[NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?
John Gayer
jgghome at comcast.net
Wed Aug 15 15:19:16 AKDT 2007
Arch,
I have been practicing the current Masters schedule.
Just for some background, I flew F3A from the beginning days of
turnaround until about 1994 and competed in grab-bag Masters before
that. I've flown in International and local meets in Australia and I've
flown advanced, expert and F3A at the Nats, the last time being 1994. I
never flew the F3A schedules well and I understand very well the
struggle to get over 900 in FAI against top-notch competition.
I've never had enough time to practice and much of the practice I did
get early on was over 7000 feet in the mountains of Colorado with no
other pattern fliers around. My first pattern contest was in Colorado in
1978(or so) and I skipped Novice to enter Sportsman where I believe I
placed (probably third). Until recently I've never had a coach to beat
on my head about what are now very old bad habits.
I stopped flying pattern in 1995. I was tired of bringing up the rear in
F3A, needed a new airplane, had no time to practice or build(bad
priorities).
Anyway, that should answer your comments about not knowing where I stand
if I were to move up. I've seen the quality of flying in D6 masters and
I do not currently stack up well at all. and yes I believe I have the
background to make that assessment. I am currently flying mostly masters
in practice and do expect to move up next year, unless I decide to hang
out(sandbag) another year and try the NATS again in Advanced. :-)
I do believe our pattern community would be better served by having one
destination class rather than two. I fully expected that the Masters
community would object but I still haven't seen any good reasons why it
wouldn't work. It used to.
I also haven't seen any comments about the simplified advancement scheme
I proposed earlier.
John
rcpattern at stx.rr.com wrote:
>John,
>
>The two classes are not related. FAI is a whole different ballgame.
>The level of commitment to get competitive there is far and away
>beyond the other classes. FAI would be an example of racing dirt cars
>and going to NASCAR. Same concepts, but a lot more effort is
>involved. I just do not see guys that I've flown against complaining
>about it. Have you ever flown masters? If not, how do you know how
>you'd do? Until you actually fly the sequences against guys, you never
>know. You might surprise yourself. I have flown FAI, and I know
>where I can stack up. The FAI is also run in itself. Masters is
>setup by the AMA. Have you seen the new FAI schedules? 09 and 11 are
>going to require totally different designs. Some of the new designs
>that are showing up now will fly them, but you arent going to take a 5
>year old plane that was designed in 02 and fly F-09 with it
>competitively. You can fly a couple of years ago design in Masters,
>but if you are flying FAI, you'd be bett
>er be buying the latest and greatest.
>
>Arch
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: John Gayer <jgghome at comcast.net>
>Date: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 4:50 pm
>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?
>To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>
>
>
>>Why does this apply to every class except Masters??
>>Aren't there better flyers available to learn from in FAI? :)
>>John
>>
>>Ken Thompson wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Now THAT'S what I'm talkin' about!!!
>>>
>>>You will only get better if you do one of two things,
>>>
>>>1. Fly against people that are better than you, obviously paying
>>>
>>>
>>attention
>>
>>
>>>to their flights.
>>>
>>>2. Have a pilot that is better than you willing to coach you.
>>>
>>>I've been blessed with having both...any contest I go to in D6
>>>
>>>
>>will have
>>
>>
>>>pilots that are better
>>>than I am, and I have Archie as a coach to help me through the
>>>
>>>
>>little
>>
>>
>>>things.
>>>
>>>BTW: I fully expect to be flying Masters in 6 or 7 years. That
>>>
>>>
>>will put me
>>
>>
>>>at 54 or 55 years old when I make the move.
>>>
>>>Personally I have no desire to go to contests and come in 1st or
>>>
>>>
>>2nd on a
>>
>>
>>>regular basis, AND stay in that
>>>class...it simply won't make me a better pilot. My goal is to
>>>
>>>
>>get better
>>
>>
>>>every year, with hard work and patience,
>>>it will happen.
>>>
>>>Ken
>>>
>>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: <rcpattern at stx.rr.com>
>>>To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 3:55 PM
>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I take exception to this. FAI and Masters are not related. I have
>>>>been flying masters several years, finishing as high as second this
>>>>year at the NATS. Yes, I'm coming back next year in Masters. I
>>>>
>>>>
>>have>>a goal of winning the nats before I move up. I can be
>>realistic...at>>some point with enough practice I might be able to
>>crack the finals in
>>
>>
>>>>FAI at the NATS, but I'm smart enough to know that realistically
>>>>winning FAI isnt going to happen. I would also argue that the guys
>>>>that have been flying masters for years, just raise the bar. I
>>>>
>>>>
>know
>
>
>>>>in different areas I've flown around the country, these are the
>>>>
>>>>
>guys
>
>
>>>>that make guys fly better. Show up in District 6 sometime, and fly
>>>>Masters...you'll definitely get better. 6 of the top 10 at the
>>>>
>>>>
>NATS
>
>
>>>>were D6. The means, guy that finished in the top 10 at the NATS in
>>>>what is probably top to bottom the most competitive class have
>>>>
>>>>
>>trouble>>getting wood at a local contest. I can promise you
>>though, the guys
>>
>>
>>>>that fly here have greatly
>>>>improved their flying than they would have in other parts of the
>>>>country. Glen has set the bar here for a while, and I know the
>>>>
>>>>
>>other>>guys are pushing to catch him, and if you look now at local
>>contest>>scores, it is getting closer. At any given time down
>>here in D6, I'd
>>
>>
>>>>say 6 or 7 guys can take a round in masters. Now that makes it
>>>>
>>>>
>>fun. I
>>
>>
>>>>know when I was flying in D4 last year. Every contest I went
>>>>
>>>>
>>to, was
>>
>>
>>>>Verne K, and Steve Miller....I knew I'd better put up great flights
>>>>every flight and this makes you a better pilot. I think you should
>>>>try moving up...take a year of the low 900's, and then see where
>>>>
>>>>
>you
>
>
>>>>are the following year. I bet you start moving up and before
>>>>
>>>>
>>you know
>>
>>
>>>>it you would be right there in the mix. This is a competitive
>>>>activity and the only way you improve is flying against people
>>>>
>>>>
>>who are
>>
>>
>>>>better than you.
>>>>
>>>>Arch
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>From: John Gayer <jgghome at comcast.net>
>>>>Date: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 3:41 pm
>>>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class
>>>>
>>>>
>selection?
>
>
>>>>To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>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
>>>>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/20070815/f4264a6c/attachment-0001.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list