Quandry over the vertical 8

OK. What is the deal with the vertical 8. Looking at the digram and description on the manuever here in Len's modern pattern. It says the vertical 8 is to be started at 45 degrees from inverted flight. You do the bottom ouside loop and then progress to the top inside loop.

Well yestrerday speaking to someone on the phone they said that it was wrong. That all 8's in the pattern start with an 1 and a half inside loops and progress form there. That would mean the vertical 8 would start at the bottom from normal flight and 1 and a half loops to the outside loop at the top.

Can any of the pattern experts clarify this once and for all? Or is this guy who competes in intermediate (Supposedly knowing the correct way to do the pattern) doing the vertical 8 wrong.

Fix that to be bottom inside loop and top outside. The thing is that IF all 8's have to start with a full loop then the airplane ends up in the wrong place in the bottom inside loop to start the top outside loop.

IE the normal 8 you do a inside loop and a half to go into the outside part of the 8. If you had to do the same for the vertical you would end up at the bottom of the inside loop after a loop and a half if starting at 45.

So do or do not all 8's have to start with a full inside loop?

Oh and while I am at it, How do you transition to inverted flight to do the vertical 8. At the close of your inside loops you add a half a loop to transition to inverted flight for the inverted manuever.

But the manuever before the vertical 8 is the square 8 and that one ends in normal flight. Do you do 2 laps the go inverted and then directly into the vertical 8?

LAST EDITED ON Aug-08-02 AT 07:48 PM (CDT)

I thought we went all over it before, at Flight Lines. Normal entry requires an inside half loop to reach the inverted intersection, and thus I'd expect another inside half loop at exit as well (and I haven't performed that type in next best to forever, I don't think).

P.S. I was right. Same descriptions in http://www.flightlines.com/forum/Forum6/HTML/001388.html

at the other forum.

The K.

>Oh and while I am at
>it, How do you transition
>to inverted flight to do
>the vertical 8. At the
>close of your inside loops
>you add a half a
>loop to transition to inverted
>flight for the inverted manuever.
>
>
>But the manuever before the vertical
>8 is the square 8
>and that one ends in
>normal flight. Do you do
>2 laps the go inverted
>and then directly into the
>vertical 8?

This was answered before, but once more, and hopefully forever...

The *judged* portion of the maneuver begins inverted in the intersection. Then you do a complete inside round loop, winding up inverted at 45 degrees again. Then a complete outside round loop, going to right overhead, and then back to inverted in the intersection again. That's one complete 8. Repeat, and the *judged* portion of the maneuver is complete. The judge should give you maneuver points for how well you do this, and this only.

HOWEVER, the rule book specifies an entrance and exit as well. Don't do these substantially as described and you lose pattern points. The specified entrance is to do a half-inside loop starting in upright level flight to enter, and a half inside loop terminating at upright level flight to exit. Therefore, you can't fly around inverted at 45 degrees, and dive into the lower, inside, loop from 45 degree inverted flight, NOR can you recover by flying out inverted level at 45 degrees. If you do, the judges should apply points for how well you execute the maneuver, but you will lose your pattern points.

In real life, it's really a lot easier to do a nice half-loop entrance than anything else, because it's a lot easier to find both downwind and the 45 degree that way. From an energy-mamagement standpoint, it's a wash, for the most part.

So the description and the diagram is wrong in the modern pattern section here? As it specificaly states that the vertical 8 is to be started from inverted flight. If the opening indside loop and a half is counted as part of the manuever then the manuever description should read like the description of the regular 8 except for the orientation to be on the vertical plane.

Thanks Brett,

This cleared up a whole lot. It seems that I was confused about the entry and the exit to this manuever. Now that I know it is a half in from normal and a half out to normal, the entire manuever makes sense.

Unfortunately the description of the moden pattern here on the site is kind of vague about some of the entry and exit parts to the manuevers. On the vertical 8 it is not even mentioned at all.
So the judging is applied to the manuever after the opening half to inverted and terminated just before the half at the exit. With two full insides and outsides done.

>Thanks Brett,
>
>Unfortunately the description of the moden
>pattern here on the site
>is kind of vague about
>some of the entry and
>exit parts to the manuevers.
>On the vertical 8 it
>is not even mentioned at
>all.

