Pattern & IMAC 2003 Nationals articles in AMA Mag.

Thu Oct 30 07:19:59 AKST 2003

It is my experience that when the original logic is very lame, there is another agenda afoot!

E.

-----Original Message-----
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
[mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of John Crozier
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 12:08 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Pattern & IMAC 2003 Nationals articles in AMA Mag.

Tony,
 Although I have never logged a complaint,  dog shows, hot air balloon
exhibits, kite exhibitions, and model rocket launches
have closed the facility for RC flying on various weekends.....croz
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tony Stillman" <tony at radiosouthrc.com>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 9:55 AM
Subject: Re: Pattern & IMAC 2003 Nationals articles in AMA Mag.

> I was told by people at AMA that President Dave Brown had received quite a
> few messages about this (about 200) form pilots complaining that the
> National Site had too many events, making it unavailable for everyday
> flying.
>
> Tony Stillman
> Radio South
> 3702 N. Pace Blvd.
> Pensacola, FL 32505
> 1-800-962-7802
> www.radiosouthrc.com
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "John Crozier" <sjcrozier at comcast.net>
> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 10:17 AM
> Subject: Re: Pattern & IMAC 2003 Nationals articles in AMA Mag.
>
>
> > Where did the notion that "AMA wants the facility available more to
> regular
> > members" originate?
> > If that's true, I agree that it is a lame excuse to not extend the NATS.
> > I live in the Muncie area, and fly there occasionally.
> > Usually when meeting an out- of -town buddy, as my home field has a
> no-guest
> > policy.
> > On any given week-day, we are almost always the only fliers there.
> > Occasionally, a couple of glider pilots show up.
> > Weekends will see a slightly larger turnout if the weather is "nice".
> > Munsee SkyChiefs have "trainer night" on Tuesdays.
> > The club offers trainers with buddy cords, and instructors, for people
who
> > are interested in learning.
> > During the NATS, the club uses their home field at the Muncie reservoir.
> > Approximately 50 of us fliers in this area are scattered among Three
> "behind
> > the barn" flying sites.
> > These  sites are certified for insurance purposes, and used at the
> pleasure
> > of the farmer-land owner on a year-to-year agreement.
> > In summery:
> > The AMA has no registration procedure for site users, so I can only
relate
> > what I have seen.
> > I have seen 0 to 4 fliers on weekdays, and as many as Six fliers on
> > weekends.....croz
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Gray E Fowler" <gfowler at raytheon.com>
> > To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 2:43 PM
> > Subject: Re: Pattern & IMAC 2003 Nationals articles in AMA Mag.
> >
> >
> > > Wow ! If the AMA wants the facility available more to regular members
> then
> > > that is a very lame excuse. The national flying site was built for the
> > > NATS, not just in case someone is traveling thru the cornfields of
> > > Indiana....with an airplane....I do believe Steve Maxwell(lives
nearby)
> > > told me that people rarely fly there anyway...so if that was an
official
> > > excuse  to shorten the NATS, then it is just plain lame. The average
AMA
> > > member could get more flying time by staying home.  This just seems so
> > > incredible if it is true....the world's largest site dedicated to RC
> JUST
> > > IN CASE you are in Indiana with a plane......Imagine if the AMA held
no
> > > competition and did not need the flying site, only an admin blgd, how
> much
> > > better off financially the AMA would be.
> > > If this is true we should fire every AMA executive we know and replace
> > > them with Dilbert managers...we would be much better off....
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Gray Fowler
> > > Principal Chemical Engineer
> > > Composites Engineering
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Ron Van Putte <vanputte at cox.net>
> > > Sent by: discussion-request at nsrca.org
> > > 10/29/2003 12:24 PM
> > > Please respond to discussion
> > >
> > >
> > >         To:     discussion at nsrca.org
> > >         cc:
> > >         Subject:        Re: Pattern & IMAC 2003 Nationals articles in
> AMA
> > Mag.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Brian Young wrote:
> > > Whats the reasoning behind wanting a smaller time
> > > slot? We have this huge national facility....seems odd.
> > >
> > >
> > > The AMA "rents" the facility to AMA members so they can stop by the
> > > facility, visit the museum and fly an airplane on one of the sites.
The
> > > Nats are held during the prime flying season (past Nats attenders may
> > > argue that statement, based on bad weather), so the time for ordinary
> AMA
> > > members use the facility is reduced.  If they make the total duration
of
> > > the Nats shorter, more AMA members can use the facility.
> > >
> > > Ron Van Putte
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >  -----Original Message-----
> > > From: discussion-request at nsrca.org
> > > [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of
> > > Ron Van Putte
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 10:35 AM
> > > To: discussion at nsrca.org
> > > Subject: Re: Pattern & IMAC 2003 Nationals articles
> > > in AMA Mag.
> > >
> > >
> > > One problem I see looming on the horizon is the AMA
