[NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?

[Matthew Frederick]

The system already allows for moving to another class for a single contest 
due to lack of competition. It would be a bad idea to allow it whenever the 
pilot felt like it. Someone would be able to decide instead of flying 
Advanced at a contest they would go ahead and fly intermediate. You get a 
good enough pilot working the system and he could theoretically win district 
champ in 2 classes. There is also a mechanism in place for requesting a 
change in class due to an extensive layoff from flying. I could have done 
that when I came back last year and started over in sportsman in spite of 
being district champ in Novice the last year I competed. I didn't feel 
compelled to do that to pilots just starting out even though I had been away 
for more than 10 years (yes, I was young when I won district) It would have 
ruffled some feathers to say the least, but it was something I had available 
to me.

Matt

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Anthony Romano" <anthonyr105 at hotmail.com>
To: <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 9:17 AM
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?




A number have made comments about changes in priorities/practice time. Would
more flexibillity help? Would allowing participants the opportunity to move
up or down easily help retain pilots? Is that number signficant enough to
care? Kind of like Earls idea of maintaining a rating. IMHO you don't want
to make pilots feel over there heads because life got in the way of toy
airplanes.

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: [NSRCA-discussion] Advancement: let's wrap it up
>Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 23:59:27 -0500
>
>http://www.modelaircraft.org/PDF-files/333.pdf
>
>Here's the rules proposal form.  If we can get one or three people to fill
>it in and post it for review here maybe this discussion will result in
>something.
>
>Here's a summary of what I think I've read (beware of severe summarizing):
>Advancement rules based on hard numbers (like 100 points) are wrong because
>some people go to more contests or some districts have more pilots.  A
>system based on percentages would be better.  We've heard a comparison to a
>national average (need an implementable procedure to accurately compute
>this), force up of the district champs, and accumulating the raw scores for
>the year into averages that can be compared.
>
>We've also heard of simply tracking and publishing points and letting
>heckling take care of the rest (really need a 3 or 4 year window on this to
>allow one to level off before masters).  Note: this was the way it was 4
>years ago, but that was before every district could post points on their
>website.  It didn't work then.
>
>Several recommendations to increase the points above 100, but this is
>really just an adjustment for the size of the district so if this can be
>modified into a way to calculate an advancement number by district, maybe
>it could work.
>
>--Lance


>_______________________________________________
>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%20theater&cp=42.358996~-71.056691&style=r&lvl=13&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=950607&encType=1&FORM=MGAC01




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


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