[NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1

Thu Apr 26 11:37:12 AKDT 2007

Over the last 8 years we have been pretty consistent.  It runs from 105-115
total.

Tony Stillman, President

Radio South

3702 N. Pace Blvd

Pensacola, FL 32505

1-800-962-7802

www.radiosouthrc.com

  _____  

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Beaubien
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 1:13 PM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1

What is typical attendance for pattern flyers at NATS?

- Robert Beaubien

- AMA #618061

- NSRCA #4121

-

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of John Ferrell
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 11:09 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1

I cannot recall having too many contestants ever being a problem at any of
the last dozen or so years...

John Ferrell    W8CCW
"Life is easier if you learn to plow 
       around the stumps"
http://DixieNC.US

----- Original Message ----- 

From: Fred Huber <mailto:fhhuber at clearwire.net>  

To: NSRCA Mailing List <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>  

Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 12:26 PM

Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1

This will cause some complaints...

I would support having district qualifiers to reduce the number of
contestants at the NATS.

One contest appx 15 to 30 days before the NATS, appx centered within the
district (go by either the AMA districts or the NSRCA districts, pick one)  

Go through the full weigh-in, measurements and noise testing. (which tend to
get skipped at local contests) 

Top 10 from each district in each class go to the NATS.

They have Scale Qualifiers...

----- Original Message ----- 

From: vicenterc at comcast.net 

To: NSRCA Mailing List <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>  ; NSRCA
Mailing List <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>  

Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2007 9:57 PM

Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1

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>
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
<mailto: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 <http://www.aol.com/?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503> .

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org 
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

  _____  

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion 

  _____  

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.463 / Virus Database: 269.6.1/776 - Release Date: 4/25/2007
12:19 PM

  _____  

_______________________________________________
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/20070426/7e671d63/attachment-0001.html 