[NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good for the future of thePattern Event?
george w. kennie
geobet at gis.net
Thu Jan 4 18:41:34 AKST 2007
Deano,
When you reference " changing the shape of the event ", how deep are you
suggesting things go? Are we losing sight of the fact that we are part of
the world community? I think we are where we are because of FAI and there
ain't no way we're going to influence the world audience. Or,.......is the
intent to create a new sub-event to co-exist for newbies only? I seem to be
a little confused here, but I don't think "Pure Pattern" will ever put up
with regression.
Georgie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dean Pappas" <d.pappas at kodeos.com>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 1:08 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models ... good for the future of
thePattern Event?
> Hi Anthony,
> Hi All,
> Forget the implementational details for now. Stop trying to Engineer it,
> we are doing Marketting.
> If it helps to get in the right frame of mind, take a few stiff drinks and
> bang your head on the workbench about ten times.
> If we decide that it's worthwhile, then there are a zillion ways to make
> the transition and to also grandfather existing planes for several years.
> That's not the issue, at least not for now.
>
> Changing the shape of the event: just for "something to do" would be an
> awful waste of energy and needless turmoil.
> We all dislike wasted energy, and I hope that we all agree that needless
> turmoil is to be avoided.
> I really want to focus on the basic question. Will making Pattern ships
> smaller lead to increased future participation in the event?
> If the answer isn't YES, then the grief probably ain't worth it.
>
> So far, I am hearing a mixed bag, and a whole lot of talk about the
> compromises we have all made when buying a vehicle.
> I am there with you. (stow 'n go Grand caravan ... love it)
> But the choir is already saved, and you all already fly Pattern.
> Please go pester the newbies and the folks that you think are potential
> Pattern newbies.
> Will this make a difference as to whether they take the plunge?
> Maybe the answer is that future participation won't be improved.
>
> After we figure out whether future participation will or will not be
> helped,
> then we can figure out what those of us already in the event would like.
> That is an entirely separate question.
>
> thanks for the help,
> Dean
>
>
>
> Dean Pappas
> Sr. Design Engineer
> Kodeos Communications
> 111 Corporate Blvd.
> South Plainfield, N.J. 07080
> (908) 222-7817 phone
> (908) 222-2392 fax
> d.pappas at kodeos.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Anthony
> Romano
> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 11:31 AM
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Small Models bonus!?
>
>
> Ok I will try it again. What about a 10 % score bonus for a 1.7m model?
> 1.5m
> 20%? Encourage the newbie or the guy on a budget and take away the
> perceived
> advantage without causing obsolescence on current equipment.
> Remember the biplane bonus at the TOC? Wasn't there a size bonus as well
> waaayyy back?
>
> Maybe it needs to be limited to sportsman or intermediate maybe not.
>
> Anthony
>
>
>>From: "Ed Miller" <edbon85 at charter.net>
>>Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Smaller Models
>>Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 08:12:11 -0500
>>
>>Yes, that is known as the BPA, Ballistic Pattern Association. So soon
>>there
>>will be 3 pattern venues to split the already dwindling pattern base :).
>>Ed M.
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Earl Haury" <ehaury at houston.rr.com>
>>To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 6:40 AM
>>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Smaller Models
>>
>>
>>Interesting indeed - a local club is considering holding a "ole fashion"
>>pattern contest this fall. The plan is to fly pre-turnaround pattern. Not
>>sure exactly what the rules will be - but not SPA, as the intent is to
>>allow
>>'70's - '80's airplanes with piped engines & retracts (one member
>>mentioned
>>a Brushfire with piped Jett 90).
>>
>>I'm very comfortable with pattern as it is - however, there is a gap
>>between
>>current pattern and SPA that many seem interested in.
>>
>>Earl
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Koenig, Tom
>> To: NSRCA Mailing List
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 7:16 PM
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Smaller Models
>>
>>
>> Guys-there are many of us that reminisce about the 'simpler' days of
>> the
>>60 size models, even down here!
>>
>> I mentioned recently to some locals that I may hold a comp similar to
>>your
>>SPA stuff. I considered just allowing 60 size models as a max, never mind
>>all the vintage rules etc.....I was SWAMPED with interest. There were all
>>sorts of ex pattern pilots ready to show up. I think I'd have had 40 -50
>>possible entries!!!
>>
>> Not trying to stir things up-but it is interesting nonetheless.
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Ron Lockhart
>> Sent: Thursday, 4 January 2007 11:31 AM
>> To: NSRCA Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Smaller Models
>>
>>
>> Yea, smaller has a number of advantages.
>> A reduction in money, time, hassle factor, etc., of models is a
>>thought
>>toward increased participation.
>> (Yea, I know the established pilots, and new pilots, are allowed to
>>fly
>>smaller models right now. But we have a
>> lot of history that shows Dean's comment "Given that everyone will
>>build or buy up to the maximum size limit" is true.
>> How does that Dixie thing go?....<G>
>>
>> Ron Lockhart
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Dean Pappas
>> To: NSRCA Mailing List
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 4:51 PM
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Header Brace
>>
>>
>> Hi John,
>> A year or so ago, I puit together an Excelleron 90 for a review and
>>eventual sale to a newbie.
>> Boy! Was it nice to drop a plane into the minivan in one piece!
>> It was almost as good as when a Phoenix 8 would fit into the back
>> of
>>a
>>hatchback Camaro in one piece.
>>
>> Given that everyone will build or buy up to the maximum size limit,
>> is there a good enough reason to push on the rules bodies to
>>legislate
>>Pattern plane sizes back down?
>> How about 1.6 or 1.7 meters square?
>> Will this affect cost and complexity enough to have a beneficial
>>effect on participation?
>> Or am I just whistling Dixie?
>>
>> later,
>> Dean
>> Dean Pappas
>> Sr. Design Engineer
>> Kodeos Communications
>> 111 Corporate Blvd.
>> South Plainfield, N.J. 07080
>> (908) 222-7817 phone
>> (908) 222-2392 fax
>> d.pappas at kodeos.com
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of John Ferrell
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 3:07 PM
>> To: NSRCA Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Header Brace
>>
>>
>> There seems to be a growing trend toward smaller airplanes among
>> a
>>lot of folks. I sure am enjoying the 90 size Boxer I bought from Ed Miller
>>last summer. Less hassle to transport, assemble and fly. That means I can
>>fly more!
>>
>> John Ferrell W8CCW
>> "My Competition is not my enemy"
>> http://DixieNC.US
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>>************************************************************************
>> *PLEASE NOTE* This email and any attachments may
>> be confidential. If received in error, please delete all
>> copies and advise the sender. The reproduction or
>> dissemination of this email or its attachments is
>> prohibited without the consent of the sender.
>>
>> WARNING RE VIRUSES: Our computer systems sweep
>> outgoing email to guard against viruses, but no warranty
>> is given that this email or its attachments are virus free.
>> Before opening or using attachments, please check for
>> viruses. Our liability is limited to the re-supply of any
>> affected attachments.
>>
>> Any views expressed in this message are those of the
>> individual sender, except where the sender expressly,
>> and with authority, states them to be the views of the
>> organisation.
>>
>>************************************************************************
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Fixing up the home? Live Search can help
> http://imagine-windowslive.com/search/kits/default.aspx?kit=improve&locale=en-US&source=hmemailtaglinenov06&FORM=WLMTAG
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list