn how to fly at the NATs.

   Now if you are from around our area, or Dallas or Houston, or Georgia, you might be able to have a tough enough crowd to do it. If you are competitive around here, the NATS will look very familiar, because a lot of the contenders are the same guys you see every other weekend. That's certainly a big key for me. If you can compete with David/Paul/Ted, you are going to do pretty well anywhere in the world. Thats a special case, of course.

     Brett

[Jerry Leuty]

Flying well holds me back too. Doug flies in Dallas and he is amazing to watch. When you look at his stance during the manuevers he is just built right physically. Doug is thin and younger than most of us. A lot of us older men are top heavy and way too stiff to be able to bend like Doug can.

[Jerry Leuty]

Thanks Brett. You've certainly given me some things to think on. We may seem great on a local level but then when gone to the national level it is a whole different story. I remember once a man that was drag racing a '55 Chevy at a small track in FTW. When he went to a AHRA track he could not even place. There are some very competitive pilots out there. After reading the Stiletto Chronicles I got a different prospective on what some level some pilots have taken this game seriously. I myself build all my own planes. Most from scratch. Some even fly fairly well. But my flying skills leaves much to be desired. There are some great pilots here in the Dallas area and I believe that if one is going to be competitive then couching is the only way to go. I can practice till I run out of fuel but if I am doing it all wrong then it is still a poorly flown pattern.

[Brett Buck]

Thanks Brett. You've certainly given me some things to think on. We may seem great on a local level but then when gone to the national level it is a whole different story. I remember once a man that was drag racing a '55 Chevy at a small track in FTW. When he went to a AHRA track he could not even place. There are some very competitive pilots out there. After reading the Stiletto Chronicles I got a different prospective on what some level some pilots have taken this game seriously. I myself build all my own planes. Most from scratch. Some even fly fairly well. But my flying skills leaves much to be desired. There are some great pilots here in the Dallas area and I believe that if one is going to be competitive then couching is the only way to go. I can practice till I run out of fuel but if I am doing it all wrong then it is still a poorly flown pattern.

   My point was that the results are really up to the pilot. There are reams of purple prose written about  about "halos" ,paying your dues, etc, but if your airplane matches the rule book better, you are likely to win. There is *always* plenty of room for improvement because even the best, at their best, make a pretty good number of pretty obvious errors (to those who know what to look for).

    There is *a lot* more to achieving the right path through the sky than simply piloting skills. That's why it takes to long to master - and why you can have many diverse range of skills and still be competitive.

     Brett

[PJ Rowland]

"If an unknown pilot flew a near perfect pattern for their official flights could they possibly have a chance to win?"

US Nats yes..

Worlds No.

By virtue of Excellent well informed judges - a well structured 4 circle format to prevent judges blowout from seeing to many flights.

I think Brett hit the nail on the head - where would an "unknown" pool his comparisons from? Its not until you see guys like the previous winners Paul/ted/dave/brett/orestes ect.. that you realise how good they are and at what level you must compete at to win.

Winning locally means you can fly decent but top 20....

[Dean Pappas]

Hi Guys,
Bart Klapinski, in Stunt, and Jim Kirkland in RC Pattern are the only two to win the NATs on the first pass.
Both happened during the Navy judge era.
Back then, ALL pilots "came from Mars" unless the fellow educating the Naval officers did too much pump-priming.

That's my take,
   Dean Pappas

[Brett Buck]

.

I think Brett hit the nail on the head - where would an "unknown" pool his comparisons from? Its not until you see guys like the previous winners Paul/ted/dave/brett/orestes ect.. that you realise how good they are and at what level you must compete at to win.

Winning locally means you can fly decent but top 20....

   I was a minor exception to that, although there are a lot of caveats. First, it was 20 years ago and the depth of the field wasn't anything like it is now. Second, I flew against Ted and David pretty regularly, which means I had a pretty good idea what was needed. I had a relatively poor idea, however, of how I stacked up against that standard.

