[NSRCA-discussion] Moving Along, Next Question on Masters

Fri Aug 17 21:48:23 AKDT 2007

Well Chris, if you're going to disagree with me I'll never speak to you again!!!  ;-) LOL

Chris, you're very kind and way too gentle.

Maybe it's the people I fly with, but I never perceived the progression from Intermediate to Advanced, in the old schedules, as a "real" problem. Sure, it was a bit scary at first, however learning to come out inverted is something I think Advanced pilots need to get used to. They need at least two or three inverted exits so the jump to the 60% inverted exits in Masters don't blow them away. If pilots aren't ready to give Advanced a try (in the old pattern) then they probably need another year in Intermediate (hence the forced advancement debate). 

When I made the jump from Intermediate to Advanced I wasn't very good at keeping my outside pushes straight. The only outside maneuver in Intermediate was the outside loop (and thank GOODNESS we had that). However, after two years of Advanced they became very natural to me and then the transition to Masters was tolerable. I was SO thankful for the elements in Advanced when I took that next step.

I guess we just need a compromise. Make Advanced more difficult than it is now but not as difficult as it was last year. Maybe just changing the 45 degree snap from inverted to upright would do the trick.

Keith

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: White, Chris 
  To: NSRCA Mailing List 
  Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 7:33 AM
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Moving Along, Next Question on Masters

  Hi Keith,

  I admire you as a true pattern flyer and competitor and promoter of the sport.  You are a great contributor to pattern and this column and usually I pretty much agree with you, but I'm not sure I do this timeJ  (I hope we can still be friends LOLJ)  How's that for lead in????

  Yes, I agree it those would help with the move to Masters, but is that more valuable than making the Intermediate to Advanced jump more tolerable?  At least when moving from Advanced to Masters a persons skill level is a bit higher.  I believe that Masters is just another phase of learning and since it is supposed to be a destination class, why not learn that skill at this time?  Especially since there is no mandatory move?

  I guess the real question is "Which class are we having trouble getting people to move to?   There are plenty of Masters flyers at our local contests (usually 2-3 times the amount of Advanced pilots)  Masters at the nats is usually double the number of Advanced.  For my own experience I moved to Advanced after Nats in 2004 and flew it until July 2005.  I have a bit of sport aerobatic flying and my skills are developed a little bit more than most new guys.    There isn't a problem with Masters that I can't blame on myself,  I haven't had the time to practice like I did for Intermediate and early advanced flying.  I keep a logbook and flew over 500 flights from August 03 to the same time in 04.  The last couple of years I'm very lucky to get about 70-80 flights a year.  Now that I'm in the class with the most experienced competition with so much experience to combat is when I need those 500 flights a year. (That probably won't happen again until the kids graduateJ)   I guess what I'm saying is since I'm in a destination class I have plenty of time to get competitive again..whether it is life's priorities or skill that is getting in the way.  (The good news is that I'm in a target rich environment.."OK MAV lets see some of that pilot Sxxx")

  Respectfully submitted,

  Chris White

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

  From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Keith Black
  Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 12:29 AM
  To: NSRCA Mailing List
  Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Moving Along, Next Question on Masters

  My opinion, increase the difficulty and add inverted exits to Advanced as it was last year. This provides a very nice preparation for Masters. As to the jump between the old Intermediate and Advanced, yes I recall the pucker factor doing the first double Immelmann where I had the inverted to inverted roll on the bottom. I just did it real high until I got comfortable. It wasn't long until it was no longer a big deal. 

  Keith Black

    ----- Original Message ----- 

    From: twtaylor 

    To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org 

    Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 9:53 AM

    Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Moving Along, Next Question on Masters

    Morning Gentlemen

    After reading many responses and having some private chats with those I respect their opinions highly I've changed my mind on Masters having to move up. I no longer think so.

      This now creates a few new questions in my mind.

      1.. Are we to keep Masters at a level slightly less than FAI so we can keep those happy that are "Parked" there? 

      2.. Do we make Masters a proper (Building) stepping stone between  Advance and FAI? 

    Right now I believe the fellows that designed the Advance schedule did a wonderful job bridging the gap between Int and Advance.

    I think the jump from Advance to Masters is a bit big. Barring adding a classes between Masters/Advance, which I don't think anyone wants, how do we do both?

    If we "dumb down" Masters to make the jump from Advance to Masters flow better on the skills set required then we might very well bore those that have been in masters for awhile. If we don't do we relegate those moving up to Masters several years of practice to get competitive? Maybe this is the answer, make the jump so hard it takes awhile to learn the skill set, or it just could be a dropping out point fliers won't bother to try to go beyond. Yeah I know, "If it was easy even a cavemen could do it"  J

    Opinions?

    Pros/Cons

    Tim

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

    _______________________________________________
    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/20070818/96680081/attachment-0001.html 