AMA MASTER'S unknown?

[Archie Stafford]

I think you can fly unknowns and also make them very precise and smooth.
Look at the FAI finals.  Other than the roller I think the sequence flowed
very well and the top pilots made it look like they had been flying it for a
long time.  Even if you used past sequences or rearranged the current
sequence.  
 
I do not think this makes it a "team" event with the caller.  Most pilots
have the callers they generally use and that person usually knows when the
person they are calling for likes to hear the next maneuver.  Also if you
use maneuvers that have been previously used or maneuvers that are
reasonably well known then you shouldn't have a judging problem.  If this is
going to be used at the NATS finals, then the judging is usually reasonably
good anyway.  I'm sure there will be varying opinions on that, but for the
most part judging in the finals is overall very good.  
 
The better pilots are going to make an unknown sequence look smooth and
precise no matter how many times they have flown it.  I think unknowns
definitely help you determine who the best pilot is.  
 
  _____  

From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of Bob Pastorello
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 6:40 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: AMA MASTER'S unknown?
 
I guess since I never take a position on anything, I should probably do so
on this -- so -- here 'tis.
 
1.  This is a genuine yes/no POLL question of the MASTERS pilots only....and
needs to be carefully administered, IF the Board is interested in opening
this one.
2.  If the POLL has at least 2/3 majority, then the next question should be
designed to find out how crazy we (Masters) pilots are about having our
scores judged by JUDGES WHO HAVE NEVER SEEN THE SEQUENCE  and 
3.  How crazy we are about the totally-impossible-to-fairly-administer
influence of the "team".  At this level of competitions (you guys are
talking about the NATS FINALS, for G---s sake!!!) I would be hard pressed to
say it will be "fair" to have the outcome determined by who had the best
caller (or the most effective team).  Not everyone can do that...  and
finally ....
4.  MASTERS is supposed to be the Top AMA class....as such, philosophically,
I think it should be the best - the VERY best - of precision, smoothness,
and gracefulness....
 
AND implementing an Unknown turns all that back into "IMPRESSION"
judging....
 
I'm not in favor of it;  won't be; won't try to persuade others to be; and
believe wholeheartedly that if a pilot is strongly committed to flying
Unknowns that he go play IMAC.  Then fly "Pattern" for precision, practiced,
smooth and skillfully-executed "routines".

Bob Pastorello
NSRCA 199  AMA 46373
rcaerobob at cox.net
www.rcaerobats.net
 
 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Ed Deaver <mailto:divesplat at yahoo.com>  
To: discussion at nsrca.org 
Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 3:54 PM
Subject: Re: AMA MASTER'S unknown?
 
Flying an Unknown truely does make it a 2 person flight.  I would still
welcome the opportunity as the challange and thrill(flying well or goofing
up and trying to collect yourself to fly the next manuever) is really great.

 
I don't know if it really identifies the callers ability, as much as the
teams ability.  Another thought depends on how much time is allowed to
prepare also.
 
ed

rcaerobob at cox.net wrote:
Before I'd answer whether I wanted one or not, I'd like to have an
understanding of what, specifically, the unknown in Masters would "reveal".
If pattern is about precision piloting that could be a different thing than
an ability to have a good caller....

Just my ignorant opinion.

Bob P.
> 
> From: "Grow Pattern" 
> Date: 2005/01/06 Thu AM 11:25:48 EST
> To: , 
> 
> Subject: AMA MASTER'S unknown?
> 
> How does this list feel about a Masters Nat's final that was different to 
> the regular schedule. OR, even an unknown in the final to make it more
than 
> just three more of the same flown in the heats.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Eric.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050106/11d59a7b/attachment.html