   Another thing I learned, the hard way, was how difficult it was to sustain the performance for the entire week. David and I started first thing Monday morning and flew just about all day. By about 5 that afternoon, I was absolutely peaked, and I would have been competitive for a Top 10 and maybe a Top 5. Problem was that the contest didn't even start until Wednesday. By the time the qualifying started, I was dead tired, not able to concentrate, and had degenerated to the point that I was flying *much worse* than my average local flight. Things went downhill from there, I was hopping every single corner, and since I could see it, I was pressing to *fly better* and forcing everything, which of course made it worse. I squeaked into the Top 20 by a fraction of a point (sorry, Chris) and then ended up dead last among those who finished both flights on Friday for 18th. Thursday night McClellan and I were sitting there in our room, and I realized I couldn't see anything out of the left side of either eye.

   The lessons I learned were manifold, but among them where:

     I wasn't *nearly* as good as I thought I was
     Most people flew A LOT better than I thought they did
     You might get lucky from time to time at home, but if a few guys screw up at the NATs, there are 10 more guys that won't, and will beat you anyway.
    A week is a very long time to try to operate at 100 percent of capability

  After that, I stopped screwing around with my "theories" of "how it should work" (which the late great Bill Netzeband would have loved), and instead started really looking at what it was going to take to actually win contests. With that in mind, I got progressively better at competing but it was a good 5-6 years before I was even in the mix. I sort of lucked into the Top 5 in 2000 (good fortune with the draw given the weather) and made a decent show of it. I missed in 01 and 02 narrowly. The last piece of the puzzle was getting an absolutely perfect engine run in 03, until I had a bearing failure in the good engine, but was still doing OK until some strategic mistakes in the wind on Top 20 day. I was a reasonably close 3rd in one of the most difficult contests ever held, the 04 NATs probably my best overall personal achievement.

    Since then I have been competitive to varying degrees, but point is that I was a really good local expert in the hardest area in the country, the best help available, and had the technical aspects down cold, and it STILL took me a good 10 years to really get my act fully together to even be a legitimate contender for a win.  You can't get any bigger halo than being the defending NATs champ, didn't help at all in 07 - but flying better sure would have. That's what makes the "runs" people get on - Paul and David - even more amazing. Winning this thing 5 times in a row is just stunning if you know how hard it is to do it even once.

  People have consistently underestimated what it takes to be successful in this event. I thought I was ready to go in 93, but I was at least 3 plateaus short of the real hotshots. Most of the people you hear griping about halos, conspiracies, etc., never got past that.

    Brett

[PJ Rowland]

but I was at least 3 plateaus short of the real hotshots. Most of the people you hear griping about halos, conspiracies, etc., never got past that.


I agree. I don't think much of the Halo factor in the US ( worlds is another matter ) 

Several Nats ago I was flying and thought I was flying well - tight and crisp placed mid field after first 3 rounds. Spent the day with kaz minato & Misaru Hiki in a fairly intense single practice day - listening to their advice and implimenting what they said they were seeing. ( Through lots of hand gestures ) scored my highest flight of the contest. My round 4 score was higher than any compeditors other scores in Rounds 1 or 2 and was 2nd highest in round 3 ( Behind Hiki who won it )

Goes to show practice ( correct practice ) will improve your scores.


You also nailed something that I think is overlooked by alot of people - OVER PRACTICE. - I play competitive golf and often will hit hundreds of balls in a week sometimes in a session. I also love to practice flying that way, Get down early and try to knock out 40 flights in the day. Leading up to a Nats I would do that 2 weeks out ( If I get time off work ) The key to consistant - long days of practice is to acknowledge that mental fatigue will breed mistakes. A few tips to maintain metal alertness over time is Water, eat consistantly  healthy snaks through out the day. I will stop for lunch, have a sandwich, eat lots of fruit. I also like to stretch throughout the day to remove the lactic acid buildup.

Going for a brisk walk once your finished several flights helps add extra oxygen to the brain.

Physical fatigue is also part player - Excersise , weight training ect can all help to improve that. I know for a fact that a certain World champion has a stringent fitness regime. Both current & former !

Im fairly active in sport so gym work 2 nights a week is a standard week. Getting ready for a contest bump it up to 4 nights. Cardio, swimming, weights, stretching.

The lessons I learned were manifold, but among them where:

     I wasn't *nearly* as good as I thought I was
     Most people flew A LOT better than I thought they did

I learned that one also..

[Bill Little]

What Brett, Pj, and others would say is right on.   The level of "flying" at the NATS is not what most would suspect until they get there and see it.