Hi Peter,

The SSW description of the "modern pattern" for the vertical eight is the same as in the AMA rule book. The diagram is basically the same. I think you should look at that diagram again (the one here in SSW). It shows the start point and the end point for what is judged for the vertical eight as Brett described.

>So the judging is applied to
>the manuever after the opening
>half to inverted and terminated
>just before the half at
>the exit. With two full
>insides and outsides done.

I think you have it!

I also think that the description makes it sound more difficult than it really is. More simply, from level flight, do 1.5 inside loops, do the top outside to complete first eight, do another inside for the bottom of the second eight, do another outside to complete the the second eight, then do a half inside to recover from the maneuver. And as Brett explained, even though the half loops for the entry and exit are not judged, they must be accomplished this way or else patten points will be lost.

Once again, tradition trumps the rules.

Peter, as described above, fly the entry as a half loop, then do the two eights, then finish with an immediate half loop exit to level flight.

As you noticed, that is not the maneuver described in the book. There is NO description of the entry. The only indication is a dotted line in the diagram, definitely not on the same track as the eight. The strict constructionists would say this means the half loop entry has to be immediately prior to the start of the eight in order to get pattern points. If anyone calls you on that, point out that the dotted line shows the plane starting the entry half loop off the track of the eight and also shows some inverted flight before the entry. Do that only if you want to start an argument.

I've never met a judge who evaluated the maneuvers as described. EVERYBODY judges the pattern as "deviation from an ideal line" starting from take off and ending when the models rolls to a stop. The only allowance is the number of laps between maneuvers can be increased without penalty.

>Once again, tradition trumps the rules.

That comment was as untrue as it was unecessary.
>
>
>Peter, as described above, fly the
>entry as a half loop,
>then do the two eights,
>then finish with an immediate
>half loop exit to level
>flight.
>
>As you noticed, that is not
>the maneuver described in the
>book. There is NO
>description of the entry.

I am sorry but that is completely out of line! Brett stated the correct (read that to mean by the rule book) way to do the vertical 8.

Paragraph 11, page 51 "...entering or exiting a maneuver in any way other than is illustrated in the maneuver section, and doing an incomplete maneuver all will result in a loss of pattern points."

The text and the illustration on page 54 shows the entry and exit for this maneuver:

13.11. Vertical Eights (Two (2) required).
Vertical eights are to be started at the point of 45
degrees elevation and finished at the same point in
inverted flight. The inside loop must be flown first.

[photo not recovered: 3d53fba6222ca5a1.jpg]

>The only indication is a
>dotted line in the diagram,
>definitely not on the same
>track as the eight.
>The strict constructionists would say
>this means the half
>loop entry has to be
>immediately prior to the start
>of the eight in order
>to get pattern points.
>If anyone calls you on
>that, point out that the
>dotted line shows the plane
>starting the entry half loop
>off the track of the
>eight and also shows some
>inverted flight before the entry.
> Do that only if
>you want to start an
>argument.
>
>I've never met a judge who
>evaluated the maneuvers as described.
> EVERYBODY judges the pattern
>as "deviation from an ideal
>line" starting from take off
>and ending when the models
>rolls to a stop.

It is completely off-base comments like that that causes judges to quit because the pay isn't good enough to take that type of abuse.

I am really sick of people criticizing judges, making generalizations, and believing that they know what is in the mind of a judge. As a judge, and speaking on behalf of most of the judges that I know, we follow the rule book to the best of our ability. I ALWAYS have my rule book with me when I judge.

I start judging at the center of the first loop. I don't give a rat's rear-end about the way you get there or the way you get out, as long as you are reasonable about it. Don't expect me to not notice that you did a complete lap inverted before you started the maneuver. That is NOT by the book.

>The only allowance is the
>number of laps between maneuvers
>can be increased without penalty.
>

I don't know whether you judge or not and I don't care. All I know that I resent being characterized as a person that gives less than 100% in giving the contestants the most fair and consistant judging that I can.

I don't believe in the "halo" affect. I believe that a 40 point maneuver is a 40 point maneuver regardless of whether the flier is a beginner or an expert. I also know that the majority of the people that I judge at a contest are truely appreciative of my efforts and the few that have nothing good to say about judges really don't matter.

