I am disappointed when you go to a major
contest like the NATS and they do a Mickey Mouse runway landing task.
IMHO, the Nats landing task is a fair, yet challenging task, especially if
done without skegs and/or sharks teeth.
Regards,
Bob Johnson
Fond du Lac, WI
RCSE-List facilities provided
]
To: Jack Womack [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [RCSE] Devaluing landings
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 20:50:17 -0500
I was at a contest once where landings didn't count and everyone who made
their times just flew across the field and push down elevator at zero.
Instead of devaluing
Womack; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [RCSE] Devaluing landings
I was at a contest once where landings didn't count and everyone who made
their times just flew across the field and push down elevator at zero.
Instead of devaluing landings I think the landing tasks should be made
tougher
At 09:41 PM 2/7/02 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The F5J group is on to something by doing the launches with electric
motors. The rules are still in evolution, but the end result will hopefully
be a test of soaring skill rather than motor power.
I have always wondered why sailplane clubs
How about zero points for dorked landings?
From: Jack Womack [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [RCSE] Devaluing landings
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 15:54:23 -0800 (PST)
First, I have to agree that the same guys are going to
be winning anyway...well, most of the time. Landing is
part
On 2/7/02 4:01 PM, Andy Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How about zero points for dorked landings?
Please define a dorked landing and describe exactly how that would be
judged.
We already get a zero for lost parts, so it can't be that.
~~
Bill Malvey
Ladera
6 matches
Mail list logo
