[NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancement

Tue Feb 3 10:28:25 AKST 2009

We could just roll a dice at the pilot's meeting.  Whatever you roll is the
class you fly. . .

On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 1:12 PM, J N Hiller <jnhiller at earthlink.net> wrote:

>  Eventually we may need to fly against our own ever increasing average
> Beater your past performance, if you can. The winner could be the contestant
> with the highest increase in a running average.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:
> nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]*On Behalf Of *brian young
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 03, 2009 10:44 AM
> *To:* General pattern discussion
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancement
>
>
>
> I just keep thinking....we need more people in the lower classes to push
> up. We need to fill the lower classes at least around where Im flying,
> otherwise it will be an all masters contest....how do you judge that?
>
>
>
> Either that or get the masters guys to get into F3A.
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Joe Lachowski <jlachow at hotmail.com>
> *To:* NSRCA Discussion List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 3, 2009 7:34:17 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancement
>
> It may be only me, but I don't buy this not ready for Masters mentality. In
> time practice usually fixes things along with taking ones lumps for at least
> a season no matter how much it hurts. I did this years ago when we were
> transitioning to turnaround. I saw the writing on the wall at that time and
> jumped from the old AMA style Sportsman right to the new Expert turnaround
> the following year. I took a beating and never finished better than fifth on
> the local circuit which was in some cases last. The following year things
> began to click and I placed in the top 3 a couple of times. Frankly, if you
> are an advanced pilot now and think you may have to move up the next season,
> you should be experimenting with some of the Masters maneuvers anyway. It
> can only make you a better pilot
>
> Jon you should be happy that you actually have a Nats trophy. I have never
> had the opportunity and will probably never make it to the finals in Masters
> because of the log jam up top. Yep, the Advanced sequence might be a little
> simplified, but you know what, most Advanced pilots still can't fly it any
> better than the previous sequence.
>
> > To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> > Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 19:52:44 -0500
> > From: jonlowe at aol.com
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancement
> >
> > Now he's talking about me!!
> >
> > Seriously, I only flew reasonably well at the NATS (5th) and one other
> > contest this year in advanced when Gary Courtney was well off his game.
> > I had my butt handed to me everywhere else. However, I was close to
> > pointing out in 2007 due to minimal competition at many contests, and
> > did point out this year. However, as the results at the the Tangerine
> > this year show, I am not ready for Masters ( I did beat Van Putte!).
> > Part of it is the Masters sequence. Half of it is inverted, and I
> > never encountered inverted entrances and exits as I moved up in ANY
> > sequence. The current advanced sequence was simplified a couple of
> > years ago, and it was overdone. However, I think I would go mad if I
> > was to do another year of advanced. The sequence needs to be shaken up
> > every couple of years, just to keep it interesting to those who aren't
> > going to move up anytime soon.
> >
> > I think the Australian method is interesting. Perhaps we could adapt
> > at least part of it to our needs.
> >
> >
> > 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 3:49 pm
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancement
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I can move back to advanced... never flew a Masters flight outside of
> > practice...lol. But don't worry, the only way I'd move back
> > is
> > if Blake gets to big of a head <G>.
> >
> >
> > I don't think the points advancement should be removed, just some new
> > 'rules' applied to it. I don't want to see a sandbagger stay
> > in a class that they clearly don't belong in. But I'd also like to see
> > a way for pilots that like to go to many contests stay in a
> > class if they still aren't ready for instead of pointing out cause
> > they're a die-hard competitor.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jason
> >
> > www.shulmanaviation.com
> >
> > www.composite-arf.com
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Dave Burton" <burtona at atmc.net>
> >
> > To: "'General pattern discussion'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> >
> > Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 4:41 PM
> >
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancement
> >
> >
> >
> > I agree with Mark on this. There is no reason to have a
> > points/advancement
> >
> > system that's not even administered and serves no purpose except to
> > force
> >
> > flyers to move beyond their ability in too many cases. Eliminate it all
> >
> > together!
> >
> > Dave Burton
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> >
> > [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Mark
> > Atwood
> >
> > Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 4:28 PM
> >
> > To: General pattern discussion
> >
> > Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Mandatory Advancement
> >
> >
> > Does he need one?? I thought20he moved directly from Adv to FAI? I
> > would
> >
> > think he could go back to Adv....
> >
> >
> > But that's my whole point. The only classes where some type of
> > mandatory
> >
> > move makes sense is the only place where we don't have one. AND IT
> > WORKS
> >
> > FINE.
> >
> >
> > Let's let people fly where THEY feel comfortable and competitive. If I
> > lose
> >
> > a contest to a "Sandbagger" than A) I still suck and can get better,
> > and B)
> >
> > they need to get a life and realize that it's a hobby.
> >
> >
> > How often does this really happen??
> >
> >
> > I think a simple guideline that helps advise people on where they
> > should be
> >
> > is the better approach.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 2/2/09 4:12 PM, "Tony Stillman" <tony at radiosouthrc.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Just contact your AMA VP. I have granted 3 or 4 such moves down over
> > the
> >
> > > last 3 years.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Sorry Jason, you WON'T be granted one.... LOL...
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Tony Stillman, President
> >
> > > Radio South, Inc.
> >
> > > 139 Altama Connector, Box 322
> >
> > > Brunswick, GA 31525
> >
> > > 1-800-962-7802
> >
> > > www.radiosouthrc.com
> >
> > >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > > From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> >
> > > [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of J Shu
> >
> > > Sent: Monday, February 02,=2
> > 02009 4:05 PM
> >
> > > To: General pattern discussion
> >
> > > 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" <simestd 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 ot
> > her 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
> >
> > >>> 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 alr
> > eady 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.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > _______________________________________________
> >
> > > 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-di
> > scussion 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
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> Windows Live™: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect. Check it
> out.<http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_allup_explore_012009>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
>

-- 

Keith Hoard
Collierville, TN
khoard at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20090203/1bccd496/attachment.html>