[NSRCA-discussion] F at locals?
Dave Burton
burtona at atmc.net
Sat Feb 2 15:33:29 AKST 2008
Del, I've never advocated doing away with the Master's class. I only
suggested adopting the most current FAI P maneuver schedule and fly Master's
as a separate class as we do today. Masters pilots would not be required to
advance to the FAI class unless they chose to do so. Seems to me like it
solves several problems. It allows a CD to have more flexibility in
arranging flight lines, a larger pool of knowledgeable judges, eliminates
the need for NSRCA (or others) to come up with a new schedule periodically
for the Masters Class. I don't think there is any difference in the
difficulty level of the P schedule and the Masters schedule today and would
not require any greater skill level than Masters does today IMO.
Dave Burton
From: Del Rykert [mailto:drykert2 at rochester.rr.com]
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 7:09 PM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] F at locals?
Hi Dave
I'm not trying to imply that I have the correct answer to that question. Not
all people that advance through the AMA classes have the desire or deep
pockets to handle being competitive at the FAI level. Some Master fliers in
the past have told me the time commitment is high to be competitive in FAI
class. Higher than they can accept. That may be the biggest reason. Not
certain. But they do enjoy the difficulty and challenge of flying masters
and if told they had to move to FAI or if pointed out and made to move up to
FAI some would choose to leave. I see it as part of the dues some are
willing to commit to play. Some drop out after making it to intermediate.
Others after reaching advanced. Some have stayed and still fly those classes
but realize they don't have the time, desire, money, to move up and be
challenging or at least make a decent showing they can accept for
themselves. I believe the competitive factor varies with us all and what we
are willing to commit to fly pattern.
I'm even suspect their are other issues that escape us and why they are
happy to fly Masters.
Del
----- Original Message -----
From: Dave Burton <mailto:burtona at atmc.net>
To: 'NSRCA Mailing List' <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.f3a.us>
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 6:10 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] F at locals?
Del, what's the difference between " FAI type" schedules and "Masters
schedules"? You are correct about previous proposals not being accepted. I
have submitted a rules change twice for Masters to fly the P schedule and it
was defeated both times. Won't do that again, but I never understood the
opposition to it.
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Del Rykert
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 3:24 PM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] F at locals?
So it would be acceptable to you to drive some away from pattern as it has
been clearly stated that some Master fliers by choice do not want to fly FAI
type schedules. It has been voted on with surveys and discussed on this
list in the past to not use that approach.
Del
----- Original Message -----
From: vicenterc at comcast.net
To: NSRCA Mailing List <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.f3a.us>
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] F at locals?
I believe that FAI rules states that it is required more than 2 days event
to fly F schedule. I am sure that someone out there is going to be able to
find if I am correct or not. Of course, we can use the AMA rules and the CD
can override this if he announces the change with time.
I agree that in Masters we should fly the current P schedule. This will
make a natural transition when moving Masters to F3A. The rules should be
changed to make the F3A class the final destination of AMA classes. In
other worlds, Masters should not be the final destination as it is now.
--
Vicente "Vince" Bortone
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Tony" <tony at radiosouthrc.com>
Those are the very reasons that I stopped flying FAI. The FAI rules state
that the F patterns are for Regional, National and International events, and
are not designed to be flown at a local contest.
Tony Stillman, President
Radio South, Inc.
139 Altama Connector, Box 322
Brunswick, GA 31525
1-800-962-7802
www.radiosouthrc.com
_____
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Anthony
Romano
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 8:36 AM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] F at locals?
Another good point Jason. The more that the F is flown and judged the better
we all get at it. I can fly Masters or the P with equal mediocrity but the F
always just scared me off. Maybe one of my goals for this year will be to
learn it. Now if everyone promises no laughing I might try it.
From comments I have hear a lot of guys just don't want to deal with
rollers.
Anthony
_____
From: jshulman at cfl.rr.com
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 19:08:38 -0500
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging by committee?
Problem with that is that we're finding that enough FAI guys don't want to
fly F... so why hold 2 FAI- P classes? I understand getting to know 1
sequence is easier to judge, but the Masters and FAI guys should be able to
have a handle on the other class without much work. Its probably just me,
but if FAI were to fly both P and F, then having "Masters" fly P might be a
more Masters class this way. Then again, I may be off in left field, or is
this right? And since now both the Team Trials and Worlds pick the winning
teams at the end of the contest (after F) it would make more sense to start
flying F locally so it's not a shock come Nats time.
Regards,
Jason
www.jasonshulman.com
www.shulmanaviation.com
www.composite-arf.com
-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Dave Burton
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 6:53 PM
To: 'NSRCA Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judging by committee?
There is a way to solve the peer judging and several other problems with
changing maneuver schedules for Master's class.
Let Masters class fly the most current FAI P schedule as a separate class.
This provides a way that FAI class can judge Masters and be completely
familiar with the maneuvers and Masters class can judge FAI and be
completely familiar with the schedule. Then the rules committee does not
have to come up with a new schedule periodically as it changes every other
year just like FAI. The schedules (P & Masters) are so close in difficulty
that flying the P schedule should not be any problem for masters class
flyers.
