[NSRCA-discussion] 2001 NATs
george w. kennie
geobet at gis.net
Wed Jun 27 10:39:22 AKDT 2007
RIGHT ON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
----- Original Message -----
From: "DwayneNancy" <dwaynenancy at suddenlink.net>
To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 10:23 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2001 NATs
> Nope, man forgives man but remembers. Man must repent and ask God for
> forgiveness and if man is in the right relationship with God, God will
> forget the sin except that God wipes the slate clean when the above
> conditions are met. The slate can get written on again but only for new
> transgressions. Process will then be repeated starting with admission
> repentance. Dwayne
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of John
> Pavlick
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 11:09 PM
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2001 NATs
>
> I thought it was the other way around... <VBG>
>
> John Pavlick
> http://www.idseng.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "DwayneNancy" <dwaynenancy at suddenlink.net>
> To: "'NSRCA Mailing List'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 11:47 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2001 NATs
>
>
>> On behalf of another that "shot" someone down there's never a complete
>> forgetfulness from those included in the circle. We as members of the
>> human
>> race can forgive but not forget. Only God forgives AND forgets. Thank
>> goodness. Dwayne
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Dave
>> Lockhart
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 8:26 PM
>> To: 'NSRCA Mailing List'
>> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] 2001 NATs
>>
>> W. Hinkle,
>> I don't recognize your name or email address, so my apologies if I've
>> forgotten a prior meeting. In any case, I don't know your sources /
>> affiliations / etc, and I hope you don't mind me offering my recollection
>> of
>> the topic you introduced.
>>
>> I've known John and his Father Peter for many years. As a matter of
>> fact,
>
>> I
>> made a point out of recommending John for Team JR after watching him put
>> on
>> an incredible freestyle display with a Midwest Cap at the Pocono IMAC one
>> year. At pattern contests, I watched John move up through the classes
>> and
>> made a point out of offering advice and coaching John and Peter. Early
>> on,
>> both John and Peter were very quiet, and very cautious about imposing
>> upon
>> anyone's time. Being that they were from an area without many other
>> competition flyers, and being a Father/Son Team, it was very easy for me
>> to
>> identify with them as my Dad and I had a very similar
>> experience/relationship when we started flying pattern competitively.
>>
>> That year at the NATs (2001 to recall), John was just finishing a
>> practice
>> flight at Site 1 one evening and I had finished some repair work and
>> started
>> to test run an engine. Yes, John and I were on the same frequency (ch 29
>> to
>> recall), and his new Smaragd (<30 flights is a good #) was about 3 feet
>> high
>> on landing approach. The plane went into an outside snap and smacked the
>> runway pretty hard (based on what I was told by several people, I only
>> saw
>> the airplane rolling on the runway). Immediately, the flightline was
>> buzzing, and I realized what I'd done. I walked out to the flightline to
>> meet John and his Father. The damage to the plane -
>>
>> - knocked off a couple of cooling fins on the OS140EFI.
>> - broke one of the plastic beams on the HydeMount.
>> - cracked the chin pan (ground off the front inch more accurately).
>> - scraped/ground about 1/4" of the bottom of the left wingtip.
>> - some stress cracks in the paint on, in front of, and behind the canopy,
>> a
>> couple of the cracks were partially into the glass/Kevlar.
>> - I think the prop was broken, the spinner was damaged, and maybe a servo
>> gear set was broke, but I'm not certain.
>>
>> John was understandably very upset about the plane, and Peter was
>> understandably not happy about seeing his son upset. I've been flying
>> since
>> 1976 and never shot anyone down except for that day - it is not a good
>> feeling and I don't wish anyone to be on either end of such an incident.
>>
>> What I offered -
>> - I offered to complete structural repairs that night to John's plane so
>> it
>> could be flown the next day, and figure out permanent repairs/finishing
>> after the NATs.
>> - I offered to take the Smaragd home with me, take time off work, and
>> work
>> nonstop to restore the plane and then drive it back to them (~7 hr
>> drive).