> > > will force NSRCA and IMAC to share the same 5 day
> > > period at the Nats.  The AMA Executive Council has
> > > already gone on record that it wants the Nats to be
> > > done in a shorter time frame.  Initially this will
> > > be implemented by pushing existing SIG time slots
> > > closer together, but, sooner or later, they will
> > > probably take note of the shrinking numbers of IMAC
> > > pilots at the Nats and decide that the NSRCA and
> > > IMAC can be done during the same time frame.
> > >
> > > Henderson,Eric wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Mike,
> > >           I have always hated the split. I know how
> > > and why it happened and also know that you can't
> > > change the past.  I fly anything with wings and
> > > especially like flying both types of planes. (The
> > > real difference is the equipment specifications).
> > > The classes flown and the styles do need separate
> > > organizations to take care of their needs.
> > >
> > > I wrote this several months ago, "Create the USRCA -
> > > United States Radio Controlled Aerobatics - A forum
> > > for common and collaborative issues to provide
> > > united national representation, (in particular to
> > > the AMA). Core group would be two rep's from each
> > > current and any new RC aerobatics SIG's".  (Nothing
> > > nasty came up on Google with the acronym-BTW). today
> > > this would be IMAC, SPA and the NSRCA forming the
> > > initial umbrella organization.
> > >
> > >
> > > The inherent problem with each discipline forming
> > > its own SIG is that the word "special" leads to much
> > > "specialization" and becomes a synonym for
> > > separation. Forming a USRCA keeps the SIG identities
> > > and operations fully functional, but creates a forum
> > > for common issues such as, sound regulation, Nat's
> > > locations, contest scheduling, rules cycles etc.
> > > that affect us all.
> > >
> > > Howzat for food for thought.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Eric.
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [
> > > mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of
> > > mike mueller
> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 11:19 AM
> > > To: discussion at nsrca.org
> > > Subject: Re: Pattern & Imac 2003 Nationals articles
> > > in AMA Mag.
> > >
> > >
> > >  I feel that we have so much in common with the IMAC
> > > guys. I really think that we would benefit if we
> > > would merge into one group and bring in the SPA guys
> > > too. It's RC aerobatics and 1 group would be more
> > > effective from the standpoint of strength in numbers
> > > and eliminating redundancy. If we would work
> > > together we would be much better off. But hey that's
> > > just my opinion. Mike
> > >
> > > george kennie  <mailto:geobet at gis.net>
> > > <geobet at gis.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > Boy, I had a similar reaction. After all the hype
> > > over the last several years about how Imac is the
> > > fastest growing venue of the sport, they had a total
> > > head count of 37??? C'mon, at a Nationals
> > > event???????????  As far as representatives of a
> > > SIG, it appears that they had absolutely zero
> > > support people. You can't feel that this is due to
> > > some economic condition, as all these guys seem to
> > > have airplanes in the >$7500 category. It also
> > > sounds like they do not have a judging program to
> > > certify potential judges, as there were many
> > > complaints regarding unfair scoring awards,
> > > resulting in many pilots realizing that they had
> > > been unduly cheated.
> > > The overall tenor of the entire meet seemed to have
> > > a great black pall decend upon Muncie for the
> > > duration of their event with nobody leaving for home
> > > with a good feeling.
> > > This report certainly does not bode well as an
> > > encouraging carrot regarding future attendance.
> > > Their venue appears to require a super shot in the
> > > arm of administrative influx, if they are going to
> > > survive in a manner capable of sustaining any number
> > > base.
> > > It's very SAD!!!!!!!!
> > > Georgie
> > >
> > > Woodward James R Civ 412 TW/DRP wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Have you read the write up by Eric and Ed regarding
> > > the Pattern and IMAC nats results and event running
> > > in general?  I really enjoyed reading Eric's
> > > article.  When I read the IMAC article I thought,
> > > "Ed has a lot of courage to describe the event the
> > > way he did."  It once again made me think of how
> > > lucky we are to have dedicated individuals running
> > > our Nationals & NSRCA.  Lots of times we start
> > > threads about what needs to be changed in pattern.
> > > Given some things could be improved; we must overall
> > > have a pretty good formula for getting people
> > > involved & trained in judging.  The articles are
> > > definitely worth a thorough read!!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > No flame suit, just starting dialog.
> > >
> > > Jim W.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >   _____
> > >
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
<http://launch.yahoo.com/video/?1093432&fs=1&redirectURL=http://launch.yahoo
> > .com/promos/britneyspears/>
> > >
> > > Spears
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
> > > http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/
> > > =====================================
> > > # 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.
#