Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: CIVA Known Proposals for 2014

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    1,342
    Hello Adam,

    Since you raised your hand, I thought that I would mention that out here in internet-land there is some grumbling from folks who draw up candidate flight programs, send them in, do not have any window into the discussion and deliberations of the committee, and are puzzled why their candidate is not picked each year.

    The guidelines in the IAC Policy & Procedures doc are so general that folks are really shooting in the dark when they draw up candidate Known Programs to send in. You might pass on the suggestion that the committee post some better guidelines for the submitters. For example, I know that Sportsman candidates that use figures that end inverted are a no-go. Folks just need more of a clue so that they can participate and help.

    And thanks for your hard work for IAC each year.

    Regards,

    Wes
    N78PS

  2. #12
    cyav8r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by WLIU View Post
    The guidelines in the IAC Policy & Procedures doc are so general that folks are really shooting in the dark when they draw up candidate Known Programs to send in. You might pass on the suggestion that the committee post some better guidelines for the submitters.
    Doesn't look like Adam posts much so I'll take a crack at this one since I've been on the committee a few years now. These are just my observations and nothing official from the Committee, but should give you an idea of what we are looking for. I'll also see if Brian has any ideas for this next summer when he sends out the request for new sequences.

    In general the same ideas floating around for a good free program design, apply to the Knowns as well. What people sometimes forget is it needs to be flyable and safe for more than just what's sitting in their own hanger.

    The first thing the Committee focuses on is providing a safe sequence for all pilots in the category. Second, any Known sequence should be flyable in the reference aircraft (Citabria w/o inverted systems for Sportsman, and the Great Lakes for Intermediate), in reasonable winds, without requiring a break for altitude, energy, or the boundaries.

    Common problems I’ve seen in submitted candidate Known sequences in rough order of occurrence:


    • Sequence will not fit in the box (vertical and/or lateral limits). Typically due to excessive altitude loss (i.e. putting a spin too late in a sequence) or downwind figure combinations (i.e. 2 downwind 45s back to back).
    • Figures not flyable in reference aircraft (i.e. inverted figure exits in Sportsman)
    • Sequence flow does not provide the energy needed for subsequent figure(s) to be flown without a break (i.e. an Immelmann followed by a Hammerhead)
    • Safety issues (i.e. high GLOC potential, high-speed snaps)
    • Figure cadence (i.e. long (boring) level-line segments between figures for proper figure placement)
    • Figures flown the wrong way for the wind (i.e. downwind loops or downwind spin entries)
    • Figures cannot be properly judged (i.e. a cross-box loop)


    Avoid the pitfalls listed above and you have a good shot at getting your sequence past the committee and sent on to the full board for consideration and approval.

    We see the same type of issues with submitted Unknowns as well, so the problem is not limited to the submitted Knowns. However the Known sequences for a given year are flown at every contest all year long, and so we owe our members something safe and fair to all the competitors.

    Paul

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    1,342
    Paul,

    Thanks for the info. One problem that I think may exist for folks trying to compose candidate flight programs is that we have a generation of pilots who have never flown a Citabria and maybe never seen a Great Lakes in the flesh. Or to put it another way, they have never flown acro in an aircraft without and inverted system. So when they see that the Citabria is the reference aircraft for Sportsman, that statement carries no information. Likely a generational factor, but when trying to communicate performance information, its important.

    The posts out on the internet that I see suggest that IAC members want to participate, they just need some more guidance.

    Thanks for you work on the committee.

    Wes

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •