[NSRCA-discussion] Stirring up the Masters 2009Sequence discussionagain...
Woodward, Jim
jim.woodward at baesystems.com
Mon Aug 13 05:04:33 AKDT 2007
... just some additional thought on this. P05 was tough. P07 was a tad
easeier. P09 looks to be even a tad easier than P07. From Masters to
P05 there was a big jump in necessary skill. The current Masters
pattern looks like a fun sequence as it is now and about right skill
wise. I also liked the newly proposed Masters sequence. I see it now
though that some of the Masters pilots could easily fly P09 at the local
level if they wanted. Masters has become a little bit more difficult,
and the P sequences have become a tad easier - some of the Masters guys
could easily fly FAI now. Besides, its fun!
Thanks,
Jim W.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and proprietary information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient(s), please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Anthony
Romano
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 8:56 AM
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Stirring up the Masters 2009Sequence
discussionagain...
Very timely Lance. I think Joe has it right on difficulty and design.
Masters should lead to FAI. The current window on advancement points
keeps
pilots moving to their correct level.
My question is why are so few Masters pilots willing to give FAI a shot?
The
two rollers in the P are not impossible and IMHO much easier than
circles.
We have had an issue in D1 were, like many, Masters is the largest
class.
Just this weekend the NEVRC worked very hard to put on a great contest.
At
the pilots meeting Masters made up half of the contestants with one FAI
pilot. Myself and one other Masters pilot decided to give FAI a try and
help
balance the classes. I didn't think judges could subtract that fast but
I
had a blast. Since my scores aren't much higher in Masters I may finish
the
year in FAI. Learned a ton about positioning and placement that wasn't
apparent in Masters.
Anthony
>From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <patterndude at tx.rr.com>
>Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Stiring up the Masters
>2009Sequencediscussionagain...
>Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 11:37:44 -0500
>
>I'm interested in what people think about this question. This strikes
at
>the heart of that topic: what's the difference between Masters and FAI.
I
>believe the many differences should be summed up as "choices". For one
>example, "do I choose to learn 2 sequences or do I only have time for
1?".
>Therefore, on the difficuulty question, I think Masters and FAI P
should
>track the same target difficulty. Jumping from Masters to FAI forces
the
>pilot to accept a lot of new issues that AMA doesn't deal with. But
the
>top AMA class should allow flying the same difficulty without the rest
of
>the baggage.
>
>On the other hand, if Masters is not a stepping stone class to FAI then
why
>have it at all? Is the baggage really that great? In practice, pilots
>usually hone their skills in Masters until they have achieved some
success
>before going to FAI, but that simply has created a division based on
skill
>but not difficulty. this is a tough question too, but since most
contests
>I see have more in Masters than FAI (or at least equal numbers) I think
our
>country supports the need for 2 classes even when the difficulty is the
>same (as it is now).
>
>However, designing sequences that actually feel equivalent in
difficulty is
>very difficult. Just counting Kfactors is not enough. Equivalent KF's
can
>be found in manuvers that have only straight lines and radiuses and in
>rolling manuvers. Rarely can that target be hit, so sometimes two
>sequences intended to be similar in difficulty will fly a bit
different.
>One or the other may feel more difficult but over the years with
multiple
>sequence cycles one should be able to say they are essentially
equivalent.
>Our AMA sequences build skills so that when we get to Masters we have
>enough fundamentals to fly any sequence in the KFactor range
prescribed.
>Remember, most countries don't have an AMA equivalent. If you want to
fly
>pattern, you start learning FAI P patterns. It is fortunate we have
our
>system so that people of all abilities can find enjoyment and those
that
>have super skills can follow a road that ends at the level of their
>choosing.
>
>Right now, Masters and FAI P07 are about the same. Once we say Masters
is
>a step below FAI P my guess is that most Masters pilots will feel
ripped
>off.
>Since AMA exists in this country for us alone we should do what the
>majority desires, however the opinion of the currently active Masters
and
>FAI competitors is of particular interest. Therefore it might be nice
to
>identify your active class participation in any response you might care
to
>make.
>
>--Lance
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Del K. Rykert
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2007 10:04 AM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Stiring up the Masters 2009
>Sequencediscussionagain...
>
>
> Is the intent/purpose to still have some progress from Masters to
FAI or
>to have Master at a similar complex level with the intent of some
staying
>in Masters as the top out Schedule? For some advanced is the highest
they
>will get.
>
> Del
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Keith Black
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2007 5:18 PM
> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Stiring up the Masters 2009 Sequence
>discussionagain...
>
>
> A while back Derek asked the membership if they wanted to stick
with
>the 2009 Masters sequence that was proposed in 2005 or change to a
newly
>designed sequence that addresses concerns some people had regarding the
>sequence. Apparently some pilots feel there are too many snaps or some
such
>complaints, I'm not really sure.
>
> At the time I was not able to go fly the sequences and thus I had
no
>response, however, I now have flown the sequences and have some
comments.
>
> My first observation is that six of the eleven centered maneuvers
are
>the same so much of the content of the patterns are identical. My
second
>observation is that each sequence has maneuvers I think would be more
"fun"
>or "challenging" than the other. If I had to put numbers to it I'd say
>there are three maneuvers in the 2005 proposed sequence that I'd miss
if we
>went with the newly proposed schedule and six maneuvers in the new
schedule
>that I'd miss if we went with the original 2005 proposed schedule.
>
> I'd also say that IMHO both of these schedules are easier than the
>2007 schedule and my initial impression was that the inverted entries
have
>been reduced. I short, it seems that the schedules have been watered
down
>from what we currently have.
>
> I will have no complaints flying either schedule, but if I were to
>choose between the two I'd select the newly proposed schedule; not to
>placate those that object to the 2005 proposed schedule because I feel
>there's nothing wrong with it; but because I think the newly proposed
>schedule is more interesting.
>
> Also, I'd like to comment that I feel that the Advanced schedule
for
>2007 was too watered down and does not prepare pilots for the 2007
Masters
>schedule. I hope when designing the schedules we aren't trying to make
>Masters easier so the jump from Advanced is not as big. If the jump is
too
>big then we should increase the level of the Advance pattern.
>
> Keith Black
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_________________________________________________________________
Find a local pizza place, movie theater, and more....then map the best
route!
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&ss=yp.bars~yp.pizza~yp.movie%20the
ater&cp=42.358996~-71.056691&style=r&lvl=13&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&sce
ne=950607&encType=1&FORM=MGAC01
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list