[NSRCA-discussion] Pattern Longitevity

[Lance Van Nostrand]

so how do you get an "impressionist" affected judge to be more objective?  Seems that kind of person is just the sort not interested in those pesky little things called "rules".  
--Lance

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Bob Richards 
  To: NSRCA Mailing List 
  Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 8:03 AM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Pattern Longitevity


  You say "the enemy is us". I agree. I feel compelled to share a couple of my own experiences.

  When I got started (seriously) in pattern, I did so with a Cap 21. I had several of the local pattern flyers (well meaning) tell me that I would never get the scores I deserved flying a non-pattern plane. If I had ever felt that was true, I would have dropped out of pattern. I flew that plane for two years, in Advanced and Masters. I did well, I won just over half the contests in which I flew, and managed to win the district points championship in '92.

  I decided to fly a pattern plane in '93, and ended up with a Hansen Runaround. 
  For me, it was a big step up. However, it did not have a pipe tunnel, and I decided to use a standard OS 1.20 with stock stubby muffler for most of the season. I went to the '93 Nats with this plane.  I had problems in the early rounds, but for the fifth round I flew t! he absolute best flight I have ever flown. I was feeling great! About 30 minutes after I flew, a rain started that cut short the flying that day. I had a large tent just behind the flight line, so most of the judges and scribes ended up under my tent. One of the scribes, a well known FAI flyer (that probably subscribes to this list) looked at my plane and told me that I would never get the scores I deserve, "flying an outdated design". I told him that I was very pleased with the flight I just had, and he said "you did not get good scores on that flight". I did not show it, but it just ticked me off. I know it sounds like sour grapes, but I decided that if I did not get good scores that round, I would quit pattern. I ended up winning that round by 65 normalized points. Looking at the tare sheets, I got great scores from all the judges that round. Now, I don't like to use the phrase "pattern snob", but to this day that is the opinion I have of that FAI flyer. 

  Now I know that a very small percentage of the pattern flyers are snobs, but they typically are the ones that are more vocal and more in the limelight than others, unfortunately.

  (climbing down off my soapbox).

  Bob R.


  Rcmaster199 at aol.com wrote:
    A few years ago, we had a winner in F3A with a wood and foam model covered in plastic film. It wasn't a terribly expensive set-up and nowhere near 5K. If that didn't dispell some notions about how expensive the sport of pattern can be, not much will.

    On the opposite extreme we have the last two years where we have seen a sort of rebirth of the extr! emely expensive custom built ARFie. These past couple years have done nothing to dispell the notions of expensive pattern. Why do these even exist?? The way I see it, we have seen the enemy and it is us.

    I would like to think that it isn't the judges' perception about  what a model cost that is driving this lunacy. I think it is the pilots' perception of what they believe will score. Truth is the best judges don't care much what the model looks like on the ground as long as the pilots' presentation on the ground is competent. If the pilots' air presentation is poor, it doesn't matter what the model looks like on the ground and how professional the ground presentation was.

    MattK

    In a message dated 2/26/2006 1:27:14 AM Eastern Standard Time, seefo at san.rr.com writes:


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  NSRCA-discussion mailing list
  NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
  http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20060226/efae5a72/attachment.html