[SPAM] 2007 Advanced Patterns

Fri Jul 29 01:57:14 AKDT 2005

I could not agree more, Rodney. That is a monumental leap from Adv to
Masters. I have not looked at the KF diff from Int to Adv, but would be
willing to bet that it is not nearly a 19 point difference.

Terry T.

On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 22:57:53 -0700 (PDT) Rodney Tanner
<rodney19821982 at yahoo.com> writes:
Terry,
I have flown both the 2007 Advanced patterns and prefer option A. but
having no inverted sequences is a let down. IMHO neither is any where
near as good/challenging as the current schedule. Troy has and his team
have outlined the rational behind their selection: the new patterns are
aimed at giving a smoother transition for Intermediate pilots moving up,
rather than current Advanced pilots. So maybe we have to practice hard on
the current schedule and then make the logical move to Masters in 2007.
My concern is the huge distance that will now open up now between
Advanced and Masters. Total KF of 48 versus 67. My $0.02 worth.

Rodney T.

Terry Terrenoire <amad2terry at juno.com> wrote:
This IS published in advance, and all pilots know it, so there is no
problem, at least there was not in the 7 years I was involved. We
certainly do not need more rules!!!! Especially a national rule that
pertains to just one, 4 day event a year!

While on the subject of rules changes. A while ago I commented on the
"dumbing down" of the Advance pattern, and had just one or two comments.
How many of you Advance fliers think that it is prudent to go from 4
inverted maneuvers to NONE. How is that possibly going to prepare you for
the difficulty of Masters??? Have any of you even looked at the proposal?
How many of you have flown the 2 proposed schedules?

 Sure would like to hear some comments from other Advance and Masters
pilots, pro or con!!

Terry T.

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 18:05:57 -0500 "Bob Pastorello" <rcaerobob at cox.net>
writes:
As a "non Nats" guy at the present - a thought - since a Rules cycle
submittal is pending, I think that ANY considerations about "penalties"
for not judging had BETTER BE BUILT INTO AMA rules.
The AMA Sanctions a national event, and I would bet dollars to donuts
that a subsequent protest for zeroed rounds would WIN - due to the fact
that there is NO AMA provision in the rules to cover the situations you
all are describing.

I'm not taking sides, nor pointing fingers/blame.

Simply suggesting that NOW is the time to try and get a rule change to
support the propositions of "enforcement".  Could be important.

Bob Pastorello
www.rcaerobats.net
rcaerobob at cox.net
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Ron Van Putte 
To: discussion at nsrca.org 
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 10:14 AM
Subject: Re: Nats Judging Rebate-keep their best SCORE!

On Jul 27, 2005, at 9:48 AM, Gray E Fowler wrote:

Money does not matter, scores do. In the past, was it not work or lose
your best round? THAT keeps people on their toes. 

That's done now.

I also heard that  some people coming to FAI and Masters did not submit
TWO frequencies, creating matrix hassles. Same here- assign the matrix to
make sense and if the person does not have his alternate frequency as was
requested on the NATS entry form then he simply does not fly that round.
The CD needs relief, and the contestants need the MOST fair matrix that
can be had.

No argument here.

Ron Van Putte

Ron Van Putte <vanputte at cox.net> 

Sent by: discussion-request at nsrca.org

07/27/2005 09:33 AM

Please respond to

discussion at nsrca.org

To

discussion at nsrca.org

cc

Subject

Nats Judging Rebate

Last week at the Nats, I had a talk with Nats event director, Dave 
Guerin about judging no-shows.  On the very first morning, Dave had at
least three no-shows (F3A pilots who were supposed to judge the Master 
class).  You can imagine the frustration of trying to reschedule pilots 
to cover for them, not to mention the delay in getting the events 
started.  This was not an isolated case.  It happened over and over 
during the week.  Some just forgot when they were supposed to judge.  
There were even some who were scheduled to judge on the third day, who 
decided to leave after two days and didn't tell anyone.

We discussed having a "$50 judging rebate".  It would work like this:  
In addition to the normal entry fees, $50 would be collected.  If a 
pilot showed up to perform his scheduled judging session, he'd get a 
$50 rebate.  If a pilot didn't show up to perform his scheduled judging 
session, the replacement judge would get the $50.  BTW, the normal 
stipend for pilots who perform extra judging sessions is $30.  
Comments?

Ron Van Putte

=================================================
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.

List members email returned for mailbox full will be removed from the
list.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050729/cb974db6/attachment.html