Masters 2005 Options

[Tony Stillman]

A list, as such, already exhists.  It is used in FAI to pick the "finals
Unknown" pattern.

Tony Stillman
Radio South, Inc.
3702 N. Pace Blvd.
Pensacola, Fl 32505
www.radiosouthrc.com
800-962-7802
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tomanek, Wojtek" <tomanekw at saic-abingdon.com>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 3:45 PM
Subject: RE: Masters 2005 Options


> Maybe in the future we can use a three step-process in selecting a new
> schedule for all AMA classes.   It would be very simple.
>
> 1) First lets the publish a list of all center and turnaround
> maneuvers. The list should contain all currently flown maneuvers and
> maneuvers that have been flown in the past.  The pattern community would
be
> asked to propose additional realistic but innovative maneuvers, for
instance
> an avalanche from the top with a snap at the bottom, or a loop with a roll
> at the top - the possibilities are endless
>
> 2) Once a complete list is assembled for a given selection cycle, it
> would be submitted for another membership vote to select the preferred
> maneuvers for each class (401, 402, 403, and 404).
>
> 3) Finally, a committee would assemble these sets of maneuvers into a
> well "flowing" schedules for each class.  (I would expect that the
selection
> process would include field testing by pilots in an appropriate class.
>
> In my opinion, the result will be set of schedules (401, 402, 403, and
404)
> that majority of the pattern community will like because it will contain
the
> most popular maneuvers, although the sequence may be drastically different
> form what we are used to.
>
> I believe that developing a single schedules with appropriate difficulty
and
> interesting maneuvers for everyone is almost impossible because of
enormous
> possibilities of variations that a schedule can be developed, hence there
> will always be more than one opinion of what is better.  As an AMA SIG,
the
> NSRCA would obviously conduct the polling/voting and final schedule
> selection.
>
> Just a proposal,
>
> Wojtek
> NSRCA 1856
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: glenn hatfield [SMTP:randy10926 at comcast.net]
> Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 3:45 PM
> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> Subject: Re: Masters 2005 Options
>
> I second the motion.
> Randy
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Lee Davis <lee at piedmontmodels.com
> <mailto:lee at piedmontmodels.com> >
> Date: Thursday, October 24, 2002 3:33 pm
> Subject: Re: Masters 2005 Options
>
> > I think it is *very* important for NSRCA to provide input
> to AMA > for rules > and flight routines.  It is the one and only voice
for
> Pattern > pilots as a > group.
> >
> > There was an announcement and time given months ago for
> anyone to > submit routines for Masters on this very list.  A number of
them
> > were discussed > right here.
> >
> > If someone wants to submit something else now, have at it,
> it's > your right, > but no one was excluded from the process of the
current
> submission > from NSRCA.
> >
> Ron, perhaps if you bothered to join NSRCA you would see the
> vast > improvements made over the last several years to reach out and >
> promote to > the R/C modeling public at large.  I have the nothing but
> praise > for the > recent administration and staff.  I'm trying to say
> something that > doesn'tcome of as rude or petty, but Monday morning
> quarterbacks > comes to mind.
>
> > It's easy to criticize from the sidelines.
> >
> > Lee Davis
> > Piedmont Models
> > http://www.piedmontmodels.com/
> <http://www.piedmontmodels.com/>
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Williams, Ron" <rwilliams at wilkinson-mfg.com
> <mailto:rwilliams at wilkinson-mfg.com> >
> > To: <discussion at nsrca.org <mailto:discussion at nsrca.org>
> >
> > Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 2:37 PM
> > Subject: RE: Masters 2005 Options
> >
> >
> > > I try to stay out of this type of discussion and
> just fly
> > pattern.  That
> > is why you most likely have never seen my name post here.
> I have
> > followedthis list for several years and could not keep
> quit any
> > longer.  I want to
> > thank Troy for saying publicly what I feel several people
> are saying
> > privately.  I am one of the people who are no longer a
> current
> > member of the
> > NSRCA but do fly pattern, attend several contests a year
> and
> > belong to the
> > AMA.  Troy is correct.  The goal of the NSRCA is to
> promote the
> > future of RC
> > Aerobatics.  This is not what I feel has been the focus
> the last
> > few years.
> > The last time the patterns were changed a back room deal
> was made
> > by the
> > leadership of the NSRCA to change the membership-approved
> > patterns.  The
> > explanation was that it had to be done or it would not
> have
> > passed.  To me
> > this was an insult to anyone flying in that class that our
>
> > leadership agreed
> > with.  There are several times on that comments are made
> on this list
> > stating that people like myself who do not belong to the
> NSRCA
> > should have
> > no say in the future direction.  No wonder people think we
> feel we are
> > better than everyone else.
> > >
> > > I agree with Troy, anyone who belongs to the AMA
> should be able
> > to present
> > a set of maneuvers to the AMA for approval.   The current
> > president of the
> > NSRCA going on a public list chastising this individual
> for doing
> > this is
> > wrong.  We need to promote the hobby to new people not
> promote
> > personalagendas.  Our local area is also growing like Troy
>
> > mentions his is.  I can
> > also tell you that most of them have no idea who the NSRCA
> is or
> > care.  They
> > are AMA members who want to fly aerobatics.  Hopefully the
> NSRCA
> > will soon
> > return to better times and we can begin to promote the
> hobby not
> > try to take
> > it over.  I agree, our future is bright and all the new
> equipment
> > keepsmaking it better.
> > >
> > > This message is not intended to upset anyone or
> is it intended
> > to be a
> > personal attack on anyone.  I hope it does not come across
> as
> > such.  It is
> > just my opinion.
> > >
> > > Ron Williams
> >
> >
> > =====================================
> > # To be removed from this list, send a message to
> > # discussion-request at nsrca.org
> <mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org>
> > # and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
> > #
> >
> >
>
> =====================================
> # To be removed from this list, send a message to #
> discussion-request at nsrca.org <mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org>  # and
> put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
> #
> =====================================
> # To be removed from this list, send a message to
> # discussion-request at nsrca.org
> # and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
> #
>
>


=====================================
# To be removed from this list, send a message to 
# discussion-request at nsrca.org
# and put leave discussion on the first line of the body.
#