OK, Flame suit on!
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Mark Atwood
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 3:56 PM
To: NSRCA Mailing List
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judgeing by commitee?
For our "matrix" version, the A& B masters groups, we effectively ran 2
contests. The scorer set up a second masters only contest for the B panel
to enter their scores. It worked quite well with only a little confusion.
It did a great job of picking the top 5 guys and getting them into the top
8. I'm pretty sure you could argue that 7-12th place might have had some
variance...but I think that's true regardless of the format.
-Mark
On 1/31/08 3:49 PM, "Anthony Romano" <anthonyr105 at hotmail.com> wrote:
I suspected this would require super- human objectivity as well as be a
logistical nightmare. However, everyone reall knows the sequence. Really
like the matrix system but not sure how much work that makes for the scorer.
Anyone have any thoughts on how to score that
One idea that was kicked around in D1 was fly an extra round in Masters to
generate an extra throw away. Each round two masters pilots judge and don't
fly rotating through the entire class. It seems like the time required would
work out the same because the group had two less pilots but again lot of
objectivity ( conscious and unconscious ) required especially as the contest
end grew near.
Anthony
_____
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:14:15 -0500
From: atwoodm at paragon-inc.com
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org; nsrca-discussion at lists.f3a.us
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Judgeing by commitee?
Anthony,
I have to agree with Jim, but for different reasons. We did this about 4
years back at our district championships with the masters class. We had 17
pilots in masters, and only one (me) in FAI, and another 6 or 7 in advanced.
So getting any judging at all would have required heavily using the
Intermediate and Sportsman classes to judge, OR, heavily burdening the few
Advanced guys...and sitting through 17 masters flights is a looooong
sentence.
So we did the peer judging scenario. Given the options, it worked very
well. But it requires some serious juggling to even try and make it work
well. We ! used pe er judging for 4 of the 6 rounds. Two flight lines,
with a rolling panel of judges. 5 judges on each line, tossed high and low
by maneuver leaving 7 pilots not judging at any given time. This allowed
the person before and after each flight some time to prep and decompress
before having to jump in the chair for 5 flights and then start over on the
second line.
It's a VERY VERY VERY busy process, not to mention that unless you
completely randomly resort the flight line each round, the pilot will be
judged but the same group...or maybe more importantly NOT judged by the same
group each round.
It worked...but it was messy. I would only do it again if we were presented
with the same grossly offset numbers of entries.
On a related note... A better solution was tried a few years later when we
had similar numbers (16 masters pilots)
We created 2 classes of masters...A and B. we still used FAI and Advanced
j! udges, but we were also able to sprinkle in B judges for A and vice
versa. We did 4 rounds for each group. Took the top 4 from each group and
combined them and they flew the last 2 rounds as a "Finalists" group (with
the other 8 judging and flying in their own group for the bottom 8 spots.)
This was MUCH more workable, and I think netted a fairer event in the long
run.
-Mark
On 1/31/08 2:46 PM, "Woodward, Jim" <jim.woodward at baesystems.com> wrote:
Hey Anthony,
**** Attempting a 50 words or less approach without too much regard for
political correctness *****
I don't think peer judging works. I don't think it sends the right message
about problem solving or achieving a more accurate score per maneuver for
each pilot. Psychology 101 would predict that it does not foster the right
mindset or circumstances for a competitive environment (Reality TV shows
like Survivor are based on one form or another of peer judging).
The #1 component that must be correct for it to work is that all
pilot/judges see and subtract about the exact same number of points per
maneuver see the same downgrades. The situation doesn't compute if one
judge is off from the others or uses impression judging. A bunch of stuff
should probably be in place for this to! work l ike: large number of
judges, drop high score, drop low score, etc. The highest caliber of honor,
integrity, and judge-education is required by all competitors to make this
work.
I witnessed this as a Masters pilot watching the FAI contest. I watched the
flying and this scenario VERY close. My opinion is that I would chose not to
compete in FAI in a peer judging scenario.
Thanks,
Jim W.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, includ! ing any attachments, is
for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
and proprietary information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient(s),
please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the
original message.
_____
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us]
<mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.f3a.us%5d> On Behalf Of Anthony
Romano
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 1:44 PM
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.f3a.us
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Judgeing by commitee?
Finally got a chance to read the current K-factor and saw a note on the
Tangerine contest. The article mentioned FAI was judged by a commity of the
FAI pilots. Could someone please provide details. Do you think you could
keep your objectivity? ! For tho se that were there how did it work out?
Sound interesting because you would finally be judged by pilots who know the
FAI rules and the sequence.
Could this be a solution for the oversized Masters class? Obvious drawbacks
too, but trying to inspire some thought.
Anthony
_____
Helping your favorite cause is as easy as instant messaging. You IM, we
give. Learn more.
<http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join>
<http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join>
_____
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
_____
Helping your favorite cause is as easy as instant messaging. You IM, we
give. Learn more.
<http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join>
<http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join>
_____
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
_____
Shed those extra pounds with MSN and The Biggest Loser! Learn more.
<http://biggestloser.msn.com/>
_____
_______________________________________________
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/20080203/8561ff28/attachment.html
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list