[NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancment

[Jon Lowe]

There is already a procedure in the AMA rule book to move back.  Ed 
Hartley in our district moved back from masters to advanced a few years 
ago.
  Here it is:

8.1.2: Exception: Consideration will be given to requests for 
reclassification to a lower class for various reasons, such as 
disability or breaks from participation of several years. For a flier 
to be reclassified to a lower rank, that person must make application 
(using a form supplied by AMA HQ) to be signed by a Contest Director 
and forwarded to the petitioners District Contest Board representative 
and Vice President for their approval.

Jon Lowe


-----Original Message-----
From: J Shu <jshulman at cfl.rr.com>
To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 3:04 pm
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancment









Why not have pilots that wish to move back a class submit a request to 
(who?) and then that person contact some pilots in the area
to find out the scoop if it should be allowed or not. 
 

I would allow myself to move back to Advanced... I really should... 
oops, I can...hehehehe. 
 

Regards, 

Jason 

www.shulmanaviation.com 

www.composite-arf.com 
 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Atwood" <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com> 

To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>; 
"Tom Simes" <simes
td at netexpress.com> 

Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 3:55 PM 

Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancment 
 


Just one of the MANY scenarios that supports just having a guideline 

approach.  I like the data that PACSS will have, but again, let's use 
it to 

advise people where they best fit, not force them. 
 

I don't know of many trophy hounds that are so UN competitive that they 

would fly beneath themselves just for a plaque.  I'm sure they 
exist...but 

I'm also sure they have other more serious problems in life than me 
worrying 

about making them "move up".  lol 
 


On 2/2/09 3:43 PM, "Tom Simes" <simestd at netexpress.com> wrote: 
 

> Mark Atwood wrote: 

>> I¹m coming in very late to this discussion, but regardless of the 
system,  I 

>> really think the primary change needs to be that instead of ANY 
mandatory 

>> system, we change the key word to be ³Guideline²...meaning it¹s a 
guideline 

>> for when to move, but not a fast rule.  This is pattern...a hobby.  
Yes, a 

>> competitive one, but there¹s no huge money riding on it (certainly 
not at 

>> the levels that are subjected to this) and there will always be 
valid 

>> exceptions that no system can take into account.  So while we can 
and should 
=0
A
>> work on improving the advancement system to be as accurate as 
possible, I 

>> will likely submit a proposal that simply changes the existing 
system to be 

>> a guideline, rather than mandatory. 

>> 

>> I personally think that fixes almost everything. (well...with regard 
to 

>> pattern advancement). :) 

>> 

>> -Mark 

> 

> In PACSS, Gene already has the underpinnings built and working for 

> national results reporting.  I'm not advocating one way or another, 

> just throwing out a data point that one of the hardest parts to 

> coordinate is already in place. 

> 

> With regard to mandatory advancement, one aspect that I think 
deserves 

> careful attention is how to handle people getting back into pattern 

> after an absence or people who have reached a point in their lives 

> where their skills are in decline for one reason or another. 

> 

> It's sad to see a competitor who progressed into the higher ranks 

> years ago and feels obligated to stay there but whose skills are 

> obviously not adequate for the class anymore.  If mandatory 

> advancement is being considered, there should also be a mechanism to 

> move downward as well - instead of just leaving the hobby. 
 

_______________________________________________ 
0D
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