[SPAM] Re: New Sequences

Ron Van Putte vanputte at cox.net
Thu Jun 9 10:06:53 AKDT 2005 

On Jun 9, 2005, at 10:42 AM, Ed Hartley wrote:

> Well said Verne! Since I reached the ripe young age of seventy-three 
> and for flying purposes became a one eyed pilot, I can appreciate the 
> class thing. I am still trying to fly Masters but it really is an 
> uphill battle. Not like it was even ten years ago!
>  
> I am trying with great difficulty to stay away from the "why-bother" 
> level!
>  
> Best,
> Ed Hartley
> roho2 at rcpattern.com
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Verne Koester
>> To: discussion at nsrca.org
>> Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 11:12 AM
>> Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: New Sequences
>>
>> Terry,
>> There are rules proposals in the survey that cover your situation. 
>> Many of them make a lot of sense, at least to me. You can find them 
>> as well as the proposed schedules on the NSRCA site. It's a little 
>> tricky, but we have to deal with the fact that there are a lot of 
>> guys who just love to fly pattern, support our contests and are our 
>> friends that won't make it to the top. The reasons can be job/family 
>> demands, financial, skill or deteriorating skill with age, or any 
>> number of other factors. The trick is to adopt rules that accommodate 
>> those things while still preventing the trophy hog from laying around 
>> in a class year after year. Some of the proposals address those 
>> things and merit all of our attention. If we ignore them, we'll find 
>> our already-shrinking local contests reduced to a "why-bother" level.
>>  
>> Verne
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Terry Terrenoire
>>> To: discussion at nsrca.org
>>> Cc: discussion at nsrca.org
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2005 6:37 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [SPAM] Re: New Sequences
>>>
>>> Just another comment. Keep in mind that I have not seen the new 
>>> sequence yet.
>>>  
>>> I have been flying Advance since 1989, before turnaround. I don't 
>>> believe I have won a contest in that time, and have had only a 
>>> couple of 2nds. Right now, I am looking at the jump to Masters as 
>>> being too big for me. I have learned to handle the current schedule, 
>>> maybe not as smoothly as most, but I can get thru the sequence 
>>> without embarresing myself.
>>>  
>>> If the new sequence is "easier", I can see myself in a position 
>>> where I could be winning some contests, and would be forced out of 
>>> the class, again with a much bigger leap to a class I feel is 
>>> already beyond my abilities.
>>>  
>>> At my age, learning new tricks, when the old have not been 
>>> perfected, may just push some of us in similar situations completely 
>>> out of the mix.
>>>  
>>> Terry T.
>>>  
>>>  
>>> On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 21:40:24 -0700 (PDT) Rodney Tanner 
>>> <rodney19821982 at yahoo.com> writes:
>>>> Bill, Mike:
>>>> I see the argument for a smoother transition between 402 and 403 
>>>> and in the context of the overall progression through the classes 
>>>> it is probably a valid one, especially for the Intermediate guy 
>>>> coming up. Personally, though,  I am glad for the leap I am going 
>>>> through in the current 403 - Advanced  and can´t wait to go up to 
>>>> Masters, which I now see as more of a logical step up, rather than 
>>>> the big, intentional, leap it will be in the future. 
>>>> Good job guys.
>>>>  
>>>> Rodney 
>>>>
>>>> Mike Hester <kerlock at comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>> What Bill said.
>>>>>
>>>>> We had 2 choices to smooth out that huge leap between 402 and 403: 
>>>>> make 402
>>>>> tougher or make 403 slightly easier. The overwhelming majority was 
>>>>> against
>>>>> making 402 any tougher, so we went this way. Like Bill said, look 
>>>>> at the
>>>>> schedules in relation to each other and consider that carefully 
>>>>> before
>>>>> anyone votes on them. There are a couple of ways we could end up 
>>>>> with a
>>>>> worse problem than we currently have. My hope is everyone will put 
>>>>> a lot of
>>>>> thought into their choices. I'm reminded of teh old knight at the 
>>>>> end of
>>>>> Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade....."choose wisely". Look what 
>>>>> happened
>>>>> to the guy that picked the wrong one. Eek.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Mike
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "Bill Pritchett"
>>>>> To:
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 8:03 PM
>>>>> Subject: New Sequences
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> > Rodney:
>>>>> > Both proposed Advanced schedules are "easier" than the current 
>>>>> Advanced
>>>>> > schedule. This was one of the criteria that we worked with, 
>>>>> based upon
>>>>> > overwhelming opinion that the jump to Advanced is currently too 
>>>>> much. I
>>>>> > like both schedules (not because I'm on the committee...hehe), 
>>>>> but what
>>>>> > this WILL do is make the jump to Masters much bigger for the 
>>>>> guys that
>>>>> > will come through these schedules. I am sort of a victim of 
>>>>> having made
>>>>> > the current jump, and now that I've made it, felt that I could 
>>>>> objectively
>>>>> > help others coming up in seasons to come not deal with some of 
>>>>> the issues
>>>>> > current Advanced flyers have had to handle. Our current schedule 
>>>>> calls
>>>>> > for 10 maneuvers prior to a cross box turnaround. Although there 
>>>>> is
>>>>> > discussion on the list right now about being on that "line", and 
>>>>> a cross
>>>>> > box being a bother, let's face it, most Advanced flyers need to 
>>>>> adjust
>>>>> > in/out earlier than 10 maneuvers in. Lots of thought and 
>>>>> discussion went
>>>>> > into these, and I'm sure that everyone on the committee hopes 
>>>>> that the
>>>>> > NSRCA membership takes a deep collective breath before making any
>>>>> > judgments. One thing we all tried to do is make it more even in 
>>>>> jumps
>>>>> > between classes, up to Masters. We all seemed to agree that 
>>>>> Masters
>>>>> > should be the "big" jump, and a jump that provides a class of
>>>>> > "Destination" for some, and FAI prep for others. I hope that 
>>>>> you, and
>>>>> > others, will look at the proposed Advanced schedule as a part of 
>>>>> the
>>>>> > whole, and not a direct comparison to the present.
>>>>> > Thanks
>>>>> > Bill
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Bill Pritchett
>>>>> > 765-744-9322
>>>>> >
>>>>> > =================================================
>>>>> > 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.
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> =================================================
>>>>> 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 --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 8688 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050609/b471b38a/attachment.bin

More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list