[NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format

Thu Jul 30 09:22:02 AKDT 2009

I think the plan is to do this when you check in at the farmhouse. At least that's the way I suggested that it gets done. In other words - as people arrive, not in a huge group. Most of the time I've been there there's never been more than a few guys picking up their packets at any given time. There won't be a line of 150 airplanes. Just three or four people with one or two airplanes apiece. This makes sense to me. We used to be able to get Street-Stock, SK Modified AND NASCAR Modified checked in before practice using the same method. :)

John Pavlick

--- On Thu, 7/30/09, Archie Stafford <astafford at swtexas.net> wrote:

From: Archie Stafford <astafford at swtexas.net>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Thursday, July 30, 2009, 1:01 PM

I think that part is easy. Dont give them a choice. It becomes part of what is required. If everyone starts early it wouldnt be that bad. Only takes a max of 2-3 minutes a plane.

Arch

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 30, 2009, at 11:57 AM, Ron Van Putte <vanputte at cox.net> wrote:

> If all airplanes that compete will be weighed/measured on the day of checkin, there had better be a non-flying group to do the job.  Competitors are not likely to be willing to spend the whole day weighing/measuring up to 150 airplanes (many pilots have backup airplanes) when they could be out practicing.
> 
> Ron VP
> .
> On Jul 30, 2009, at 8:32 AM, Derek Koopowitz wrote:
> 
>> Mike,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks for responding.  The board discussed a lot of these ideas the week after the Nats and we’ve been working on a list of stuff that we’re going to ask Dave to implement next year.  Pretty much what you’ve outlined below is in that list with some variations.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> We’re also going to fully enforce weight/size on all planes that compete – everyone will be weighed and measured on the day of check-in – each plane will be “stickered” as they qualify and if anyone fails to make weight or size then they’ll have the whole day on check-in day to make modifications but will need to be weighed and measured again before the check-in period ends (and pass) before they’ll be allowed to fly.  Random weight checks will also be made throughout the event (random process to be determined later).
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -Derek
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of michael s harrison
>> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 5:30 AM
>> To: 'General pattern discussion'
>> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: michael s harrison [mailto:drmikedds at sbcglobal.net]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 3:45 PM
>> To: 'Don Ramsey'
>> Subject: nats format
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> After considerable thought and reflection, I would like to share my views of the nats and the classes flown.  I believe we have been very fortunate to have an excellent group of volunteers that work and sacrifice to make the nats happen.  That group is led by the event director Dave Guerin, who has worked tirelessly and unselfishly for years at this job.  I believe he has responded to our desires to make this the best national event possible.  With that in mind, there are some changes I believe we can make that would be a win-win for everyone and reduce the workload as well.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> They are:
>> 
>> 1.       Have a finals for advanced
>> 
>> a.       8 finalists
>> 
>> b.      3 rounds
>> 
>> c.       Judged by advanced or intermediate judges(qualified volunteers)
>> 
>> d.      The site is open so it is not a space issue
>> 
>> e.      24 flights would take app 3 hours
>> 
>> f.        Do on 4th day
>> 
>> g.       Count the prelims as a 1000 normalized score
>> 
>> h.      Count 3 of 4 scores for the winner
>> 
>> 2.       Modify masters accordingly
>> 
>> a.       3 round finals
>> 
>> b.      Count prelims as a 1000 normalized score
>> 
>> c.       Count 3 of 4 for the winner
>> 
>> d.      10 finalists
>> 
>> e.      30 flights about 5.5 hours
>> 
>> 3.       Fai
>> 
>> a.       3 rounds final
>> 
>> b.      F-11 flown 1 time
>> 
>> c.       Each unknown(1&2) flown once
>> 
>> d.      Count the semi-final F-11 scores only as a single 1000 normalized score
>> 
>> e.      Count 3 of 4 for the winner
>> 
>> f.        10 finalists
>> 
>> g.       30 flights about 5.5 hours
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Rationale behind changes:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Advanced
>> 
>> This would make for a very exciting and fun event for the advanced class.  It would make the 4th day a very real part of the nats for them.  This format is totally self contained with no additional personnel required.  It could be started and finished before the masters and fai is done.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Masters
>> 
>> Masters is in a real sense an endurance contest.  How many times does someone have to fly the same sequence to prove he is the best in that class.  The present system is 10 times!  The only argument is the equal exposure issue-which may have merit.   The system I propose addresses that issue and takes less time.  I raised the number of finalists to 10 to close the argument that someone is cutout of the finals because of unequal exposure.  Counting the prelim as one of the 4 scores is, in my opinion a legitimate score to keep-having been earned over a period of 3 days under a number of variables.  Assuming incorrect scoring(bias, unequal exposure, etc.), the competitor has 3 flights to erase that concern.  Any 3 flights count so the prelims score can be dropped.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> FAI
>> 
>> The argument for doing 2 Finals pattern is that at the world event in the semifinals, there is not equal exposure of the pilots and the pool is so large that conditions can change substantially over the course of doing the semifinals.  This rationale wouldn’t apply at the nats.  The semifinals at the nats is only 2 flights with 20 pilots, using the prelim score as a 1000 normalized score.  Therefore, the 2 F patterns can be combined to be a score carried over into the finals event.  The finals then becomes a single F pattern and 2 unknowns.  Count 3 of 4 scores.   I would recommend doing the F schedule first, then the 2 unknowns.  I believe all the other pilots would love to see FAI unknown finals flown by some of the best pilots in the world. It would be a showcase event.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> To conclude:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I believe this is a win-win for everyone.  We would add finals to advanced; both the Masters and FAI finals would be shortened; the best pilots would be showcased; more pilots would be in the finals; fewer personnel to do the finals.
>> 
>> There is no perfect system.  I am sure there will be objections of some kind, but I believe this system has real merit and should be implemented.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Respectfully
>> 
>> Mike Harrison
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20090730/cc182246/attachment.html>