[NSRCA-discussion] I'm off to a contest....

Sat Aug 18 00:15:55 AKDT 2007

Sorry Dave, have to do this:
and this is (I think) even more engrained after making several prior transitions (Int to Sport, Sport to Advanced)
Further proving my point that we need to revert back to the old names: Novice, Sportsman, Advanced, Masters.

Nice to know I've been demoted back to the lowest level... let's see how that goes over in Lake Charles next weekend... I bet I could take home a trophy!!!

Matt

----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Dave Lockhart 
  To: 'NSRCA Mailing List' 
  Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 8:40 AM
  Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] I'm off to a contest....

  ..so I won't be reading 100+ emails the next couple days.  I started this new post because I simply couldn't decide how/which email to respond to.  So, forgive the somewhat scattered approach, but some thoughts I have after the last few days -

  - Why is Masters the largest class?  Maybe because guys like the class?  Maybe because it is a "comfortable home" without the added pressures/demands of F3A?  Do we want to force happy Masters into F3A (or maybe force them out of pattern)?  I'm not sure I see too many people dropping out of pattern on their way from Adv to Masters.  In any case, I think any changes to the Masters pattern should be done with the greatest of care - it is the largest single class on average at any given contest.

  - Difficulty between classes.  So what is the jump between Advanced and Masters is a little bit bigger than the jump from other classes - I think it should be.  Pilots with more experience are the best suited to handle larger jumps.  Pattern pilots by nature (meaning approach to practicing and learning, recognizing limits) are not likely to wreck planes learning new maneuvers for Masters, and this is (I think) even more engrained after making several prior transitions (Int to Sport, Sport to Advanced).  Besides, maneuver complexity itself is not the only measure of difficulty between classes.  Int is in part about learning what the box is - that is quite a challenge for many.  Sport has more complex maneuvers, as does Advanced.  To be competitive in Masters, you absolutely must be very skilled with the throttle and know not only how to fly the maneuvers, but how to present/link the maneuvers and present a seamless pattern.

  - Differences between Masters and F3A.  Many seem to think because the # of maneuvers, KFactor, and maneuver types are similar between Masters and F3A (prelims), that there is very little difference between Masters and F3A.  I don't agree.

  1)  To be completive in F3A, you must fly at a higher level, and in all wind conditions.

  2)  To be completive in F3A, you must be polished at both the prelim and finals schedules - even if the finals schedule were the same difficulty level as the prelims (and it isn't by any stretch), this is not simply twice the work - it is more like 4 times the work.

  3)  To be completive in F3A, you need to be quite comfortable with a library full of integrated loop/roll maneuvers - and you need to be truly comfortable rolling both directions in complex maneuvers.

  Bottom line of which is I would advocate a Masters schedule which is of similar difficulty (# of maneuvers, KFactor, maneuver types, etc) to the F3A prelims is indeed a step below F3A, and is indeed a good stepping stone to F3A.

  - Point system / Advancement.

  1)  At the end of the day, how many people are really affected by the point system?  Most advance when appropriate, if not sooner.  My opinion is that many advance as soon as they can consistently get through a pattern - and they move up without developing any polish - which is fine is the goal is not perfection.  Recognize that participant levels in different classes in different parts vary substantially, and vary with time (speaking for the US) - no point system is going to be exactly right all the time, and if we choose to, we can adjust it any number of ways.  And I think the only thing that matters is that we technically have a point system on the books which can be employed to force promotion of a clear "sandbagger".  Does anyone want to see a pilot in Int, Sport, or Adv who is not dominant in the class promoted to a higher level where they may never be competitive, and may be chased out of the event?

  2)  F3A is F3A, and it is a quasi AMA class as it is referenced/listed in the AMA book.  I say quasi because the maneuver schedules are not determined by the US for the US, and the amount of input the US has on the F3A schedules is quite limited (how many can actually name the guy that represents the US to FAI?).  Forced advancement from Masters (which the US controls) to F3A (which the US has limited if any control over) is not something I think should be pursued.

  3)  The goal of a feeder system of classes to "build" the best F3A Team for the US is a great goal.  However, not everyone has the time/desire to pursue a spot on the US Team, and they need a "home" as well. As I noted above, I think the current class structure does a good job of feeding F3A, and it also has room for destination fliers in Masters.  Could a better feeder system be in place if Masters were not a destination class?  Maybe.  But I think pattern as a whole in the US (including F3A) would suffer if any measurable number of current Masters pilots left the event due to changes to improve the feeder system.  The US pattern community is perhaps unique in the world of pattern - at the top, we have very substantial depth for fielding an F3A Team.  We have enough pilots to have 4 very competitive classes (including F3A) at the NATs every year.  The "feeder" system in the US is far better than most (if not the best).

  Regards to all

  Dave Lockhart

  DaveL322 at comcast.net

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

  _______________________________________________
  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/20070818/1b7789f4/attachment.html 