Masters 2005 Options

[Verne Koester]

Wojtek,
Sounds great on paper but doesn't work in reality. The key element missing
in this approach is flow. There's lots of neat maneuvers out there to choose
from. The difficult part of schedule building is getting the right mix that
includes a good balance of maneuver types, difficulty level, challenge
considerations, wind direction and flow from one maneuver through the next.
Try assembling a whole schedule and you'll see what I mean. If you REALLY
want a thrashing, post it out here or somewhere for public scrutiny. You'll
need the hide of a rhino to take the abuse <g>.

Verne


----- 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.
#