A general observation (just one thing that shows):  We have a "limit" of 4'-6' for our bottoms on maneuvers.  A "lot" of local fliers can hit that 4-6 foot mark, for every maneuver when flying.  BUT!  A NATS Walker Trophy winner will  not hit a "range" of 4'-6'  He will hit 4'6" EVERY time, or 5' or 5' 6" or even 6'.  But, he will hit that "singular" height every time.  Those are just examples, not any real measurement I have ever taken, but a "comparison figure".  And they are capable of adjusting their bottoms to be totally consistent during the flight.

A better description might be:  I might hit 4' on all my round loops, then 6' on my square loops, then 5' on my figure 8's, etc..  All with in the "rule book".  Then Brett (or any top 5 pilot) flies.  He hits 5' on his reverse wing over pull outs and then puts all the rest of his bottoms at 5'.  That alone shows a much better pilot!  I have seen Top 5 pilots that might have their bottoms a "touch high", but each and every one seemed to be with in an inch of the last one.  "Consistency" and repeatability are really key factors and the best do that better than the rest.  I just used bottoms as an example since they are easily spotted.  But the same applies to shapes and sizes for these guys, and they can "adjust" for a flight, and readjust as the flight goes on.  It's not just flying to the rule book, but "consistently flying to the rule book"! LOL!!  And if one aspect is getting judged better (say a slightly smaller, tighter, pattern) then they can adjust to that.  Putting your name on the Walker Trophy is a true sign of a pilot's overall abilities.

Can a "newbie" win the Walker Trophy?  SURE!  But he will have to be really good!  From the limited NATS flying I have done, the judging was good, regardless of WHO was on the handle.  In other words a flight was scored by pilot A in the same manner as it was for pilot B using the same criteria.  Consistency in judging and done honestly is all that can be asked and it is what "I" have seen.  Of course a really competitive pilot, in the heat of the battle, might think otherwise (highly competitive people can be that way)!  

In 1996, I watched the Top Guns fly a lot, my plane suffered a structural failure from a previous mishap, and I was more intent on helping my son in his first NATS adventure.  I launched Bob Baron and Ted Fancher for practice flights then WATCHED them fly the maneuvers.  Closely.  I sat and watched Billy, Bob H., Bob G., Paul, Windy etc., etc., and saw all the Top 5 pilots fly numerous practice flights.  And I studied the flights.   If you ever get a chance to do that, you will be surprised and it will make your own flying better.    

Yeah, you DO have to see the bottom of a LOT of "empty fuel jugs", but you had better have someone along who knows the pattern, and how to fly it, when you are burning that fuel.

Big Bear

[Jerry Leuty]

Wow! This is good stuff. Much better, very informative information, than I ever expected. Now my salvating is flowing to attend the Nats. I could fly in Intermediate on Monday then stick around and watch the 'experienced' pilots do it. Last year at VSC we had some winds. Bob Hunt had the last flight of the day. He caught some fairly mild winds as most had not. He did put that Classic through the paces. I felt like I had been spanked. Bob reminded me of the insurance commercial of that time where Charlie Daniels tears up the fiddle then hands it back to the owner and says; "That's how you do it son." We all watched in amazement.

Thanks a heap...............lets go 'git ur dun'

Jerry

[Chris McMillin]

Hey Brett,
You beat me, fair and square. You've always had a killer wingover, mine are too soft. That was a weird year, I always thought the floods brought some stuff out in the air that usually wasn't around because I could never calm down and had nervous funnies in my flying which I usually do not have.
Chris...

[Brett Buck]

That was a weird year, I always thought the floods brought some stuff out in the air that usually wasn't around because I could never calm down and had nervous funnies in my flying which I usually do not have.

   I had exactly the same problem.

     One thing it brought was epic humidity. I know on Sunday morning, I woke up, and it was 88 degrees and *fog*. At 7:30 AM. There's almost no way to stay properly hydrated when its 100 deg and the dew point is in the 80s. It's been pretty bad in Muncie a few times, and over 100 degrees and pretty humid, but never has it been remotely as bad as Lawrenceville in 93.

     I am certain that my problems later in the week were due to dehydration. I wasn't kidding, I lost my vision on the one half of both eyes by Thursday night.  They had fantastic lemonade at the truck over by the entrance to the field but I know I drank about 4 a day and never once had to hit the little blue plastic house until Friday after Top 20 day, when I had forced myself to drink about a quart of water an hour. I have been very careful about that since. 

    Brett

[PJ Rowland]

General Guidelines for Fluid Needs During Exercise in High humidity .

While specific fluid recommendations aren't possible due to individual variability, most athletes can use the following guidelines as a starting point, and modify their fluid needs accordingly.

Hydration Before Exercise

    * Drink about 15-20 fl oz, 2-3 hours before exercise
    * Drink 8-10 fl oz 10-15 min before exercise

Hydration During Exercise

    * Drink 8-10 fl oz every 10-15 min during exercise
    * If exercising longer than 90 minutes, drink 8-10 fl oz of a sports drink (with no more than 8 percent carbohydrate) every 15 - 30 minutes.

Hydration After Exercise

    * Weigh yourself before and after exercise and replace fluid losses.
    * Drink 20-24 fl oz water for every 1 lb lost.
    * Consume a 4:1 ratio of carbohydrate to protein within the 2 hours after exercise to replenish glycogen stores.

[Bill Little]

During summer football practice, each player was required to weigh in and out before/after practice.  If too much body weight % was lost the trainer took over.  In the heat we encounter here (over 100-110 heat index) dehydration is a serious medical problem.  My freshman year at UNC I had a heat stroke, unconscious and core temp 104+ .  My soph year a team mate died of heat stroke.  The bigger linemen would lose 15-20 lbs of water during practice, easily, and all was water weight.  My youngest son spent a summer in football camp at Mesa Community College (he later reported to NCSU instead of playing at Mesa) and the "dry heat" there was dangerous.  You don't "sweat"!  They were told to check their arm pits and crotch for a sign of whether they were losing too much water.  As my coaching career went along we learned that you HAVE to provide water to the players at all times.  The worst that can happen is they will vomit if they get too much water and that is MUCH less serious than a heat stroke.  The medical team had to set certain procedures for individuals who suffered from massive muscle cramps.  It is a problem that was ignored in the early days, when water was denied during practice to "toughen up" the players.  Fortunately, more young players didn't die from the practice.  These days, the players have no "acclimatization" to the heat, A/C present in homes and autos, and no where near as much "outside work", so a young person can succumb to heat problems much quicker.  The NCHSAA set up guidelines that have to be followed as to what the heat index and practice conditions can be for us in North Carolina.  Failure to follow those guidelines means "no leg to stand on" if anything were to happen of a catastrophic manner.

Wasn't told at the time, when I spent the night in the hospital, but was informed many years later, that once you have had any heat related "episode", another one is much easier to occur.  I had a bad problem at Brodak's in '03.  I know that I "HAVE" to drink water when it is hot, and if I am not visiting the porta potty, I better get to the shade, get a few bottles of water, and "chill" for a while.  As I have seen, and almost experienced, heat stroke can kill.  Being in better physical condition, staying hydrated, and slowly building up exposure to high heat indexes, are the only real means of helping combat the heat.

Big Bear

[Jerry Leuty]

   The heat here in north Texas can be brutal as early as May. Every mid June we have a contest in far east Dallas county. Last June just about did most of us in. It seems that most of what we do is in the middle of summer. My g-dad told me once that when you stop sweating get to the shade and get liquid down in you. I have had a couple of heat related instances in my life. One at about age 14 I was out flying. Again about 10 years ago I was out in the middle of the day in east Ft. Worth flying again. We almost blew a head gasket. I told my buddy; "We ain't doin' that again." So now I try and get out early in the morning during the summer and get back into my hobby shop later. There is no sense dying while doing this.

[Jim Pollock]

One more thing -  If you think you can fly pretty good, then watch your model in the air.  There should be no instances of yawing due to precession.  No flopping due to hinging.  The model should appear to nearly stand still and rotate about it's CG when doing the last corner of both triangles.  I learned that last one from Dave Fitz while he was practicing in front of the Japanese team at the '98 Nats.  They were watching as well and every time he did that 3rd corner that way they all were going "AAAHHHH" that's how good it was.  Get used to watching everyone fly exactly in their first track on the second maneuvers.  That's what it takes to just get into the Top 20! 

Good luck,

I might make it back to Muncie sometime.  Tell, Doug, Bob, & the rest of the DFW gang I said hello

Jim Pollock