[NSRCA-discussion] Proposed Masters Sequence for 2009/2010

[Doug Cronkhite]

Just because you CAN change them every year doesn't mean you have to or 
should. I agree with you that the lower classes should have some 
stability so newer pilots have a chance to build the foundation the 
higher classes require.

I think the SIG should absolutely have control of the schedules, as the 
people leading the SIG are generally actively involved in the sport. 
Other than Tony Stillman, are any of the EC active in pattern? Because 
if they're not, then I don't think they can make an accurate assessment 
of the needs of the SIG. Tony may be the only one on the EC who even 
flies anything on a regular basis now.

-Doug

> I like variety in schedules too, but I think there is a balance to 
> strike with the lower classes.  It's a lot of effort each year to 
> learn a new sequence.  Once you have enough experience flying 
> aerobatics, you can focus on new sequences without detracting from the 
> other improvements you want to make.
>
> Re. giving the SIG all the control, I would not want to see that 
> happen.  In the case of IMAC, the SIG leadership became very IAC 
> centric and made changes that work against being able to learn 
> fundamentals before moving up, in favor a being a carbon copy 
> miniature of IAC.  Just look at what the IMAC lower class sequences 
> now contain and consider what problems they represent for learning 
> fundamentals.  I think you need an effective counterbalance to help 
> keep sanity to the sequence design.
>
> Ed
>