[NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1

[vicenterc at comcast.net]

IMAC does not offer the Basic class in the Nats.  It appears that the situation is similar.  Looks like you can ask for your money back from at least two SIG. 

--
Vicente "Vince" Bortone

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: "Mike Robinson" <shineyobject at gmail.com> 
Matt - at least you make a valid point about time and making room for other events etc. But, WHO decided Sportsman Class was less important? I pay my dues just like everybody else! It is my dues, in part, that helps put the NATS on to begin with. Some say 'intent' is an issue. OK, I intend not participate in the NATS. I should get my 'not intended' portion of my dues back from AMA. 
Some things are just wrong. Just because 'it is written' or 'the intention was'  does not make exclusion of the Sportsman class at NATS the  right.
And, that's all I got to say about that. 
Peace. 


On 4/25/07, Rcmaster199 at aol.com <Rcmaster199 at aol.com> wrote: 
It's a matter of time allocation. Trying to get some 700 flights in during the time available is no trivial task. Ask any Nats Event Director near you.

I would love to see our time increased by 2 days and Sportsman Class allowed....but that ain't gonna happen at an AMA Nats. AMA puts on a great deal of other events, many of which require the same site. The allotted time is divided as appropriate 

NSRCA has put on it's own NATS (in lieu of and much to the chagrin of AMA) a bunch of year ago now. To do it again requires a whole lot of motivation, volunteers and money. It's doable but it's no trivial matter either 

MattK
In a message dated 4/25/2007 8:45:14 PM Eastern Standard Time, shineyobject at gmail.com writes:
Don't worry about it Keith, we Sportman are just to freaking dangerous to be around!


On 4/25/07, Keith Hoard < mailto:khoard at gmail.com> wrote: 
Has anyone ever estimated how many more people would attend the Nats
if Sportsman class was offered?

On 4/25/07, Mike Robinson < shineyobject at gmail.com> wrote:
> With as much respect as I can muster...Translation is...
> "The governing body don't think Sportsmen are good enough to fly the NATS". 
> Safety?...gimme a break!
> And we wonder why people think we aerobatic pilots are snobs! Not only are
> we snobs, we are often full of sh%@!
>
>
>
> On 4/25/07, Keith Hoard < khoard at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > You weren't at the GMA contest last weekend. . .
> >
> > . .  .<snip>. .  Also, I doubt that a
> > > true Sportsman would be very comfortable flying at the Intermediate 
> level at
> > > the NATS.
> > . . .<snip>. .
> > _______________________________________________
> 






See what's free at AOL.com. 

_______________________________________________
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/20070426/13e4ccb0/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: "Mike Robinson" <shineyobject at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 02:21:35 +0000
Size: 705
Url: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20070426/13e4ccb0/attachment-0001.mht