[NSRCA-discussion] K-Factor morphed into Grow Pattern

[J N Hiller]

Before dropping out of pattern we flue a discarded FAI schedule in master
for as I remember 7 years. That was too long but changing every two year
rules cycle allow a little more time to prefect one's ability to fly the
'new maneuvers' rather than just learning and stumbling through new
schedules. Yes for top-level competitors an annual change is like flying an
unknown all year and only slightly impedes their performance.
Jim Hiller

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Robert L.
Beaubien
Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2009 10:43 AM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] K-Factor morphed into Grow Pattern

The idea around changing the routines each year is intended to provide a
little change for someone that fly's the same level for more than one year.
Since Sportsman and Intermediate are definitely not end levels like Master
where the same competitors fly them year after year after year, the routines
can be from a pool of pre approved routines.

Three Sportsman routines can be developed and then rotated on a 3 year
basis.  Same for intermediate.  For that matter, you could use the past 3
different sportsman routines and just rotate them on a yearly basis. This is
nice because it doesn't requires a committee to come up with a routine every
year for those levels.  Advanced might also fall into this category as well,
but definitely not Masters.  They need a routine committee because pilots
can be in that class for years and years and change to keep things
interesting would definitely be needed.

- Robert Beaubien
- NSRCA, District 7 Webmaster
-

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of J N Hiller
Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2009 11:30 AM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] K-Factor morphed into Grow Pattern

OK guys if you are going to change the schedules every year you need to
change the current mandatory advancement system as well so competitors aren'
t advanced prematurely. But we kind of have that problem now.
Jim Hiller


-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Derek
Koopowitz
Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2009 10:14 AM
To: 'General pattern discussion'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] K-Factor morphed into Grow Pattern

The AMA has indicated to us that this will be considered - it will
definitely be a rules proposal if everyone agrees.

  _____

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Budd
Engineering
Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2009 9:51 AM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] K-Factor morphed into Grow Pattern
Now that Dave Brown is gone we should try again.

Budd Engineering
jerry at buddengineering.com <mailto:jerry at buddengineering.com>
http://www.buddengineering.com

On Jan 31, 2009, at 9:18 AM, Gene Maurice wrote:

A BIG difference is that the IMAC schedules are an addendum to the rulebook
and DON'T have to go thru a rules cycle to change. We've tried this and
failed to get it past the AMA.

Gene Maurice
Plano, TX
AMA 3408 NSRCA 877
PACSS.sgmservice.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20090131/7df0ef68/attachment.html>