Sequence Poll Results

[Ed Deaver]

Lets look at this from a little different point.
 
1)  I have not attended any local contests where FAI was not a part of the AMA sanction.  So, regardless of the semantics, FAI is a part of USA aerobatics.
 
2)  Most pilots from spectator to Masters look at the FAI pilots as the destination and "top dogs" IMHO
 
3)  As I have gone through the ranks, FAI has always been my goal.  Whether I will achieve it or not is yet to be seen.
 
4) Manuever selection
 
Lets take the rolling circle just for an example.  This manuever has been in Advanced IMAC for at least the past 6 years.  It has been in the TOC as a seperater of skills as long as I can remember.  As well it has been in IMAC Unlimited in different forms as long as I can remember.  It is an extremely precise and when done well, very pretty manuever.  It is also an extremely difficult manuever to do well.
 
So the FAI finals this year included this little jobbie.  My question is, do we as American piilots ignore this fact??, or do we say well shucks, lets learn how to do this.  We can rise to the challenge(which it is) or we can shrink away from it.
 
When the ice skater who did the first quadruple whatever, did the rest of the skaters say gosh, I can't do that and quit.  Or did it just raise the bar of quality and expectation???  Quadruple jumps are commonplace now, or so it seems on what I see on TV.
 
Evolution occurs whether we want it to. We can be left behind or we can step up to the plate.  Just think of the first time Quique did torque rolls at the TOC.  Pilots now, probably before doing snap rolls are trying to do this trick.  And some succeeding.  Evolution occurs.
 
I am not agreeing with the past notion to fly the past FAI schedules for Masters, but as skills increase, so should expectation in Masters, if nothing else as a stepping stone.  Sadly, I don't have any idea how to accomplish this as I'm not creative, except to accept evolution and work with it.
 
Lastly, some people have made the connection with the Masters/FAI schedule and pattern numbers decreasing in Sportsman, Intermediate, and Advanced which I disagree with.  If anything, some of the FAI pilots work towards recruiting pilots more than anyone.  So it is true for some of the pilots in all classes depending on personalities.  I look at the difficulty of the IMAC sequences, especially with a snap in the Basic class and all the pains NSRCA went through with this issue in Intermediate, considering that Basic in IMAC is once again running upwards of 20 or more pilots at local contests, are we looking at the right things to increase membership??  Just food for thought.

Ed Deaver
Bob Pastorello <rcaerobob at cox.net> wrote:
An "unofficial" poll of the NSRCA mail list members (and anyone else who may read RCU's Pattern Forum) was approved by Tony Stillman, created and posted by Ed Hartley on the NSRCA website.  Ed and I did the tabulations independently and arrived at the information you see below.
 
This information is the tabulation of all of your responses to this question:
    "Should the progression of classes within AMA precision aerobatics be designed to prepare a person for the FAI class?"
 



YES

NO

TOTAL-Class

% of Total

% Y of Total

% N of Total

Sportsman

9

3

12

9%

12%

6%

Intermediate

21

8

29

22%

28%

15%

Advanced

10

14

24

19%

13%

26%

Masters

23

20

43

33%

30%

38%

FAI

13

8

21

16%

17%

15%

TOTAL Polls

76

53

129



100%

100%

% of Total

59%

41%

 








 
Five votes were disallowed, as they either did not contain a name, competition class, or AMA number.  All three elements were required for a vote to be tallied.  There were three votes where a person selected two classes for their competition.  In those situations, I used the lower class, so that the vote could be consistently counted across all classes represented in those choices (there was one each in Intermediate, Advanced, and Masters).
    The source information has been saved by Ed (and I) for archival needs, should any arise.
 
It is my hope, since I was the original "questioner", that this information may serve to foster discussion and gain insights about our preferences and serve also to springboard future similar polls and member involvement activity in this Rule Change year.
    We wish the President-elect to consider this information, and discuss with the Board possible future activities.
 
Thanks to all of you for your participation and insight!!!
 
Bob Pastorello
NSRCA 199  AMA 46373
rcaerobob at cox.net
www.rcaerobats.net
 
Ed Hartley
roho2 at rcpattern.com
 
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050103/c86214a7/attachment.html