[NSRCA-discussion] For Sale

[J N Hiller]

Thanks Ron.
I don’t really remember flying by frequency. I was relatively new in pattern
back then and just went to the ready box when it was my turn. This was
before contestant judging when host clubs were filling chairs with willing
club members and USPJA judges when available. The club members were
volunteers that seldom appeared a second time due to outspoken pilots
informing them of their perceived errors. I learned early on by watching
others not to express my dissatisfaction. At one point when I was district
VP I recorded scores I felt I earned for each maneuver and each flight which
were compared to the judges scores after the contest. I seldom found more
than a 2-point difference for single maneuvers and the flight scores were
virtually the same. It was an interesting comparison. Things got a lot
better with judge certification and contestant judging. The NSRCA can be
proud of the national standardization achieved through certification. Many
thanks to those dedicated individuals who continue the program.
Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Ron Van Putte
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 12:03 PM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] For Sale

Long ago, right after dirt was invented, we used to fly by frequency.  This
was back before the 50 channels we have now.  There were seven 72 MHz
frequencies, as I remember (if I'm wrong, someone will jump in and correct
me).  Contests were flown with, for example, all the pilots on 72.080 MHz
flying in a row, regardless of what class they flew.  It was awkward for the
judges, because they would see pilots in different classes flying in front
of them helter skelter.   We started flying by class in the southeast long
before the Nats were done this way.  In fact, it was our success with
running classes this way that lead to the Nats adopting it.  You just need
good frequency control.  Later, we decided to allocate certain frequencies
to each class and frequency control became easier.

Ron Van Putte

On Jun 7, 2007, at 11:42 AM, J N Hiller wrote:



Hi Ron. We’ve never met but I remember reading your column for many years.
Thank you!
I was flying pattern here in the Northwest in the early 90’s and don’t
recall having problems. Flight order on multiple flight lines was arranged
to position or separate conflicting frequencies which was inconvenient at
times, especially when mulligans disrupted the planned flight order. I guess
I didn’t understand the NATs planning problem. As I remember frequency
allocation first appeared when pattern and pylon events were flown
simultaneously and it was a no brainier to extend frequency allocation to
classes flown simultaneously on different flight lines. Can you fill me in
on the problem?
Thanks
Jim Hiller

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [
mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Ron Van Putte
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 6:14 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] For Sale

I also remember a Nats meeting in which flying by class, instead of by
frequency, was discussed. Rick said (actually more like 'bellowed') that
frequency conflict problems would make it unsafe and "nobody in the
northwest would put up with it". We'd been doing it in the southeast for
many years. Well, here we are flying by class.

Ron Van Putte

On Jun 7, 2007, at 5:59 AM, Bob Richards wrote:




I have to chuckle a little about the fixed gear Oly. Rick Allison designed
the Olympian. Back in the early '90s I made the comment to him that I
thought pattern planes would be better with fixed gear (and fat fuselages),
and he told me in no uncertain terms that "Pattern planes would never fly
right with fixed gear". It would "screw up the force arrangement". I thought
he was going to burst a blood vessel.
Never say never!! :-)
Bob R.


Ed Deaver < divesplat at yahoo.com <mailto:divesplat at yahoo.com> > wrote:
Piorun Olympian Medal with fixed gear and cheek cowls added.
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto: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/20070607/f996cdbc/attachment-0001.html