>> - I offered to replace the damaged EFI head with the one from my backup
>> engine (which was either NIB or had a couple break-in runs, I don't
>> specifically recall).
>> - I offered my plane to John to fly that evening and for the remainder of
>> the contest.
>> - I offered to let John take home my plane to fly until I repaired his
>> plane
>> or he had a new plane flying.
>> - I offered to give my backup plane (not yet test flown, still needing
>> equipment installation) in exchange for his damaged Smaragd.
>> - I offered to buy a new Smaragd and spend all my free time to
>> build/finish
>> it using the damaged Smaragd as the "model".
>>
>> I can't think of anything else I could have offered at that time.
>>
>> The above offerings were all discussed within hours of the incident.
>> Several very reputable flyers/builders were at hand offering additional
>> support. That night, Peter's biggest concern was not his ability (or
>> mine)
>> to repair the model, but was the loss of a competitive edge for the next
>> day's flying, and emotional upset stemming from damage to a new model.
>> That
>> evening, all options seemed (understandably) to be unappealing to John
>> and
>> Peter. The last discussion I had that evening was with Peter (John was
>> also
>> there) and he stated he did not want to see me "pay" for an honest
>> mistake,
>> and was not comfortable about how to resolve the situation - it was
>> something he and John would have to further discuss when both had time to
>> cool down. Despite the encouragement of myself and several other guys at
>> Site 1, John seemed intent on leaving for home that night (again, an
>> understandable reaction).
>>
>> The next day - I learned that John and Peter had started to drive home
>> the
>> prior night, but came back to the site after speaking with Mike
>> McConnville
>> (Mike was very recently the Team JR Manager at that time) during the
>> drive.
>> The backup plane John had was Mike's Fashion (which had been with them
>> since
>> the start of the NATs).
>>
>> I spoke with Peter and John several times over the course of the day, and
>> the "favored" remedy changed several times. Others that approached me
>> about
>> the issue were aware of the various options, and informed me of some new
>> ones I'd not heard of or discussed with anyone. A bit of confusion to
>> say
>> the least.
>>
>> The bottom line of it all was that I consistently offered to do whatever
>> I
>> could to make things right with John and his Father. The recently new
>> Team
>> JR Manager (Andy Pound, who held that position very briefly) was at the
>> site
>> that day. As Andy and I had never met in person, Len Sabato, the Team JR
>> Heli Manager at that time, was with him as Len and I knew each other
>> quite
>> well from working together at the WRAM show for many years. I do not
>> know
>> the exact content of the conversation(s) between Peter/John and Mike M,
>> between Mike M and Len/Andy, or between Len/Andy and Peter/John. I did
>> have
>> a private conversation with Len and Andy shortly after they arrived at
>> the
>> site. It was immediately clear to the three of us that some confusion
>> remained (understandable given the number of discussions I'd heard during
>> the day). The group of us (myself, John, Peter, Len, and Andy) had a
>> private discussion to make sure we were all on the same page.
>>
>> That day, from Site 3 (on a judging break), I spoke to Al at Central
>> Hobbies
>> and "found" a replacement Smaragd kit (in very high demand at the time)
>> which was sent to Bob Noll to build (on my nickel). I agreed to order a
>> full package of accessories for the new plane when I returned from the
>> NATs.
>> Before leaving the NATs, Peter gave me the original Smaragd (stripped of
>> all
>> hardware). Upon my return from the NATs, I ordered (from Central) all
>> new
>> accessories for the new plane - as that was what I had agreed to at the
>> NATs
>> - I actually ended up keeping some of the new MK linkages as Peter would
>> not
>> accept them (he retained the linkages from the original plane). Mike
>> Stokes
>> (former Team JR Manager), the current Team Futaba Manager took the
>> damaged
>> EFI to have it repaired no charge.
