[NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancment
John Gayer
jgghome at comcast.net
Mon Feb 2 20:52:59 AKST 2009
What's the luck part?
Batteries shipped with the airplane?
Actually, are you shipping the plane or taking as excess baggage?
John
J Shu wrote:
> I do. I leave them discharged, all connectors taped and a bit of luck.
>
> Regards,
> Jason
> www.shulmanaviation.com <http://www.shulmanaviation.com>
> www.composite-arf.com <http://www.composite-arf.com>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Derek Koopowitz <mailto:derekkoopowitz at gmail.com>
> *To:* 'General pattern discussion'
> <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> *Sent:* Monday, February 02, 2009 10:44 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancment
>
> Who brings your batteries?
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> <mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On Behalf Of *J Shu
> *Sent:* Monday, February 02, 2009 7:33 PM
> *To:* General pattern discussion
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancment
>
> Its usually about $80-125 to bring my plane. Then I stick minimal
> stuff I need in my suitcase and carry on my Tx.
>
> Regards,
> Jason
> www.shulmanaviation.com <http://www.shulmanaviation.com>
> www.composite-arf.com <http://www.composite-arf.com>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* John Gayer <mailto:jgghome at comcast.net>
> *To:* General pattern discussion
> <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> *Sent:* Monday, February 02, 2009 10:24 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancment
>
> Good luck. Wish I were going too.
> What will it cost to get your planes there?
> John
>
> J Shu wrote:
>> Hi John,
>>
>> This will be my 2nd trip to the land down under. I was there
>> for the Desert Aircraft Challenge in 2007.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jason
>> www.shulmanaviation.com <http://www.shulmanaviation.com>
>> www.composite-arf.com <http://www.composite-arf.com>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* John Gayer <mailto:jgghome at comcast.net>
>> *To:* General pattern discussion
>> <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>> *Sent:* Monday, February 02, 2009 7:28 PM
>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancment
>>
>> Tom,
>>
>> The NSRCA website says overseas dues are 40 USD when
>> K-Factor is online only. Probably should be even less to
>> encourage overseas participation and since overseas dues
>> are gravy if K-Factor is online only.
>> Are your dollar quotes USD or AUD?
>>
>> For everyone else
>> Aussie dollar is currently about 0.63 dollars US.
>> current Sydney petrol price for Shell regular= 1.159
>> AUD/liter = 1.159 * 4 / 1.05 * 0.63 = 2.78 USD/gallon
>>
>> What is your homebrew cost for 30%DZ fuel using
>> coolpower oil? I assume that is the regular 2-stroke oil
>> we used to use rather than the low-viscosity heli oil?
>>
>> The APA website says Jason is going to be at the
>> KraftMasters this year. First trip, Jason? You'll love it.
>>
>> When I was there, Peter Goldsmith and a team that will
>> remain nameless put cable ties on the driveshaft of the
>> Canadian team van. They were sweating bullets all the way
>> back to the airport wondering if the van was going to
>> make it. Beware of practical jokers. Just enjoy massive
>> quantities of great beer and new friends.
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Koenig, Tom wrote:
>>> Hi Guys, Hi John...
>>>
>>> Sorry-been lurking for a while now.
>>>
>>> Yes John is correct about our system and I must say it
>>> kind of works ok. Nothing is ever perfect, but it does
>>> work. Maybe you guys can learn something from us?
>>>
>>> On another note, I've been a NSRCA member now since '95
>>> ( I think?) and Oh dear...I must renew...Sorry Jim! I
>>> have very few reasons actually to be a NSRCA member!!!
>>> What can the NSRCA do for me????? All I can get is that
>>> warm fuzzy feeling knowing that I am part of the pattern
>>> community-is that enough?
>>> On top of that, now that the dues have increased, the
>>> exchange rate is killing me!!! Let me ask this-how many
>>> of you would pay $100 for the K-factor alone?
>>>
>>> Well, I will-and I get no benefit at all from your
>>> organisation. Or do I?
>>>
>>> In all truth, I actually think I get great value! I have
>>> made some great friends over the years and how does one
>>> put a monetary value on that? So ( Jim in particular) I
>>> will renew asap...but I just might watch the exchange
>>> rates for a day or two and try and pick a good time!
>>> Oh-and I will write and contribute to the K-factor-I
>>> just need to line up a few more ducks first.
>>>
>>> Fuels: Guys down here most of us mix our own using the
>>> Coolpower oil. We source Nitro from VP ( or other
>>> brands) and buy methanol anywhere we can, as long as its
>>> pure. To buy pre mix is disgustingly expensive. I think
>>> a gallon of CP30 Heli will be close to $85. Just plain
>>> madness in my opinion.
>>> Electrics will flourish eventually-simply from an
>>> economic point of view. You guys in the US do not always
>>> appreciate just how lucky you are!
