[SPAM] Re: 2007 Advanced Patterns

[AtwoodDon at aol.com]

Hey Dean, do you think our gray hair (or lack thereof) is starting to  show?  
I think Sportsman should try the old Procedure Turn and  Horizontal Eight 
(whoops, can't do that one, it heads for the judges at the end  and would be way 
too long  ;-)  But talk about 'exposure',   yikes!!!
 
Don
 
In a message dated 7/29/2005 6:59:34 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
d.pappas at kodeos.com writes:

Hi Tom,
I especially agree with the point you make  about the teaching of the 
"multiples" maneuvers. The third roll is the one  that demonstrates continued control!
The third loop adds time (which may have  been the problem) but it adds 
exposure! Exposure time, in a maneuver, is a  large part of the difficulty (as 
opposed to complexity) and this is moreso in  the wind.
Regards,
    Dean
 
Dean Pappas 
Sr. Design Engineer 
Kodeos Communications 
111 Corporate Blvd. 
South Plainfield, N.J. 07080 
(908) 222-7817 phone 
(908) 222-2392 fax 
d.pappas at kodeos.com  
-----Original Message-----
From:  discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]On  
Behalf Of AtwoodDon at aol.com
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 9:40  AM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: 2007  Advanced Patterns



Well, I have avoided jumping in here for as long as I can but here  goes.
 
First, the proposals as presented are not cast in stone, nor mandatory  
changes to the current schedules, they are sets of proposed changes of which  we 
are asking the pattern community (not just NSRCA members) to express  their 
opinion by selecting one of the alternatives in each class (as a  recommendation 
to AMA).  As previously stated in this discussion group,  anyone (and everyone) 
is free to submit their own proposed sequences to the  AMA for consideration. 
 However, we had hoped this approach would  generate a preferred solution 
representative of most of our pattern  community and help pave the way to 
improving the logical progression thru  sequences.
 
Second, these proposed sequences are not one person's idea, they were  
generated by a committee with many hours of thought and discussion and  actual 
flying of the sequences to come up with not one, but two alternatives  in each 
class.  This was done by volunteers for the committee that  spent many, many hours 
working on this.  I doubt any single individual  out there would have come up 
with a similar approach and results.
 
Third, I was involved in early discussions about the approach to this  
exercise and spent quite a bit of time discussing the intent of this  exercise with 
Troy. He and the entire Sequences Committee were very  focused on generating 
new sequences as balanced as possible, but (get this,  it is a very important 
part) also generating sequences focused on building  progressive 
basic-intermediate-advanced flying skills that actually require  the pilot to 'fly' the 
plane rather than relying on being able to bang the  stick over and come out the 
other side of the maneuver.  In my  opinion, about 10-12 years ago, we got so 
focused on making it easy to  get into pattern with simple sequences we lost 
the part about learning some  of the flying requirements.  What happened to 
having to do MULTIPLE  loops or rolls.  Anyone can close their eyes and do one 
loop or roll  then recover with recovery being the most active part of the 
maneuver.   The proposed sequences (either in each class) provide a logical and 
balanced  (as much as practical) progression from sets of skill sets to the next  
level.  I would even guess existing pattern flyers in the entry classes  may 
find the new sequences to actually be more difficult to fly (notice the  word 
fly) well than the current sequences, however, in doing so they will  have 
learned more about actual flying than they do now.  
 
Sorry for the long winded message here, but I would ask everyone to  consider 
the intentions of the proposed sequences as well as the sequences  
themselves.  I believe our current sequence schedules actually create  more of a gap 
between the entry level classes and the higher classes because  the lower class 
sequences actually lack some of the building blocks of  developing flying 
skills which forces the competitors to take larger 'skill'  steps as they approach 
the higher classes.  The proposed sequences  smooth those gaps more evenly and 
introduce maneuvers designed to enhance  those building blocks rather than 
just making it easy to get thru the entry  sequences.  
 
Personally, I think the Sequences Committee led by Troy Newman are to  be 
commended for the thought they put into these proposals as well as their  
personal time discussing, flying, reworking and finalizing these  proposals.  
Obviously thankless work as witnessed by some of the  comments and sniping that has 
gone on recently on this group.  Anyway,  I have made my selections on the 
sequences, hope you all have to.   Thanks Troy and group, most of us appreciate 
your efforts and  intentions.
 
Don Atwood





 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050729/ee6a7683/attachment.html