Schedules

[Bill Glaze]

Eric:
Methinks that we better get cracking on this, or all the classes other 
than Masters will be out of luck.  If  I get too bored, you'll see me in 
Masters;  now, considering my performance at BARKS, would you like 
that?<VBG>
BTW:  jealous husband or not, next time I see Michelle, she gets a hug 
from me for her help at the contest with my personal disaster.  Tell her 
many thanks for me!

Bill Glaze

Henderson,Eric wrote:

> Bill,
>       It was not even remotely possible to submit new 401-403 
> schedules for 2005. It would have required - as per the brand new 
> survey membership vote - another survey and we were plumb out of time. 
> I won't bore you with the time-line, but suffice it to say we had 
> hours left to get them in to the AMA. Tom Weedon did the rules change 
> wording and I did the schedules and maneuvers.
>  
> You have to think three to six years in advance to work the AMA rules 
> change process. The 2 years old schedules that you are flying now were 
> done  FIVE years ago. Masters was designed to make movement between 
> 404 and the FAI P-03 and P-05 schedules, a practical proposition.  
> 401-403 were completely rewritten - a major exercise that had not been 
> done for many a year - New 401-403's can be proposed in the Annex 
> methodology.
>  
> I will extract and post all of your votes in an put  them in my next 
> post so you can see what you all voted for.
>  
> Regards,
>
> Eric.
>  
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: discussion-request at nsrca.org 
> [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Bill Glaze
> Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 7:35 PM
> To: discussion at nsrca.org
> Subject: Re: Schedules
>
> Eric:
> Thanks much.  I just knew that I wasn't mistaken about something that 
> was so dear to my heart.<G>
> As far as implementation, would it not have been possible to submit 
> the other class(es) proposed schedules just as was done with Masters? 
>  In other words, right alongside Masters for consideration by AMA?  If 
> this was, in fact possible, does anybody have any idea why it wasn't done?
>
> Bill Glaze
>
>
> Henderson,Eric wrote:
>
>>Bill,
>>      The 2002 survey and the implementation of its results fell on my shoulders. Masters(404) had several schedules designed and available that were shown for your vote. It was expected that 404 would change every three years, as per the 1999 survey.
>>
>>I personally asked the question "Should we also change 401-402 on a three year basis?" You all voted yes. Now we have to come up with a way to do that.
>>
>>As Ron states, the Annex system is the way we can do it.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Eric.
>>
>>P.S. We posted all the results in several places, but I will send you a copy of the word file. - E.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
>>[mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Ron Van Putte
>>Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 5:58 PM
>>To: discussion at nsrca.org
>>Subject: Re: Schedules
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Bill Glaze wrote:
>>
>>  
>>
>>>I noted that only the AMA Masters class seem to be applying for a new 
>>>schedule.
>>>One of the reasons for change was stated as  being that  a majority of 
>>>the membership voted for change.
>>>The same vote tabulation stated that the other classes also wished to 
>>>see a schedule change.
>>>Is this currently being worked on?
>>>    
>>>
>>
>>
>>Proposals for changes to the current 401 - 403 maneuver schedules were 
>>not submitted to the AMA by NSRCA.  However, IF the NSRCA Annex proposal 
>>passes, we will have the option of changes to all maneuver schedules as 
>>frequently as annually.
>>
>>I don't remember that a majority 'voted' for changes to schedules other 
>>than the Master class.  Even so, any AMA member can submit a change 
>>proposal.  I have submitted several as an individual over the years. 
>> One was for the takeoff direction being the pilot's option.  I 
>>submitted it three times before it finally passed on the third try, but 
>>it did pass.  So, individual proposals do get through.  People need to 
>>make proposals if they see the need for change and not rely on someone 
>>doing it for them.
>>
>>Ron Van Putte
>>
>>  
>>
>>>Thanks
>>>
>>>Bill Glaze
>>>
>>>=====================================
>>># 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.
>>#
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20031023/6ceb3a4b/attachment.html