>>>
>>> Gasoline ( we call it Petrol :-) right now seems to be
>>> around $1.20- $1.30 per litre. Just a little trivia for
>>> you all.
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On
>>> Behalf Of *John Gayer
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, 3 February 2009 2:07 AM
>>> *To:* General pattern discussion
>>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancment
>>>
>>> Jim,
>>>
>>> When this subject came up lst year I suggested looking
>>> into the advancement system the Australian Pattern
>>> Association uses to address the issues you are bringing
>>> up. Their system is maintained by the APA which
>>> maintains the status of each pilot attending any
>>> sanctioned contests. In Australia you earn advancement
>>> to the next class by beating a national standard (raw
>>> score) three times in a running 12month period. They
>>> have 4 classes (FAI,Expert, Advanced and Sportsman).
>>> Since the APA is keeping track of all competitor's
>>> advancement status, there is no honor system or
>>> bookkeeping issues for the competitor. Since advancement
>>> is based on national scoring averages of the
>>> FAI(Masters) community, the quality of the local
>>> competition in the individual classes is removed(mostly)
>>> from the class advancement criteria. Also, advancement
>>> of the top flyer in a class locally has no impact on the
>>> advancement of the remaining competitors in that class.
>>> I flew under this system for a couple of years and it
>>> works quite well. The biggest problem, as always, was
>>> fair and honest judging. Typically, classes were judged
>>> by competitors in the next higher class and there was a
>>> tendency to keep lower class competitors down on the farm.
>>> More more information on the Australian advancement
>>> system, go to
>>> http://www.australianpatternassociation.com.au and drill
>>> down to rules and then MAAA Rules, scroll down to R/C
>>> Aerobatics Grading System to get a complete description.
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>>
>>> J N Hiller wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Yes John the NSRCA rules change survey is for ALL who
>>>> are interested in pattern (RC Aerobatics). We can't
>>>> emphasize this enough. For those who haven't been
>>>> around longer than dirt, the objective of the NSRCA is
>>>> to gain some consensuses within the pattern community
>>>> regarding rule change proposals. This process reduced
>>>> the total number of proposals the AMA change process
>>>> needed to deal with, many of which were in conflict or
>>>> adversely affecting each other, greatly complicating
>>>> the re-right between the first and second AMA votes. At
>>>> least I think that is how it was. It's been a while! In
>>>> any case individuals can still make change proposals
>>>> directly to AMA. To my knowledge AMA rules are not
>>>> controlled or dictated by any special interest group.
>>>>
>>>> <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->
>>>>
>>>> While out for a walk this afternoon I had a couple more
>>>> thoughts that I wish to share. First the story of how I
>>>> got to masters should have included how the remaining
>>>> advanced fliers would be affected by my absence. They
>>>> will likely be trading first place advancement points,
>>>> which will accumulating faster, epically if a single
>>>> individual dominates. Without gaining significant
>>>> proficiency someone could find himself or herself
>>>> forced into masters much less prepared than I, which
>>>> can be difficult at best.
>>>>
>>>> <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->
>>>>
>>>> When I spoke of using the raw score as a personal
>>>> benchmark I was actually using the judge awarded
>>>> average not the total K factor average. I found a
>>>> couple contest records both of which had 10-point
>>>> takeoff and landing, which contributed excessively to
>>>> my performance average. The K-average was 1 to 2 %
>>>> lower due to lower scores in higher K maneuvers. The
>>>> value to be used needs to be the K value average.
>>>>
>>>> <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->
>>>>
>>>> The other thing we should consider is revising /
>>>> simplifying the rule used to allow a return to a lower
>>>> class. Nobody enjoys being in last place all the time.
>>>> A performance average used for advancement effectively
>>>> identifies the upper performance limit within a class
>>>> and an equally valid argument could be made to use a
>>>> minimum value, below maybe 50%, to allow return to the
>>>> next lower class. Of course this of course would not be
>>>> mandatory.
>>>>
>>>> <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->
>>>>
>>>> The thought also occurred to me that some incomplete
>>>> flights due to a double fowl line violation should be
>>>> included in the contest performance average as well. We
>>>> don't see this very often but it justifiably pulls down
>>>> the competitor's performance average.
>>>>
>>>> <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->
>>>>
>>>> If you have read this far you are interested. Don't
>>>> worry about offending me. Post your thoughts.
>>>>
>>>> <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->
>>>>
>>>> Jim
>>>>
>>>> <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->
>>>>
>>>> -----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 1:36 PM
>>>> *To:* Discussion List
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancment
>>>>
>>>> <!--[if !supportEmptyParas]--> <!--[endif]-->
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>> >
>>>> <!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
>>>> <!--[endif]-->
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20090203/73328ea7/attachment.html>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list