[SPAM] Re: Re: Class Structure - 400S
Dan Curtis
warrior523 at mchsi.com
Mon Jan 10 17:31:30 AKST 2005
Bob and all,
I have been lurking on this thread for awhile and decided to throw in my
thoughts.
I have been a CD for awhile and have hosted and attended alot of contest
over the past few years. I don't recall having one Sportsman flyer talk
about the sequence being to hard, difficult for some yes, but too hard no.
I have had practically everyone (Sportsman flyer) that I have talked to tell
me that it is awfully short. A few thought it was just about right while
most wanted more flight time per sequence. Flying the sequence twice per
flight seemed to remedy most of the grumbles. Double sequences worked
pretty well without causing any problems with scoring or in total contest
time and could be looked at very closely. It is easy to do by just posting
the intent in advance. I for one, would not mind seeing a few more
maneuvers added to the class but I can also see where it could be raising
the intimidation factor a few points to newbies.
Adding another class in our current schedules would be a poor path to take,
IMHO. Contestant numbers are low at some contest all ready and I have seen
many contest with from 1 to 3 Sportsman entrants. A pre novice class could
very easily dilute this kind of attendance into 1 per class for example.
CD's would need to come up with sponsors or monies for another set of awards
and could very well have many awards going to waste. I also, am one of the
few (it seems) that believe the Sportsman class in pattern is for beginning
"pattern" flyers and not necessarily for beginning RC flyers. I see nothing
wrong with a newbie "pattern flyer" entering his first contest in Sportsman
with the best gear that is available if that is what he/she wants to fly. I
know years ago when I first decided to enter the pattern fraternity it never
enter my mind to go into the beginning class with out the best equipment I
could manage. The idea of Pre-Sportsman class to attract the real fledglings
is precisely what pattern primers are designed to accomplish and this is
where our efforts and energy should be directed. I feel we can use, stand
alone pattern primers or primers inbedded in club fun flys, to a much
greater degree than we have been, and that this approach would serve our
goal of stimulating interest in pattern flying much more effectively than a
watered down new class.
Thanks for reading
Dan Curtis
----- Original Message -----
From: <rcaerobob at cox.net>
To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
Sent: January 10, 2005 3:01 PM
Subject: Re: Re: Class Structure - 400S
> EVERY time we have a rules change/cycle pending, and we start discussing
what to do....SOMEBODY says "Add another Class".
> It is obvious that I am the only person who sees how incredibly
dis-serving this would be...no one else has spoken up!!!
>
> The main reason that "extra classes" get suggested, is because we have
never had the chutzpa to get together in real consensus and build the class
transistions properly. I remember when Verne had his set. I remember when
we had a couple of pretty good schdules set up a few cycles back...BOOM.
Blown up because WE - not anyone else - cannot get our act together in
dealing with the core issues.
>
> If we decide we need another entry class, then it should be crystal clear
that there is something WRONG with the Sportsman sequence, and that has
happened because we had to make Intermediate more difficult so there
wouldn't be this chasm to leap into Advanced, which we made more difficult
because of the HUGE-er chasm into Masters!!!!!
>
> DOES NO ONE ELSE - REALLY - SEE this but ME ?????
> Ya'll gotta tell me, because if I am an "Army of One", I'll just go away,
and let ya'll figger out fer yerselves.
>
> SOMEBODY tell me.....straight up!!!
>
> BOb Pastorello
> (Having a MONDAY at the salt mine!!!!!!!!!!!)
> >
> > From: "Grow Pattern" <pattern4u at comcast.net>
> > Date: 2005/01/10 Mon PM 12:54:15 EST
> > To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> > Subject: Re: Re: Class Structure - 400S
> >
> > Yes like SPA.
> >
> > I am a big fan of SPA but it has one thing that does not work that well
for
> > me. That is the planes flown.
> >
> > The 400S class would use current models, if the pilot so desired. Of
course
> > the older designs might well prove to competitive again - how cunning of
me
> > to even suggest that. Also the age of the pilot is not really a rule.
> >
> > The 400S class would find its own level just like water.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Eric.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jim Ivey" <jivey61 at bellsouth.net>
> > To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 12:41 PM
> > Subject: Re: Re: Class Structure - 400S
> >
> >
> > > Eric
> > > As in SPA.......
> > >
> > > Jim Ivey
> > >>
> > >> From: "Grow Pattern" <pattern4u at comcast.net>
> > >> Date: 2005/01/10 Mon PM 12:32:40 EST
> > >> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> > >> Subject: Re: Class Structure - 400S
> > >>
> > >> It may well be that we need a similar routine for the older flyers
who
> > >> now
> > >> find turnarounds to be too far away? (No tease or insult intended.)
I'm
> > >> just being realistic and live close to there right now.
> > >>
> > >> The class would have NO progression or pointing-out exit rules. Enter
if
> > >> you
> > >> want. Call it 400S. S=sport=fun etc...
> > >>
> > >> For the record I have always liked the idea of a non-turnaround
> > >> starter/primer.fun-acrobatics schedule.
> > >>
> > >> Regards,
> > >>
> > >> Eric,
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> From: "Tom Simes" <nsrca at shinymetalass.com>
> > >> To: <discussion at nsrca.org>
> > >> Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 12:19 PM
> > >> Subject: Re: Class Structure
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> > On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 11:09:04 -0500
> > >> > "Del Rykert" <drykert at localnet.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Hi Verne.
> > >> >> I am only 1 vote but you would have my support as many I have
> > >> >> tried to get to consider giving pattern a try were intimidated
by
> > >> >> the box and keeping a group of maneuvers in it. Without a
coach
> > >> >> was to over whelming for them.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> del
> > >> >
> > >> > Rather than formally creating a new division or simplifying the
> > >> > sportsman sequence, how about addressing the issue locally as
needed
> > >> > with something like a "newbie hour" prior to starting the contest?
> > >> >
> > >> > It seems to me that instead of a single cause such as turn around
> > >> > maneuvers, or flying within the box itself, there are likely a wide
> > >> > variety of fairly minor barriers which keep pilots from making the
leap
> > >> > from being interested to being participants. This list is ample
> > >> > evidence of both our desire to grow the sport and help each other.
> > >> > While everyone is getting unpacked and set up, how about formally
> > >> > setting aside an hour to help newbies one on one nail that maneuver
> > >> > that
> > >> > eludes them, get their plane trimmed, get their engine running
right,
> > >> > or
> > >> > just give them 5 minutes on a buddy box flying a well set up
pattern
> > >> > plane with an experienced pilot. In short, take an hour and do
what
> > >> > you
> > >> > can to push someone over the interested hump and into participant
mode.
> > >> >
> > >> > Some folks fall naturally into the mentoring mode and would
volunteer
> > >> > for the duty, but if that fails maybe the mentoring could be part
of
> > >> > first round judging duties.
> > >> >
> > >> > What do you think?
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Tom
> > >> >
> > >> >
_____________________________________________________________________
> > >> >
> > >> > | , | Tom Simes
> > >> > ---------(@)--------- AMA 230068
> > >> > --|-- NSRCA 3830
> > >> > ' nsrca at shinymetalass.com
> > >> > =================================================
> > >> > 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.
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> =================================================
> > >> 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.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > =================================================
> > > 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.
> > >
> >
> > =================================================
> > 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.
> >
> >
>
> Bob Pastorello, El Reno, OK, USA
> rcaerobob at cox.net
> www.rcaerobats.net
>
> =================================================
> 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.
>
=================================================
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.
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list