>>
>> To be 100% honest, for a little while after the 2003 NATs, the
>> interaction
>> was a bit awkward (for myself, my Dad, Peter, and John) compared to
>> before
>> the NATs - I think this is very understandable considering the emotion
>> during the incident and the confusion with so much "hearsay". I feel
>> that
>> awkwardness is long past now, and on the occasions that I see John and
>> Peter
>> (John no longer flies pattern actively in the northeast), it is always
>> friendly.
>>
>> Yup, I screwed up big and shot somebody down. And I'm now reminded it
>> seems
>> some will never forgive an honest mistake. What I've known for quite
>> some
>> time is that attaining a degree of success can put a target on your back
>> and
>> draw unwarranted attacks from others.
>>
>> I'd like to respect the intent of this list and the moderators request
>> and
>> close this aspect of the thread. My direct email is listed below, should
>> any be so inclined. Thanks to my many friends (old and new) who've been
>> supportive on and off list the past week.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Dave Lockhart
>> DaveL322 at comcast.net
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of W. Hinkle
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 11:26 AM
>> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too far.
>>
>> Dave is a good pilot but character being beyond reproach is a bit of a
>> stretch. Ask John Glizellis about when Dave shot him down and haggled
>> over
>> the price. This was to replace a brand new model with less than 30
>> flights
>> on it at the NATS. The incident was at the NATS during practice at the
>> AMA
>> field. We all make mistakes, but to penny pinch the guy that just cost
>> his
>> new model part way through the Nationals. JR had to step in and forced
>> the
>> hand. If it had not been for Dave the sponsorship threat Dave would still
>> be
>>
>> argueing the price of a new built model. Dave replaced it after some
>> debate
>> with JR. This is not character beyond reproach? Dave may be a good guy
>> just
>> don't be on the same freq. He'll tell how poor your model is built and
>> its
>> not worth the price of a professional built kit.
>>
>> I'll agree that both parties in this fight are not angels. I'm not a fan
>> or
>> Eric's but my question to this forum
>>
>> Why is the NSRCA involved at all?
>>
>> Doesn't the NSRCA have better things to do with its time and energy than
>> lynching a judge at the request of a couple pilots that have character
>> beyond reproach?
>>
>> I feel this is another sign of the NSRCA just wasting resources, time and
>> money in the name of being the Savior of pattern flying. Beware people
>> beware. Come on. Getting two of Dave's best buddies in D1 to write a
>> program
>>
>> to damn a person that they and David hate with a passion. To me is smells
>> like old shellfish. These were the same judges who claimed in the past
>> the
>> judge that gave the zero was the one that got it right.
>>
>> The NSRCA has no business in this arena. I find it appalling the Board
>> even
>> had this on the agenda. I also find it appalling that a ruling was made,
>> then Eric was notified of the charges and the conviction. As Eric stated,
>> no
>>
>> statistics can determine what the judge actually saw or better yet what
>> the
>> pilot actually flew. So Eric's scores were below the average for a given
>> pilot. Maybe the pilot flew below average in Eric's eyes. This is why the
>> NATS uses more than one judge. This is a fact of life. This looks very
>> one
>> sided by the NSRCA.
>>
>> The NSRCA has no place in this squabble.
>>
>>
>>>From: "John Pavlick" <jpavlick at idseng.com>
>>>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] Chapter-5 Going too far.
>>>Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 01:27:00 -0400
>>>
>>>Len,
>>> All of the people involved were from D1 - I thought the good ol' boys
>>>were in D2 and D3! <LOL>
>>>
>>>John Pavlick
>>>http://www.idseng.com
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Leonard Rudy
>>> To: NSRCA Mailing List
>>> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 8:47 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too far.
>>>
>>>
>>> John,
>>>
>>> The conflict may have blossomed like a Hockey Game Conflict, but
>>> in
>>
>>>the NHL
>>> those "with the power" hear both sides and let each side present their
>>>case before
>>> the powers to be assign penalties. After the penalties are imposed,
>>> the
>>
>>>player or
>>> individual still has the right to appeal the decision.
>>> You say Eric should take whatever the powers to be want and don't
>>>make any
>>> noise or waves.
