Sequence Poll Results

Sun Jan 2 19:33:41 AKST 2005

Great discussion. Easy to see both sides. But what does this survey say
about how the AMA contest board voted. I would like to hear something
constructive on why the AMA contest board voted as it did. I dont believe
the number of non NSRCA pattern fliers out number the NSRCA pattern fliers.
So, any theories?
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Atwood, Mark" <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2005 10:16 PM
Subject: RE: Sequence Poll Results

This paints a pretty clear picture (Thanks Eric) and supports what someone
said earlier....That the masters pattern can and does serve multiple
purposes (and that none of the masters fliers wish to fly an old FAI
sequence)

It's a building block for those en route to the next class.

It's challenging enough on it's own merit to serve as a destination class
for many (possibly most).

Given both of those, it seems that some obvious things need to follow...

The sequence needs to change frequently for BOTH purposes.  For those in
Masters as a destination...the change provides a freshness critical to
maintaining interest levels.  For those passing through...the change needs
to reflect SOME...key word SOME of the challenges that are currently facing
FAI.

Let's face it...The ENTIRE program is more difficult today than it use to
be.  The intermediate pattern flown today is FAR more difficult than the
advanced pattern I flew pre-turnaround.   Today's advanced sequence would
easily challenge several of the older Masters sequences.  So yes, FAI is
raising the bar and expecting others to follow.  NOT simply to make things
harder...but because it's REQUIRED to seperate the playing field.  As the
pilots get better...so needs the challenge.  If we think the judging is a
problem now...imagine all the current top 10 FAI pilots competing with the
Advanced sequence...try to pick a winner out of that crop...7 way tie for
1st...3 way tie for second...(and that's assuming 3 of them had mechanical
failure...)

________________________________

From: discussion-request at nsrca.org on behalf of Grow Pattern
Sent: Sun 1/2/2005 10:36 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Sequence Poll Results

Results from last survey of on-line and off-line members.

Masters - 404

Question-21

Should the Masters 404 class be changed periodically

YES = 163____         NO = 5_____          RESULT = NO CHANGE____

Question-22

If "YES =", these classes should change, should they
93___ Change every rule cycle (3 years) = WINNER

45___ Change every two years
4___ Change every other rule cycle (6 years)

15___ Other - Specify ____

Question-23

Should the Masters pattern be based on the FAI pattern from previous FAI
period

YES = 50____         NO = 107_____          RESULT = NO CHANGE____

Question-24

Should takeoff and landings be scored in Masters

YES = 106____         NO = 60_____          RESULT = NO CHANGE____

Question-25

Should Masters fly: the previous FAI pattern. P-01 pattern when FAI is
flying the P-03 pattern.

YES = 23____         NO = 123_____          RESULT = NO CHANGE____

Question-26

Should Masters adopt older FAI schedules such as schedules A, B, C, D and E

YES = 29____         NO = 119_____          RESULT = NO CHANGE____

Question-27

Should we require a change in the class 404 (Masters) maneuver sequence to
be in step with the two-year cycle of Class 406 (FAI-F3A) using the current
F3A prelims sequence.

YES = 52____         NO = 98_____          RESULT = NO CHANGE____

General Questions

Schedule design.

Question-29

Should 401-4-3 be structured as sets of building block schedules

YES = 150____         NO = 12_____          RESULT = PASS ____

Question-30

Should each schedule stand on its own and be set at a degree of difficulty
level regardless of the maneuvers employed.

YES = 107____         NO = 48_____          RESULT = PASS ____

________________________________

From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of Jerry Stebbins
Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2005 2:56 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Sequence Poll Results

Derek, appropiate comment for the question at hand. Some pilots I talked to
wondered why it was written /phrased as it was. Most felt it really did not
need an answer, since if our AMA Masters is our best, hardest, and final
destination class, it falls that getting there would be A path to FAI. Not
THE path necessarily, but if you could not do those "hardest" maneuvers then
you are really at a disadvantage trying to fly FAI maneuvers. I realize Bob
threw the question out as a quick "look see", and am glad he did.
Follow on, and future questions that are planned to be used as a basis for
setting NSRCA Policy ,or approach to some issue, do need to be very
carefully worded, and tested, so there is a clear and concise understanding
of what you are being asked, and no room for individual assumptions to be
developed.
I hope we do set up a "systems approach" to defining the path NSRCA wants to
follow for class definition and development. Would not be too hard, just a
lot of time and aquiring lots of good input from the Membership.
Jerry

=================================================
To access the email archives for this list, go to
http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/
To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.