ACRO E-mail Archive Thread: [Acro] Re: Poll: Do we need a new category be ...
[International Aerobatic Club] [Communications] [Aerobatics Images]
Disclaimer: These aerobatics pages are developed by individual IAC members and do not represent official IAC policy or opinion.
Thread: [Acro] Re: Poll: Do we need a new category be ...
Message: [Acro] Re: Poll: Do we need a new category between Advanced and Unlimited?
Follow-Up To: ACRO Email list (for List Members only)
From: ACCassidy at aol.com
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 12:40:18 UTC
Dear Allan, You have expressed your position very well, and I can fully appreciate the drift of where you want to go. Although I am an IAC member, and have competed occasionally in the US, I tend to have an 'outsider's' view of the IAC and so have other ideas of what perhaps should be the direction of travel. Because I am the UK CIVA Delegate, I am also in a position to make proposals at the the International level and am able to argue for them in the inevitable following debate. I agree that Unlimited has got a lot harder over the last 4 years, since the bonus system was introduced. (We have followed CIVA at UK domestic contests, so have had bonuses since 1998). In 1998 and 1999 I flew a 4-cylinder monoplane (Giles 202). I was the only 200hp aeroplane at both the Worlds in 1998 and the UK Nationals in 1999. The Giles had enough guts, even in density altitudes of 2,800 feet, to fly the abbreviated Free in 1998 Worlds and 1999 Europeans, without performance handicaps. In 1999 I won the UK Nationals in it against a field of 8 or 9 others, all of whom had 300 or 360 hp planes. The people who beat me in those years did so because they had better technique, or better mental focus, than me, not because they had more horsepower. In 2000, a friend of mine was still flying Unlimited, with a 9-figure Free, in an S-1T and making the top half of the field. The UK Nationals is probably at the level of a good North American regional contest, though not as competitive as the US Nationals. Changing from a 15-figure Free to 10 figures sounds like a real problem for a Pitts, but it is nowhere near as difficult as it sounds. This is because there are now lots of new figures in Family 1, Family 7 and Family 8 that are , effectively, two old figures combined. The only figures that cannot be the same as two old figures strung together are the rolling turn, the tailslide and the hammerhead. Just about everything else, for example an old "Family 4" spin and a "Family 1" shark's tooth can now be made into a single figure. With careful design, the only difference between a 15-fig Free and a 10-fig one is the removal of 5 very short bits of high-speed level flight between what used to be separate figures and have now become fewer single figures. You can still build in low-speed, straight and level between figures, where a lot of energy can be restored. So I think your assumption that a short Free will automatically result in you giving away 300 points to a 300hp monoplane is not necessarily a good one. You have the real advantage of flying an aeroplane that you have had for a long time and know very well. Tell you what - send me a copy of your 15-figure Unlimited Free and I'll send you back a 10-figure one that loses less height in the same aeroplane. No charge!!! I am sure it can be done. As Don Peterson says, getting a new category started is gonna be real hard. My personal view is that Unlimited and Advanced should remain the top two categories, as that will enable stability in international nomenclature and regulations. But I also think Advanced could be made more technically challenging (which would also suit your desire and maybe even get you into a Canadian AWAC team!!). It would be a more simple matter to upgrade Advanced by including outward rollers, some selected negative snaps of the more straightforward variety and vanilla tailslides. All this could be done without making any more energy demands on the aircraft. This could also be done Internationally with US and Canadian support to a, for example, UK or French proposal at CIVA. This might well coincide more closely with your idea of a Sporting Unlimited, and would certainly be more challenging for S1S drivers, but could have the added bonus of maintaining commonality between North American aerobatics and those elsewhere in the world. It is in no-ones real interest to have an "isolationist" IAC in an ever-shrinking aerobatic world. Taking things a little further, I think the IAC Intermediate is too simple. I also think Intermediate is the natural home of the -3g aeroplane like a certified S-2A. In the UK, Intermediate is more technical than in IAC, with inside rolling turns, more prolonged but gentle negative and so on. If another category were to be inserted in IAC, I would put it between the current IAC Intermediate and an uprated International Advanced. These discussions on the exploder are always interesting, and worth the effort of sifting through all the casino and 'adult' spam, don't you think? Best wishes Alan Cassidy IAC# 18506 Maidenhead, England