Paul's DQ flight

[bob whitney]

 with about 50% of the flyers in dst 5 going Electric and me thinking about getting more into helping running some of the events .i would like to know more about what Paul did or didnt do to get DQ'd

[Bob Hunt]

It's simple, Bob. Just have the judges watch the flier after he/she lands and have them be certain that the handle and safety thong does not leave the flier's hand prior to the helper/retriever disarming the model. This should be a part of all electric flier's routines. I was warned about this at a Nationals some years ago, and have made it a part of the flight to just hold the handle still after landing until my helper has reached the model and disarmed it.

But, hey, we all forget sometimes...

Later - Bob

[frank mccune]

     Did the safety thong ever leave his body or did it remain attached to his person?

     Tia,

      Frank McCune

[Dave Rigotti]

I gotta believe someone has a video of his flight that MAY show what happened......

[Brett Buck]

I don't think there is any question what happened, Paul described it. Safety thongs don't matter once the airplane has stopped, he switched hands with the handle, but he was always holding it.

    That is legal according to the published rule, and no problem. When the rule was written, any references to safety thongs was intentionally omitted to permit exactly what he did, or to permit handing your handle to your helper so the pilot could go disarm the airplane.


       The only question remaining, in my mind, is that are the NATs  briefing an additional restriction about switching hands.

     Brett

[Jerry Eichten]

Thank you to those who've contributed information and thoughts on this topic.  At the risk of dragging out the discussion, for me there is still an unanswered question of how the interpretation came about that resulted in a 0 score.

Others may be curious too since what happens at our national championship can influence decisions at other contests.  Like many stunt fliers, I judge occasionally and am still a contest director. While its unlikely I'll attend the nationals anytime soon I do make some effort at knowing what the current rules are and generally try to understand what's going on with the sport at our local and regional level. I'm not saying the nats decision is right or wrong.  What I'm hoping for is more context that can help explain the process.

So if I'm ever a local contest official when someone approaches and says "Joe Blow passed his handle! He's DQed! That's what they did at the Nats!" I'll have a clue.

Thank you - Jerry
 

[john e. holliday]

As this is all history now and He got beat by 1 1/2 point the score he would have got wouldn't have made a difference.   Maybe this made him try harder.  Congrats to all five of the finalists.

[FLOYD CARTER]

At that level of competition, there is no possible  issue as "try harder".  These people are already at 100%  (BTW:  by definition, there is no such thing as "110%")

[Dennis Toth]

I think Paul gave a pretty good description of what the happened and why he did not contest it. The thing that is unanswered is was this brought up by the head judge or CD at the pilots meeting. As has been pointed out this sets a president that could impact local contests so it would be good to have someone who was there and listening to jump in here and explain if it was address or if not what was the bases for the ruling.

Best,   DennisT

[bob whitney]

where can i find Paul's responce

[EricV]

Back in the same Nats Finals thread where Keith first brought it up:

I had finished my flight. The plane was at a complete stop. I was waiting for Bob to pull the arming plug. I thought I saw him bend over to pull it so I switched hands. At no point was there no hand on the handle. Once in my left hand, I slipped my hand out of the safety thong.  I looked up to see Bob had stood up before pulling the plug. At that moment there was a judge watching me.

As we walked the plane back in the judges grouped together for a conference. I knew what was about to happen.

The tabulators didn't need to add the scores. So I did. Being first up made me think it was unnecessary, but I did anyway.  It was a 568.

If it would have made a difference, I would have waited until I was done flying and then filed a protest. The plane was never "non restrained". But, it didn't matter.

[Doug Moon]

Just to add some more fodder to the cannon, the flight was not actually a DQ.  It is scored a foul and no points are awarded.  The contestant can continue in the contest and fly the next rounds as needed.  If the contestant were Disqualified he would be removed from the contest and the premises. It is very hard to get disqualified. You basically have to willfully put people in harms way in an excessive and meaningful manner.  I don't know why I needed to state this but I just thought I would.

If the fliers plane is restrained at all times then I don't see the problem.  The rule could be simplified to make this the normal way so there is no arbitrary way it HAS to be done.  It just has to be restrained everyone is safe and that is the intent of the rule.

[Ken Culbertson]

I would really like more information before weighing in but it doesn't seem to be forthcoming.  We need to hear from a judge or someone who was in that meeting as to why.  When it is unclear whether or not a rule was broken because it was unclear, you always err on the side of the person "breaking" the rule then move to clarify for the future.  The letter of a rule should never override the intent.  I have seen first hand in other disciplines what nit-picking can do to competition.  Paul did exactly the right thing.  I am not sure I could have kept my cool like he did.  Maybe we need an Arming Plug signal to the judges.  The guy that normally launches me at contests does that, now I know why.

Ken

[Dennis Toth]

Ken, agree we need a clear answer. What seems to be the issue is the idea that the pilot needs to keep the thong on until the power is dis-armed, even though the rules allow the handle to be handed to an assistant, once the aircraft comes to a complete stop while the pilot dis-arms the power without the need to engaged the thong.

Best,   DennisT

[jerry v]

In RC the helper makes a visible sign to the pilot about turning off Rx, so the pilot can turn off Tx.
In electric CL the helper can make a sign/sound for the judges and the pilot about disarming the model.
If the pilot prefers to disarm his model by himself then he can drop the handle as soon as the helper securely restrained the model and holds it until the pilot disarms it and makes a visible/audible signal to the judges about it.

US Nats participants are the best of the best, the elite of the stunt community. They are supposed to be examples and role models for the rest of the world. Of course, we are humans, everybody can make mistakes. But any precedent creates confusion and has to be explained clearly and fixed properly.

Jerry

[Brett Buck]

The rule could be simplified to make this the normal way ....

This is what it says:


The model shall be restrained at all times while the system is armed, either by the pilot (including holding the handle before, during, or after an official flight), an assistant, or mechanical restraint device (e.g. stooge).
 

Emphasis added.

    It says, explicitly, that holding the handle after the flight is considered to be "restrained". There is nothing to interpret, it says it literally and it is unambiguous. If it is unambiguous, "interpretation" is not permitted, and I can't see how to make it any simpler. It was written that way on purpose to permit what appears to have happened. It's not tricky, it's not subtle (to be understood only after years of careful study), it's not intended to "catch" people over technicalities.

    My guess is that they hold to a different standard at the NATS, based on the fact that before this rule was written into the rule book, they had an agreement about removing the safety thong before the airplane was disarmed. What appears to have happened is that they enforced this prior agreement. This is fine if that was made clear at the pilots meeting - which I admit I didn't pay much attention to. If that is the standard at the NATS, then do that at the NATS.

     It doesn't form a "precedent", if not otherwise noted, the rule as written is the rule, it says holding the handle is OK, so it's OK. If that is not acceptable, then someone can modify it to include safety thongs or switching hands, and until then, add whatever you want to your sanction papers.

     Brett