Ed Culver

By the way - even knowing how you feel about judges, I would still judge your flights to the best of my ability... It is an integrity thing.

Peter,

I know you are on a budget, but (at the risk of sounding like a salesman for Windy), I can't think of a better way to solve all of your interpretation difficulites than to watch one of Windy's Nationals videos. The 2001 Nats tape, for example, is nothing but flight after flight by Fancher, Fitzgerald, Werewage, et all, all taken from an angle that lets you see every move of each stunt. Of course, the added benefit is that you can run them slow and watch every part of each maneuver. A picture is worth a thousand words, so these videos clear up all misconceptions.

Also, with a careful eye you will see the variations in technique of each flyer and even the mistakes. If you have a few spare dollars, these tapes will help.

Right HERE, on Leonard's fine site, you can find the official description of the V8, with a nice 3D drawing of it, and guides for judging it:

http://www.clstunt.com/pattern.htm#verts

I guess I don't quite understand what the confusion is about it.

One thing I have to admit that confused me about the drawing on Len's site, as opposed to the one shown above in Ed's post, is that the maneuver is shown from the perspective of the judge, not the flier, and I didn't notice that until after seeing the drawing Ed posted. I have to admit, I haven't paid much attention to these things yet, as I've only recently progressed from level flight and sometimes-loops to comfortable loops and lazy-8's, but I'm going to start studying this stuff now, and hope to progress in the next year or so. I can certainly see how it can be confusing when one is first learning the pattern, and it points up the extreme value of having a good coach.

The dotted line is in track with the flown line but is shown off set so you can visualize it. No way to do three dimensions in two dimensional graphics. The dotted line shows entry and exit to a maneuver. Been this way since the 50's.

>Once again, tradition trumps the rules.

>As you noticed, that is not
>the maneuver described in the
>book. There is NO
>description of the entry.
>The only indication is a
>dotted line in the diagram,
>definitely not on the same
>track as the eight.
>The strict constructionists would say
>this means the half
>loop entry has to be
>immediately prior to the start
>of the eight in order
>to get pattern points.
>If anyone calls you on
>that, point out that the
>dotted line shows the plane
>starting the entry half loop
>off the track of the
>eight and also shows some
>inverted flight before the entry.

I fail to see any point you might be trying to make. The diagram seems pretty unambiguous.

I remember watching Windy fly in person, many time when I was living back up north. Used to see Vic Macaluso, Windy, Tom Lee, and most of the other NE experts over the years.

At the time I was not even remotely serious about pattern flying so I never really scrutinized the flights. I was just doing any manuever at any order without too much concern for the rule book. Thats what sport flying is all about.

Now 35 years later I am toying with the idea of entering a contest or two. (Still not sure I want to compete seriously) I figured that I'd get the proper way of doing things down.

As there is only one CL competition in FLA it will be a once a year thing for now.

This is the one I was talking about. Notice it makes no mention on how to enter or exit the manuever. It just indicates inverted flight entry and does not address the exit. One would believe the plane should be flying inverted before starting the manuever.

This was what was confusing me.

I was practicing this by turning the plane inverted flying a lap or so and then entering the manuever from the inverted position. This is wrong but the description does not help with figureing this out.

Tim McT wrote:"....is that the maneuver is shown from the perspective of the judge, not the flier, and I didn't notice that until after seeing the drawing Ed posted." Tim, the judges and flier see the maneuver from the same direction, tho the vantage point is roughly line length (CL to CL) plus 15'-20' or so, farther away, that is if the flier is placing the maneuvers down wind as desired, and the judges are placed upwind as desired. When the wind speed gets low, it shifts constantly with thermal activity, making judges scramble to maintain an upwind viewing position. The flier may feel the wind direction is different than the judges feel, with about 75' to 85' difference in location. The model may perceive the wind direction to be different than either judges or flier Steve

Well, okay, because of my ignorance I didn't phrase it correctly. What I meant was that in the drawing on Len's site, the perspective is from outside the circle, with the plane between the observer and the flier. In the drawing posted by Ed, the perspective is from inside the circle, as what the flier would see from his vantage point. The two are mirror images of each other. It's even clearer since the drawing on Len's site is drawn as superimposed on a hemisphere, to show the perspective and how the maneuver really looks. You can see that you're standing outside the circle looking at the maneuver, so it would have to be backwards from what the pilot sees. That's what I was getting at - I was expecting that the diagram would be from the perspective of the pilot.

