[NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format

Joe Lachowski jlachow at hotmail.com
Thu Jul 30 10:36:50 AKDT 2009 

And there was controversy<g>
 
> From: ghwatson at comcast.net
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 13:04:53 -0500
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format
> 
> In the past AMA was successful in obtaining volunteers from the surrounding
> community, elderly, girl/boy scouts, etc. Couldn't these types of
> volunteers perform admin functions of the weights and measure process? This
> would also be a great time to get an equipment list survey filled out maybe
> even a contestant photos...
> 
> ~Glen W
> 2009 no show who failed to contact Dave G -- please accept my apology
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Ron Van Putte
> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 12:20 PM
> To: General pattern discussion
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format
> 
> Two minutes per airplane may result in a job five hours long. The 
> other half of the equation is that assigning several pilots to do the 
> job means that they wouldn't have to judge, depleting the judging 
> pool. We had several individuals who did a LOT of judging this 
> year. Dave Guerin was pulling his hair out, until the volunteers 
> came up to offer to do extra judging sessions.
> 
> Ron VP
> 
> On Jul 30, 2009, at 12:01 PM, Archie Stafford wrote:
> 
> > 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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™ SkyDrive™: Store, access, and share your photos. See how.
http://windowslive.com/Online/SkyDrive?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_CS_SD_photos_072009
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20090730/9807429b/attachment.html>

More information about the NSRCA-discussion mailing list