Masters 2005 Options
George Kennie
geobet at gis.net
Thu Oct 24 16:08:07 AKDT 2002
Sounds doable to me, Wojtek.
Tomanek, Wojtek wrote:
> 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.
#
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list