[NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?

[John Gayer]

Ron,

Are you saying that I since I have no support from the NSRCA leadership, 
I am entitled to go my own way and submit a rule change directly to the 
R/C Aerobatics contest board?
If there is no support for my viewpoint here, then I would be seriously 
wasting my time taking your advice.

John


Ron Van Putte wrote:

> Well, it's your prerogative to take exception to the existing rules 
> and it's also your prerogative to submit a rule change proposal (soon) 
> for a rule doing what you want to do.  If passed by the R/C Aerobatics 
> contest board, the rules would go into effect in January 2009.
>
> Ron Van Putte
>
> On Aug 15, 2007, at 3:36 PM, John Gayer wrote:
>
>> Ron,
>> I take exception to those rules. There should be only one destination 
>> class. Why shouldn't there be a mandatory move from Masters to F3A? 
>> They are just two patterns with a natural progression as there is 
>> between Advanced and Masters.
>> Parking and sandbagging is a mental state, not a rules violation.
>> john
>>
>> Ron Van Putte wrote:
>>
>>> The Master class is the top AMA class and there is no mandatory move 
>>> from the Master class to F3A, so how can there be "parkers" or 
>>> "sandbaggers"?  
>>>
>>> Ron Van Putte
>>>
>>> On Aug 15, 2007, at 2:10 PM, John Gayer wrote:
>>>
>>>> how about changing the AMA advancemant rule and keep it very simple?
>>>> Your first contest of the year will determine your class for the 
>>>> year. You may go up one class at any time during the year but may 
>>>> not go back down during the year. At the start of the next year you 
>>>> may drop back one class at your option, stay where you are or go up 
>>>> a class.
>>>> This is simple enough that your fellow competitiors will know if 
>>>> you are following the rules. It will also be up to your fellow 
>>>> competitiors to insure that you are not sandbagging.
>>>> I also feel strongly that sandbagging in Masters should not be 
>>>> allowed. If you disregard Sportsman, then half of the classes allow 
>>>> parking. Obviously, F3A has to be a parking lot but I see no reason 
>>>> to allow this behavior in Masters. As a competant advanced pilot of 
>>>> somewhat advanced years, I have very little interest in moving to 
>>>> Masters in order to spend the rest of my pattern years trying to 
>>>> break 900 against the parkers.
>>>> I fail to see the logic in having two destination classes. 
>>>> Shouldn't we all aspire to progress to FAI? The current Masters 
>>>> schedule is designed as a stepping stone to Masters. Let's use it 
>>>> that way.
>>>>
>>>> John Gayer
>>>> NSRCA 632
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> BUDDYonRC at aol.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There was a proposal on the last rules cycle that would allow a 
>>>>> person to move up and test his ability then move back if he 
>>>>> had not attained the skills required for the higher class.  I 
>>>>> personally think it is a good idea and I also see no need for the 
>>>>> point system like someone said if someone abuses the privilege we 
>>>>> can solicit Earl and four other guys his size to take him behind 
>>>>> the barn and splain to him why he will be moving up. I believe 
>>>>> peer pressure is all the control we need.
>>>>> I think this is worth a try.
>>>>> For those who have the ability and desire to achieve a spot at the 
>>>>> top I don't see that we have a problem.
>>>>> Buddy    
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com 
>>>>> <http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour/?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000982>.
>>>>>
>>>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>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 
>>>> <mailto: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 
>> <mailto: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/20070815/ff431677/attachment.html