schedules

[RC Steve Sterling]

I certainly understand how we get stuck in a class. I've been in
Intermediate way too long. For me, its not so much age as it is lack of
practice. Work and family eat most of my time up, and I choose to split the
available flying time between instructing, pattern and a bit of sport
flying.  My choice of course, no excuse.

Last couple of practice days I have been working on those snaps, and even
started working on the slow rolls with a goal to move up to Advanced in
2005.
  -----Original Message-----
  From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On
Behalf Of Bill Glaze
  Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 8:10 PM
  To: discussion at nsrca.org
  Subject: Re: schedules


  Steve:
  I agree with all you say, but consider for a moment  those of us who for
one reason or another, find ourselves in a destination class other than
Master.
  And yes, there are more than just me in this situation; there are, in
fact, quite a few.  As for me, I have several alternatives, none at the
present time being particularly pleasant.
  This typing with one hand is tiresome; I'll keep it to the minimum until I
get full mobility back.

  Bill Glaze

  RC Steve Sterling wrote:

    Maybe its more like the Masters folks got together and took care of
their own needs, and us lower class guys did nothing, waiting for others to
do it. If we wanted a change, we should have initiated it ourselves. For me,
putting the immelman/snap back into intermediate will stretch me another
year, then it will be time to move up anyway.

    Us lower class guys get fresh schedules by moving up. Masters is defined
a destination class, and they need change to keep from getting bored.
      -----Original Message-----
      From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
[mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Bill Glaze
      Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 2:43 PM
      To: NSRCA discussion
      Subject: Re: schedules


      All:
      It is interesting, however, to note that, while there wasn't "time" to
get new schedules together for classes other than Masters, there still
existed enough "time" to put that one together.  (And, of course, being much
more involved, it would consume more "time.")  The intentions of  those
folks in charge of the asylum<G> wouldn't have been nearly as suspect,  if
the only new sequence to be submitted was, say, Advanced or Sportsman.  I
tend toward believing that, regardless of the survey results, there is a
cadre of folks that believe the classes other than FAI and Masters just
don't warrant the attention required.
      And, please believe me, this is not any kind of a slam at Ron, but you
note that his idea of the "Old Geezers Class" mentions only Masters.  BTW:
Ron may have been joking, but I feel  that his idea has more than a little
merit.
      Perhaps the other classes need an advocate specific to them?  Or an
ombudsman  whose efforts would encompass everyone except the top classes?

      Bill Glaze

      george kennie wrote:

        Hey Bill,
        This one's not even tough to figure out! The administrative people
were all coming from the ranks of the Master's class at the time the survey
was done and didn't want to be bothered with us peons. They were only
interested in fixing what they specifically were affected by and the rest of
us could be accomodated at a time convenient to their agenda, which somehow
was thrown into disarray by the everyday hum-drum of life.
        Not everybody is as selfless as your bud John Ferrill!
        Georgie
        Bill Glaze wrote:

          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/20031024/27063123/attachment.html