[NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?

Fred Huber fhhuber at clearwire.net
Wed Aug 15 15:42:52 AKDT 2007 

Buying the best has always been a requirement to compete in the top 
classes...

Chip Hyde designs a plane for FAI... and someone wins with it in Masters... 
and nothing else is competitive in 6 months.  Fly the new Wide body with the 
new super-engine (or super e-power system) or lose.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <rcpattern at stx.rr.com>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 4:57 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] More flexibility in class selection?


> 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
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.19/953 - Release Date: 8/14/2007 
> 5:19 PM
>
>

More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list