[NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancment

[John Konneker]

Jim,
Thank you for the thoughtful reply and your interest in the survey.
As someone once told me, you can't have change without dissatisfaction.
The subject of class advancement comes up often enough that one has
to believe a lot of folks feel there is a better way.
You bring up some excellent alternatives that need to be discussed.
I know this discussion will lead to one or more survey proposals.
I hope to have the survey ready to publish on the website, in the K-Factor and 
Model Aviation and on the various forums by late summer.  So we have time
to formulate your ideas.
By the way, the survey will be open to ALL those interested in pattern.
NOT just NSRCA members.
Once again thanks Jim!
JLK> From: jnhiller at earthlink.net> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 12:37:25 -0800> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancment> > John, I would be happy to get involved with this.> > I believe flight score averages derived from complete flights are good> indicators of ability. Advancement could be based on multiple contest> average (maybe 6???), enough to demonstrate consistency. 70%? 75%? 80%? 85%?> could be used as an advancement indicator rather it be mandatory or simply a> recommendation. Not having raw scores information it would be difficult for> me to suggest a hard number. Probably needs to be included in a proposal!> Last season's contest raw scores would be a good indicator of an appropriate> value.> > Here is my story:> I'm being pushed into masters where it's not likely that I will ever be very> competitive, but that's OK. I reached my personal plateau of about 80%> flying advanced in 2007. Through much of 2008 during practice I was just> standing in the flight box going through the motions, talking to who ever> was standing there. I expect I will be hard pressed to break 70% in masters.> My feeling is advancement percentage needs to increase with the class> progression as the skill development or learning curve tends to level out.> Not that the maneuvers are more difficult relative to our acquired ability> but the sequences become much less forgiving of even simple errors.> > For something like this to work the AMA would need to maintain accessible> records that are consistently updated by CD's. How many pattern contests are> sanctioned? Does AMA still require CD to send contest results to AMA? How> many CD's actually do? We started to touch on this issue in the 'national> database' discussion last year. How can it be done? Who is going to do it?> Who needs to be involved to make this happen? Are they interested? Are we> (pattern fliers) interested?> > Change is never without obstacles. Lets discuss this and other ideas and add> it to the rules proposal survey. Lets try not to get overwhelmed with> unreasonable high tech automated data management systems. We only need one> additional number included with contest results and a new advancement> 'points' card format.> > It's past time to try something different. John, how much time do we have?> > Jim Hiller> > > -----Original Message-----> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of John Konneker> Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2009 11:17 AM> To: Discussion List; d_bodary at yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Pattern Classes & Growth> > hmmm...> Jim H.,> That looks like a good rules proposal in the making!> I'd be happy to include it in the survey.> ;-)> JLK> > > > From: jnhiller at earthlink.net> To: d_bodary at yahoo.com; nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 10:37:28 -0800> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Pattern Classes & Growth> > Dennis your dedication is admirable and describes rather well the problem I> see with the mandatory advancement system.> It is based on performance of others, or lack of, rather than individual> capability. In short flying against more capable competitors reduces> premature mandatory advancement.> Flying a sequence for 4 years can get old especially if improvement stalls.> I pay close attention to raw score averages, both individual maneuvers and> total flight, and use it as a guide to understanding problem areas and gauge> improvement. It is also a very good indicator of flight-to-flight> consistency and the ability to control the flight in adverse conditions.> Even more rewarding than winning the round, contest or district championship> was maintaining my average flight score in very windy conditions.> Pattern flying can be very rewarding.> Jim Hiller> > _______________________________________________> 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/20090201/6a2d9ca2/attachment.html>