Sequence Poll Results

[White, Chris]

Mr.  Van Putte has hit the nail right on the head for me.  F3A and its top fliers are a real attraction to pattern for me as they are truly magnificent fliers of world reknowned status.  But, tailoring the sequences to the wants of most pattern fliers and not necessarily to prep for  F3A may do its own bit to keep pattern healthy.   I mean no discredit to F3A , or its value, nor to those who have worked to design the AMA sequences....  I'm just glad to see the input to give more options or ideas to future sequences. 
 
Chris White
Advanced

-----Original Message-----
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Ron Van Putte
Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2005 10:21 AM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Sequence Poll Results





On Jan 2, 2005, at 9:58 AM, Ron Lockhart wrote: 


For the 41%  voting to Not have the progression of AMA classes be designed to prepare for F3A, 

what changes would you like to see in those classes? 



Feel free to respond on or off list. 


I'll bet that many of the people who voted NO on having the progression of AMA classes designed to prepare for F3A were saying, "I don't think the construction of the progression of maneuver schedules should be dictated by a maneuver schedule we have no control over." I, for one, feel that way. I feel that the Master class, the terminus of the AMA maneuver schedule sequence, should reflect what members of NSRCA want. We can't affect what FAI does to the F3A maneuver schedule. If we tailor the Master class maneuver schedule to what is in the F3A maneuver schedule, we will be tinkering with it continuously and changes to the Master class maneuver will often dictate changes to the maneuver schedules in the other classes. I believe we should decide what we want to do and do it. 


Ron Van Putte 



----- Original Message ----- 

From: Bob Pastorello 

To: NSRCA 

Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 8:44 PM 

Subject: Sequence Poll Results 


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/20050103/02e67d7c/attachment.html