The MASTERS 2005 PROPOSED ROUTINE THAT YOU VOTED FOR.

[Del Rykert]

So going to an electronic version isn't an effort to reduce costs also? Many
of the people that I know that come from the blue collar work force do not
have easy access to a computer. Some refuse to get caught up in the ongoing
expense and battle to keep it working properly. I do agree it would be nice
to have timely information available. Would be great if CD's could post the
results of pilots placing in last round that is normally not posted at end
of contests I attend. From what I have read it isn't going to appreciably
save the NSRCA much money unless they reduce the number of issues per year.
I have seen the organization do many changes over the last 25 years and all
have not been for the good of promoting the sport of precision aerobatics.
If many keep wanting to have increased participation and attendance then a
return to simpler times is also required. I can show you pictures of contest
that are still in existence today that had over 4 times the attendance from
what we see now. We can't keep raising the bar of difficulty and
expectations of the competitors without losing some that don't have the time
our resources to handle the demands. I don't see how going to electronic
version is going to keep the K-Factor going in a more timely fashion in the
people doing the work have the same issues that has been keeping the current
paper version from being distributed in a timely fashion. Count me ignorant
as I have not been told or read what the problem have been with the lack of
paper copies. If someone can prove to me that by going to the electronic
version is going to magically address these issues then I am all for it.

     Del K. Rykert
     AMA - 8928
     NSRCA - 473
     Kb2joi - General

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tomanek, Wojtek" <tomanekw at saic-abingdon.com>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 7:25 AM
Subject: RE: The MASTERS 2005 PROPOSED ROUTINE THAT YOU VOTED FOR.