Peter,

The reason I suggested the video is that it is natural for most people to learn manipulative skills much faster by observing actual operations than by reading or being told. All people learn in three ways: reading, watching or doing, and we all have a natural preference for one over the others. When I was first learning to fly acrobatics in full-scale airplanes I found that I could usually read or hear a maneuver decription and then go fly it fairly succesfully. Later when I ran my own business, I was stunned to discover that one of the brightest students at our flight school (a real 'golden hands') couldn't even visualize something simple like a chandelle without seeing it demonstrated. Thats why so many pilots start 'flying' their hands whenver they are trying to discuss maneuvers.

Now, after thirty years as an aerospace educator and public school teacher I have no doubt that drawings and words are often the poorest forms of teaching manipulative skills. I have taught thousands of students in several aviation disciplines, everything from how to overhaul a jet engine to how to read a weather map, and it is my standard routine to always follow lecture with demonstration, then allow immediate hands-on. For flying the pattern, a video is almost as good as a coach.

Windy ends most of his videos saying "share this with a friend", so if you'd like, I'd be glad to loan you the 2001 Nats video. I know you are a little strapped financially right now, so I'd be happy to help out by sending it to you.

My apologies for overgeneralizing. In addition to judging many patterns I've talked to 50-100 judges and many contestants. They all seemed to hold to the view that the model should be judged by how closely it follows an ideal line as opposed to the tolerances tolerances spec'd in the descriptions. If you subscribe to the "ideal line" there are no 40 pt maneuvers, while if you hold to the "tolerances" point of view quite a few of the top flyers routinely make 40 pointers. That seemed like a big enough sample, but I guess it's not EVERYBODY.

Actually the maneuver looks quite nice if the entry and exit half loops are 45-60 deg. away from the maneuver axis. That also fits the dotted line "description" in the diagram as well as anything. But try it sometime! The judges will have fits because it isn't what they are used to.

>Actually the maneuver looks quite nice
>if the entry and exit
>half loops are 45-60 deg.
>away from the maneuver axis.
> That also fits the
>dotted line "description" in the
>diagram as well as anything.
> But try it sometime!
> The judges will have
>fits because it isn't what
>they are used to.

I think the dotted line "description" in the diagram is shown away from the actual bottom loop just to distinguish it and show that it is not a part of the judged maneuver. I think the intent is to show that you do a loop and a half, but the first half loop is not judged. It is expected to follow the "line" however, even though it is not judged for accuracy. If you get it accurate, however, you are well on your way to complete the next full loop accurately. Obviously too high or too low will be wrong, but if it is not round going up, you will probably not be able to complete a round loop following it.

The last half loop is simply exit, but if it follows the line, that would be the intent, even though it is not to be judged.

I always had a very good visualization of the maneuvers when these overhead 45 off diagrams were used in the rulebook.It made sense to me, as a child even, because we fly in a hemisphere and those sraight on veiws used nowadays aren't as intuitive to me.Anyone know when and why they were changed?Did anyone else like them better?
Chris...

I have not read all the responses.

In the early '50s, the o'head 8 could be done any one of several ways. They all counted.

Nowadays, it seems that the OTS judges require the overhead 8 to be entered at 45 deg over the left shoulder, with the inside loop first. So I do that now, with good results.

I have scored high in past years with the o'head 8 entered from a vertical climb to top and either the inside or outside loop done first. (usually outside first)

We certainly need clarification on this. Right now, judges seem to prefer an entry at 45 deg over the left shoulder.

Either way, the track in the sky is an "8".

The overhead 8 in OTS is, in my opinion, not a clearcut matter. Others think it is. This is something to get defined at the pilot's meeting. In OTS there is no question that the vertical 8 can be flow any one of 8 different ways, although it cannot be entered from the top of the circle. Personally, I'm like most, I just looked at the OTS diagrams and fly the maneuvers that way, regardless of other legal options.