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

Sat Aug 18 02:42:28 AKDT 2007

Hey Keith...well Okay...LOL  thanks for the compliment. (You know how
abrasive typed words can look on email:-))

I can see your point, it will be interesting which direction we go in
the next change.  Change is necessary and many times good,  in any case
and we should always seek to satisfy the majority.  I personally liked
the 2004 Advanced schedule very much and like you, the most intimidating
part was the Double I outside push to full roll....but before very long
it was one of my favorite maneuvers and I'm sure it made me more
comfortable with push outs:-)

Hope you guys are getting to do a lot of flying.... 

Take care...

Chris

________________________________

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Keith
Black
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2007 12:48 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Moving Along, Next Question on Masters

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 <mailto:chris at ssd.fsi.com>  

	To: NSRCA Mailing List <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>

	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
time:-)  (I hope we can still be friends LOL:-))  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 graduate:-))   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 <mailto:twtaylor at ftc-i.net>  

		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"  :-)

		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/20070818/17a97057/attachment-0001.html 