FAI F3AL---Pattern IMAC combined

[Terry Brox]

I flew at the first contest and can say I enjoyed it and learned alot. Some
interesting comments I hear though, from a few of the IMAC guys: "These
pattern guys are judging too harsh". "Those pattern guys are smooth". "These
guys fly the same schedule for 4 years?" "Where is your cockpit?" "I have
never given so many 10's at a contest in my life." All made by IMAC flyers
at this contest. I can say with certainty that I enjoyed the contest a lot.
First of all, I never received so many 10's. And I learned a lot. The IMAC
guys and the pattern guys got along great, and of course teased each other.
It was a great time and I will not hessitate to go again provided work
doesnt interfere. Troy and Bruce did an incredible job along with Jim
McManus who helped to coordinate the IMAC portion (if I got the right name).
I believe Jim gave a report the Troy put in the K Factor when Troy was AVP
for Dist. 6. Just my positive experience. However, I would not care to see
the 2 combined beyond what was done at this contest. Good Night, Terry
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Troy Newman" <troy_newman at msn.com>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 1:50 PM
Subject: Re: FAI F3AL---Pattern IMAC combined


> I would say the answer is no!...but on the other hand the way we ran
it...it
> was a round of pattern then a round of IMAC the pattern flyers judged the
> IMAC guys and vice versa...so no the two different models were not in the
> air at the same time.
>
> Nor would they need to be in the air at the same time...routine situation
is
> F3A and Masters don't fly at the same time. So why would IMAC and pattern
> need to fly at the same time...by the way we ended at a decent time of day
> on Sunday completed 5 rounds and held a Free-style event that was open to
> both Pattern and IMAC pilots....with the pattern and or IMAC models.
>
>
> Worked very well.
>
> Troy
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Tony Stillman" <tony at radiosouthrc.com>
> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 1:28 PM
> Subject: Re: FAI F3AL---Pattern IMAC combined
>
>
> > Isn't there a much bigger risk of mid-airs when you have a giant scale
> > airplane in the same "box" as an F3A model?
> >
> > Tony Stillman
> > Radio South
> > 3702 N. Pace Blvd.
> > Pensacola, FL 32505
> > 1-800-962-7802
> > www.radiosouthrc.com
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Marty Pizzitola" <aerobatx at bellsouth.net>
> > To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 2:23 PM
> > Subject: Re: FAI F3AL---Pattern IMAC combined
> >
> >
> > > IMAC and Pattern are 2 completely different flying styles. To hae a
> > contest
> > > like Try was talking about with IMAC judgeing pattern and visa versa,
> WOW.
> > > Most IMAC pilots have trouble flying a straight line much less
judgeing
> a
> > > masters and FAI group in pattern. I would be affraid the scoring would
> > > really be screwed up. I know there are a handfull for Pilots that
cross
> > > over, but we are talking about local contest, not Nats.
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Woodward James R Civ 412 TW/DRP/ACQ"
> > <James.Woodward2 at edwards.af.mil>
> > > To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 9:49 AM
> > > Subject: RE: FAI F3AL---Pattern IMAC combined
> > >
> > >
> > > > I think that if a "run-what-you-brung" rule is imposed and IMAC and
> > > Pattern
> > > > are ran in the same contest sometimes, I would still enter.
However,
> > the
> > > > IMAC guys don't use a box (or is it 180 degrees, 100' away?).  The
> idea
> > of
> > > > competing with my pattern plane against a 40% plane doesn't bother
me
> > > > because I'm confident with it.  However, I think the IMAC guys would
> be
> > > > hugely against that because it is not "scale'ish" in design.
> > > >
> > > > An open aerobatic competition, schedules with whatever plane you
want
> to
> > > > fly, is appealing to me.
> > > > 0.01 cent worth.
> > > > Jim W.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Jon Uhler [mailto:juhler at bellsouth.net]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 9:27 AM
> > > > To: discussion at nsrca.org
> > > > Subject: re: FAI F3AL---Pattern IMAC combined
> > > >
> > > > Troy (look, I got your name right!),
> > > >
> > > > This by far is the best approach that I have seen, to date in this
> list.
> > > I
> > > > am very interested in hearing your ideas on combining IMAC and
> Pattern.
> > I
> > > > don't understand the need for people to bash one area of a hobby
just
> > > cause
> > > > they don't participate in it.  I am not a fisherman, but do bass
> > fisherman
> > > > bash fly fisherman?  Using the RC example I guess they do.....
> > > >
> > > > I would be willing to help, in any way, in promoting the joint
effort.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Jon
> > > >
> > > > =====================================
> > > > # 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.
> > > > #
> > > >
> > >
> > > =====================================
> > > # 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.
> > #
> >
> >
> =====================================
> # 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.
#