>>> This is a clear message to others who will be judging at meets in
>>>the future. DO NOT GIVE THE GOOD OLD BOYS GROUP any low or bad scores or
>>>you may be on the receiving end of some form of penalty that you will not
>>>like.
>>>
>>> Len Rudy
>>> "Life is easier if you learn to plow around the stumps" or in other
>>>words, do not
>>> hand out low scores to the Good Old Boys or you will pay dearly for it
>>>one way or
>>> another.
>>>
>>> Fred Huber <fhhuber at clearwire.net> wrote:
>>> The penalty does not appear appropriate...
>>>
>>> It also sounds like it was not applied in a manner consistant with
>>> the
>>
>>>rules system.
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: John Ferrell
>>> To: Don Ramsey ; NSRCA Mailing List
>>> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 8:12 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too far.
>>>
>>>
>>> I have the good fortune to not be involved in this dispute. I am
>>>only aware of the conflict.
>>>
>>> Not being very good at staying out of arguments, I offer the
>>>following observations:
>>> A heated difference of opinions occurred.
>>> Every one involved is considered a valuable asset to the Pattern
>>>Game.
>>> Things were said that should not have been said.
>>> Every one thinks they are right.
>>> There was probably at least one (or may be several) bad call(s) by
>>>some one.
>>>
>>> The conflict blossomed like a Hockey Game Conflict and the net
>>>result was those with the power and responsibility treated it like a
>>>Hockey
>>
>>>Game Conflict! A serious "time out" was assigned to the individual at the
>>>focal point of the conflict. It was their duty to put the problem on ice.
>>>
>>> The expectations of the rest of us who value the game and its
>>>players is that right or wrong the referee's call must be honored. The
>>>referee has the power to impose further penalties if the individual
>>>continues to make waves. Right or wrong, this is the was disputes are
>>>handled in the world of competition.
>>>
>>> If the individual was drawn into the conflict by goading it is
>>> still
>>
>>>he who gets the penalty.
>>>
>>> Conflict resolution is not something that is natural to the human
>>>condition. Conflict is.
>>>
>>> Eric needs to take the penalty and get on with things.Those in
>>> power
>>
>>>need to accept that the penalty has been applied and to continue the
>>>game.
>>>
>>> WE ALL need to be aware that we either play nice or get sent to
>>> the
>>>showers!
>>>
>>> Another factor to consider is that the higher profile one achieves
>>>in this sport the greater the need to hold that individual to higher
>>>standards.
>>> Eric is certainly a "high profile" player.
>>>
>>> John Ferrell W8CCW
>>> "Life is easier if you learn to plow
>>> around the stumps"
>>> http://DixieNC.US
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Don Ramsey
>>> To: NSRCA Mailing List
>>> Sent: Sunday, June 24, 2007 7:32 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Chapter-5 Going too far.
>>>
>>>
>>> I would like to thank Eric for the nice complement in his
>>> comment,
>>
>>>"To circumvent this conflict of interest problem and to keep the
>>>Nationals
>>>above reproach, I steeped out of line and asked Don Ramsey to
>>>independently
>>
>>>choose the judges, Dave could not refuse this method, but I will tell you
>>>that he got extremely mad at me for doing it."
>>>
>>> I must respond that for good or bad I've been choosing the
>>> finals
>>>judges for many years. I started that process when Jeff Hill was Event
>>>Director. It must also be stated that I've never had any pressure of any
>>>kind from contest management regarding who I choose to judge. I try to
>>>pick the best candidates and rotate those so no single judge can
>>>influence
>>>the outcome extradionarly.
>>>
>>> Don
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>
>>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>> Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.9.6/863 - Release Date:
>>>6/23/2007 11:08 AM
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
>> ---
>>> Building a website is a piece of cake.
>>> Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.
>>>
>>>
>>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
>> ---
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
>> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>>
>>
>> --
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>> Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.9/870 - Release Date: 6/26/2007
>> 10:07 AM
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.10/873 - Release Date: 6/26/2007
> 11:54 PM
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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