[NSRCA-discussion] Exper Class??

[Budd Engineering]

Lance, Derek, Dave, et al -

What's the merit in having a rule to solve a problem that doesn't exist?

Thx, Jerry


On Feb 7, 2008, at 6:39 PM, Lance Van Nostrand wrote:

> Derek,
>
> The current system has been improved and probably needs further  
> tweaking.  We have a 4 year rolling horizon so guys collecting 100  
> pts in this time are either in very large districts or are doing  
> pretty well.  We have a current rule change in process to address  
> those that collect points too fast.  There was a lot of effort to  
> weigh the issues to come up with that rule. Scrapping the rules  
> altogether would invite a lot more uncertainty.
>   I think the guys complaining about not being able to move down are  
> just misinformed.  Section 8.1.2 of our rules allows anyone to fill  
> out a form and move down.  There may be plenty of reasons why a guy  
> might not want to do this, but rules barriers is not one of them.
>
> --Lance
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Derek Koopowitz
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 2:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Exper Class??
>
> Since there are 12 AMA districts it really does take a majority to  
> get a proposal through the contest board.  I also think that we  
> really need to run this by the membership to ensure that they are  
> behind a proposal like this - just because you and I and a few  
> others think that we should do away with this rule doesn't mean that  
> the majority of the membership feel the same way.
>
> On Feb 4, 2008 11:07 AM, Dave Burton <burtona at atmc.net> wrote:
> Scrapping the mandatory advancement rule is an excellent approach.  
> Where you when I submitted rules proposals in two different cycles  
> to do just this? I could have used the support as it was soundly  
> shouted down. I won't do that again. But it needs to be done. I'm  
> one of those 67 year old flyers  trapped in Masters/FAI who can't  
> move down where my present skill levels would be more appropriate.  
> Don't know if I would choose to back a class, but anyone should have  
> the option of flying the class most appropriate for them IMO. I  
> think peer pressure would keep the trophy hounds from staying. One  
> reason Masters is so crowded is ex FAI flyers who can't hack it with  
> the top FAI guys anymore and move back to Masters where they can  
> compete.
>
> Dave Burton
>
>
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org 
> ] On Behalf Of Derek Koopowitz
> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 1:47 PM
> To: NSRCA Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Exper Class??
>
>
> There is a discussion going on the District 7 list at the moment  
> about not forcing people to move up a class (using points).  Case in  
> point is a pilot that was forced out of Intermediate into Advanced  
> and has crashed 2 Angels Shadows due to "pilot error" (he admits  
> it).  He is 67 years old and his skill levels just don't warrant him  
> being in Advanced.
>
>
> Eric Henderson's last article in Model Aviation about the points  
> system in the NSRCA just proves this issue - I'm in full agreement  
> with Eric on this and would like to see the points system scrapped.   
> We definitely need to cater to the pattern pilot that is very  
> uncomfortable flying a new class (they've pointed out of their  
> current class) and would like to stay put until they feel more  
> comfortable.  This can also happen if a new sequence is developed  
> for their class and the pilot is uncomfortable flying it as well in  
> a contest.  Shouldn't we allow them to move back a class until they  
> feel comfortable with the new sequence (as Chris and Mike suggested)?
>
>
> I would hate to lose a pilot to pattern (and a long time supporter  
> of pattern) because the system forced them to do something that they  
> just aren't comfortable with doing.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20080208/cac7a728/attachment.html