> RE:  "I'm the big loser of course"
>
> As outlined by Eric in his proposal, the paper copies of the K-Factor will
> still be available to those that like or prefer that.
>
> However, the issue is bigger than the question if we get mailed a paper
copy
> or an electronic one via e-mail.  The issue is of what is the best way to
> disseminate timely information about current events, contest, district
> pilots, engine information, trimming, construction, latest trends,
judging,
> vendors, world trends (FAI), etc., to the current NSRCA members and
> especially to the new pattern pilots and hopefully future NSRCA members.
> For instance, the AMA publication is very nice but you get to read about
an
> event approximately 5 or 6 months after it has taken place - although it
has
> a nice paper and format like a real magazine <G>.
>
> The more people we can reach and get interested the better it will be for
> all of us in the pattern community.  Just having a website has been a
great
> improvement.  Sporadically I get questions at the local fields "how do I
> find out more about the pattern or where could I get a pattern plane?"  It
> is so much easier and more effective to refer someone to a website for
> majority of the well presented info.  I do not mind to answer the
questions
> of the potential new comers but they get more by reading the website, and
> for those that do not have access I do carry a copy of a K-Factor
> (especially for names and phone numbers of vendors).  Let's not be selfish
> of what is better for an individual, let's take a look of what is the
> ultimate goal here for the entire pattern community, its future, and how
to
> attract new pilots.  An electronic format (which can be printed by the
way)
> can be instantaneously distributed to many more folks here and other
> countries.  Fixed number of hard copies or publishing every two or three
> months is not the answer.
>
> The goal for the pattern community is to have more people at the local
> contests not less, and to improve our sport/hobby/interests (depending on
> the point of view).  Also, a side benefit of having more people at the
local
> contest will be having more qualified judges - I am sure that this will be
a
> welcome thing to the CDs and other contestants so everyone will be
anything
> but the "big loser of course."
>
> An electronic format is just a tool, and it is not going to go away, it
will
> only get bigger - now let's make sure that we all contribute to content of
> our K-Factor in this new format.
>
> Ok, this is long enough.
>
> Wojtek
> NSRCA 1856
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Del Rykert [SMTP:drykert at rochester.rr.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 11:53 PM
> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> Subject: Re: The MASTERS 2005 PROPOSED ROUTINE THAT YOU VOTED
> FOR.
>
> When I look at what the K-Factor used to be (1 folded 8 x 11 page)
> and what we have now when we get it, makes me smile. The lack of being
> timely does bother me immensely. I thought dividing up the chores of
> producing it was going to solve that problem. Going electronic does have
> some financial advantages but I go long periods of time without having
> access to a computer. I can grab my mail on the way out the door and still
> get to read and digest at work. Going electronic is not better for me. I
may
> be in the minority on this part. It gets discouraging when I have 150 to
200
> messages waiting for me next time I sign on. If adding electronic K factor
> adds to that load then something will give. I fear it will be my reading
the
> k-factor or only glimpsing as my district. I'm the big loser of course but
> please remember many of us do have puters but we don't have them at work
and
> or life's hectic schedule doesn't allow timely access to blurbs and
notices.
> Can I justify paying double of price to read the throne variety. I'm not
> certain.
>
> Del K. Rykert
> AMA - 8928
> NSRCA - 473
> Kb2joi - General
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Henderson,Eric" <eric.henderson at gartner.com
> <mailto:eric.henderson at gartner.com> >
> To: <discussion at nsrca.org <mailto:discussion at nsrca.org> >
> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 11:23 AM
> Subject: RE: The MASTERS 2005 PROPOSED ROUTINE THAT YOU VOTED
> FOR.
>
>
> Any K Factor rating experts out there, please wade in..
> Eric.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tomanek, Wojtek [mailto:tomanekw at saic-abingdon.com]
> <mailto:[mailto:tomanekw at saic-abingdon.com]>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 2:21 PM
> To: 'discussion at nsrca.org'
> Subject: RE: The MASTERS 2005 PROPOSED ROUTINE THAT YOU VOTED
> FOR.
>
>
> Should the maneuver # 9  (9. Half Inside Loop, 2/4 on exit K=1) be
> rated K=2, comparing to an Immelman which is K=2?
> WKT
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henderson,Eric [SMTP:eric.henderson at gartner.com]
> <mailto:[SMTP:eric.henderson at gartner.com]>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 12:27 PM
> To: Discussion at Nsrca <mailto:Discussion at Nsrca> . Org
> Subject: The MASTERS 2005 PROPOSED ROUTINE THAT YOU VOTED
> FOR.
>
> 2005 Masters proposal.
> 1. Takeoff (U) K=1
> 2. Stall Turn 1 ¼ Rolls Up, ¾ Roll Down, Exit Inverted (U) K=4
> 3. Half Outside, 2/4 K=2
> 4. Reverse Avalanche with 1 positive snap @ Bottom (D) K=4
> 5. ½ loop with full Roll Out K=2
> 6. 45 degree Pyramid Loop with Half Rolls (U) K=4
> 7. Humpty Bump, ¼  Roll Up, ¾ Roll Down  K=3
> 8. Quarter, Half, Quarter Roll (D) K=4
> 9. Half Inside Loop, 2/4 on exit
> K=1
> 10. Square Eight from the Middle, Pilot's Option (U)
> K=4
> 11. Figure nine - pull loop first, ½ roll down
> K=3
> 12. Slow Roll (D) K=3
> 13. Pull-Push Humpty Bump with Pilot's Option  K=2
> 14. Square Loop with 2/4 Rolls on all side (U) K=5
> 15. Stall Turn With Half Rolls K=2
> 16. Inside-Outside Diamond Eight with Full Rolls (D)
> K=5
> 17. Immelmann Turn K=2
>
>
> 18. 45 Degree Down, Positive Snap Roll (U) K=3
> 19. Top Hat with ¾ Roll Up, ¼ Roll Down, Exit Upright K=3
> 20. Knife-edge to knife-edge (D) K=4
> 21. Half Square Loop with ½  Roll Up K=2
> 22. Spin, 2 ½ Turns, Half Roll Out, Exit Upright (U) K=4
> 23. Landing (U)  K=1
>
>
> ====================================# 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 <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.
#