[NSRCA-discussion] Movin' on up !

[J N Hiller]

At first glance the concept of minimum demonstrated ability seams reasonable
but probably not very realistic.
If I wanted to move to the current Masters schedule it would take me an
entire season to consistently fly at 65%. If I am going to fly it I want to
fly it in competition. This is kind of a learn as you go thing.
Jim Hiller

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of twtaylor
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 4:56 AM
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Movin' on up !

I'd like to float this idea to the masses.

Rather than have a point out rule in ANY class why can't this work?

Have each Class except Sportsman have a minimum acceptable level of
competency?

What I mean is we'd have to "Qualify" our flying ability to jump to the next
class. Rather than just being able to move up at will.
We'd have to have a panel of (For sake of argument Master class fliers)
judge an advance fliers ability to fly the masters schedule and the flier
must pass a 65% total raw score averaged across 3 judges 4  flights to step
up to the next class. Wouldn't this be better than just pointing out? Wouldn
't this give the pilot more incentive to do better? Wouldn't it keep a flier
where his skill set placed him? I'll admit I've not thought the whole idea
out from beginning to end. Looking at some of the Japanese sites they do
something like this.  The flier can be practicing the next class up once he
becomes comfortable with his current class.

Tim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20070817/335598db/attachment.html