[NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1

Mon Apr 30 10:17:37 AKDT 2007

Good points, that's the piece of info that we were missing.

Hmmmm......that sounds like exactly the same problem we have at some larger local events: the sport flyers could care less, even to the point of being anti-competition. And let's face it, we're seriously outnumbered in that regard.

You might should have prefaced the original question with that bit of info, it helps to understand the "angle'.

-Mike

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Tony Stillman 
  To: 'NSRCA Mailing List' 
  Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 2:09 PM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1

  Ok.. .you asked for a need. here it is..

  The Executive Council is always pressed by sport fliers as to why funds should be spent on less than 1% of the membership to allow for a site for a Nats, as well as the staff support and equipment support required to run these events.  The Nats takes up 6 weeks of prime flying time for Muncie.  Other groups would like to use that time for events as well.  The Nats operates in the red every year.  

  So, if we reduced the number of days required to have a Nats, that would reduce costs as well.  How do we reduce the number of days required to run the pattern Nats?  Do we just increase the entry fee to take care of all of the costs so the sport fliers can then be told that the competition pilots "pay their own way"?  Do we (the EC) just ignore them and hope they go away?

  I am a BIG fan of competition and the Nats.  However, I can tell all of you that many on the EC don't give a rat's behind about competition or the Nats.  I am trying to represent competition and how important it has been in the past and will be in the future.  

  So, how does NSRCA handle it if we get cut to a 2-day even for the Pattern Nats?

  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 Mike Hester
  Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 12:37 PM
  To: NSRCA Mailing List
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1

  ok, then one more:

  if it ain't broke, why fix it? Is there some underlying problem that we aren't aware of? I'm just not seeing the need I guess. if it were a vote, I'd definitely vote NOT to have to qualify for the Nats. 

  -Mike

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

    From: Tony Stillman 

    To: 'NSRCA Mailing List' 

    Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 1:07 PM

    Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1

    John:
    I realize that this is a different approach and that there are lots of opinions.  That is all I am asking for.

    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 John Ferrell
    Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 11:32 AM
    To: NSRCA Mailing List
    Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1

    Flame suit on, cannons loaded and ready...

    If you really want a good answer, ask the guys who are competing at Muncie this year.

    If you want to justify a position already decided, survey the population that will give you the answer you want!

    No offense intended.

    Why would you want to curtail the most successful segment of the Nats? Without the Nats, there is little point in maintaining Muncie. 

    (BTW, considering the source, I think you are shopping for ammunition rather than an argument!)

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

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

      From: Tony Stillman 

      To: 'NSRCA Mailing List' 

      Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 8:40 AM

      Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1

      Buddy:
      As I said at the beginning of this discussion thread, I am involved with a total NATS review.  We are talking about all of the NATS, nothing is too sacred to be up for discussion.

      One question I always had is why it the NATS an open event?  Most all sports NATIONAL championships require you to qualify.  With so many people complaining that the AMA NATS is 6-weeks long, this was brought up as a way to shorten the event.  It also would elevate the status of the NATS.  I don't see how this would reduce participation at the local level.  It may actually increase it!

      Keep in mind that this is just DISCUSSION!!!  Don't get all bent out of shape because we are talking about it.

      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 BUDDYonRC at aol.com
      Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 6:56 PM
      To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
      Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rule 8.1.1

      I have a question

      Why all of a sudden are you talking about special requirements needed for 

      Nat's entry.

      My take on this, is if this is done we will reduce participation. I may be wrong but if I am not how is this going to help pattern and the NSRCA?

      I think it will be the first step toward a further reduction in membership and a step toward an all professional Nat's 

      Second question

      Tony are you pushing this idea for real?  

      Buddy 

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

      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

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

    _______________________________________________
    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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20070430/9d3c8aac/attachment-0001.html 