Questions for Presidential Candidates

[Derek Koopowitz]

For some reason my reply isn't making it through...
 
See below...

 
  _____  

From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of Bob Pastorello
Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 12:20 AM
To: NSRCA
Subject: Questions for Presidential Candidates


I would like to ask the two Presidential candidates to respond to these
questions, on this open forum, with THEIR specific and individual opinions
for us to evaluate in making our election decisions.
 
1.  What changes would you like to see made within the NSRCA to improve the
impact of the opinions of individual members in decisions made by the Board?

 
Well, I'd like to see more surveys done of the membership - on an ongoing
basis.  We have a great tool to accomplish this - the website.  For
instance, I'm not a huge fan of the matrix system that is in use at the Nats
for Masters/F3A and so we should poll all past Nats participants (current
NSRCA members) and ask them some pointed questions with regard to the Matrix
system, judging, rounds being flown, etc. and then use their input to
formulate a new/revised Nats format for Masters/F3A.  This also goes for the
rules cycle.  I feel that the surveys done in the past weren't structured in
a way that would give us good input into rules/schedule changes.

 
 
2.  What specific ideas do you have that you would offer to the membership
to assist in growing interest in Pattern?
 

We talked about pattern primers at the last board meeting as a good tool
that can be used to show other R/C pilots what pattern is all about and I
know that not all districts have utilized this "tool" to its full extent.
This needs to be pushed out continually by the district VP's with the full
understanding that the NSRCA will fund the primer (up to $50).  It is also
incumbent on each and every NSRCA member to continue to recruit members from
their local clubs or spectators at a contest.  I mentioned in my campaign
statement that there are a bunch of "pattern" ARF's now available in the .40
- .90 size and we should leverage off that availability whether it be asking
Great Planes (or other quality manufacturers such as Horizon) if we could
include a flyer in the box of these kits that highlights the NSRCA as a
membership organization that can provide them information about aerobatics.
I would solicit input from everyone on how to attract/grow membership - I
only have enough memory space to come up with some ideas and there are a lot
of very creative people out there that I'm sure have some great ideas too.
I would also encourage all the VP's that have R/C trade shows in their area
to host an NSRCA booth and to solicit help from the members to man the booth
- there is nothing finer than having a well built and well painted pattern
plane on display in a booth - especially the new designs.  Electrics are
becoming a huge component of R/C now and that is another area that we need
to focus.

 
3.  What is your individual belief about the overall objective of the
"stepping stone" approach to skill levels of sequences flown? 
 

There definitely needs to be a progression in the classes in the types of
maneuvers flown.  I think the current set of sequences is a better
reflection of the stepping stone approach than what was done in the past.  I
can remember the "jump" from the then Sportsman to Advanced in the early
90's was huge and the learning curve was totally out of line.  We definitely
made great strides with the last set of sequences but I know we can do more
- lessons learned can be applied to the next set of sequences.  This would
be a prime example of using a survey to get feedback on the current
maneuvers for each class - what worked, what didn't, changes needed, etc. 

 

4.  Should Masters class, in your opinion(s), remain a class that stays at
it's current complexity level, or should Masters class follow the  
F3A design philosophy toward ever-increasingly complex manuevers with each
schedule introduce?
 
I don't think my opinion counts over here.  The people that count are the
current Masters pilots and the potential Masters pilots - they should be
polled to find out where their interest lies.  If I was a current Masters
pilot I'd give you my opinion but it would be based on the fact that I view
Masters as a stepping stone to F3A (for myself only).

 
5.  What are your positions on changing/eliminating/adding equipment
requirements/rules relative to engine size, and overall weight of aircraft
flown in all 4 AMA classes?
 
Hmmm. I've always felt that the Sportsman class should allow all legal AMA
planes to fly - this would allow anyone to give pattern a try.  I do feel
that we need to keep the current size limits in place for the remaining
classes - I'm not too concerned about weight restrictions because as
everyone knows - the lighter the plane. the better they fly, so if we remove
the weight restriction I think it will only hurt the pilot.

 

Hopefully I answered your questions.  Please feel free to follow-up.

 
 
I am quite sure that many on this list have not sent their ballots yet, and
would perhaps benefit from reading your responses.  Thank you for your
information to help with our decision.

Bob Pastorello, Masters class
NSRCA 199  AMA 46373
rcaerobob at cox.net
www.rcaerobats.net
 
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20041215/29f42604/attachment.html