[NSRCA-discussion] Flash Poll - Relocate the Nats in 2010?

[Derek Koopowitz]

Jerry Budd had a good suggestion in running 4 mini-contests for 6 rounds
where each pilot would fly against their group for 6 straight rounds and
then the top 3 from each group would fly in the finals.  I'm leaning toward
this because the current format does not work.  We also need to do something
about FAI - because there isn't equal exposure there either.



On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 2:41 PM, John Fuqua <johnfuqua at embarqmail.com>wrote:

> Every Nats I went to that had all events in 2 weeks ended up screwing
> Pattern out of time or space.  It never failed.  I am against it even
> thought I liked to go see other events.  We cannot do a first rate job when
> we compete for runway space and days to fly.
>
> I thought AMA wanted to reduce Nats costs.  Moving them around does not do
> that if you look at history and read up you will find a consistent comment
> about reducing Nats costs.  NPAC was fully funded by the pilots and it cost
> more than a typical Nats so factor that in.
>
> No one has addressed the equal exposure to judges issues for the current
> format yet and Mike's proposal does not correct that situation for Masters.
> I had one person suggest to me that if we continue to use the Matrix system
> that we take the top 3 pilots from each "Group" to a 3 round finals.  At
> least then we have equal judging exposure and more or less equal weather
> exposure per round.
>
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>  [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Tony
> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 2:56 PM
> To: 'General pattern discussion'
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Flash Poll - Relocate the Nats in 2010?
>
> That is a possibility also.  AMA is thinking about returning the NATS to a
> 2
> week all-events NATS like used to be done.  If all events are together, HQ
> can put all costs into one effort.  If they are all split up, Each group
> would have more costs to deal with due to the fact that HQ can't send a
> group of people to every site.
>
>
>
> Tony Stillman, President
>
> Radio South, Inc.
>
> 139 Altama Connector, Box 322
>
> Brunswick, GA  31525
>
> 1-800-962-7802
>
> www.radiosouthrc.com
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Tim Taylor
> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 3:39 PM
> To: General pattern discussion
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Flash Poll - Relocate the Nats in 2010?
>
>
>
> It was done, It was called NPAC
>
>
>
> Tim
>
> --- On Thu, 7/30/09, Bill's Email <wemodels at cox.net> wrote:
>
>
>        From: Bill's Email <wemodels at cox.net>
>        Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Flash Poll - Relocate the Nats in
> 2010?
>        To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>        Date: Thursday, July 30, 2009, 2:06 PM
>
>        Why not allow the SIGS to do their own thing? IMAC and NSRCA do not
> need to share a site. The LSF can find a site for the soaring NATS. Pylon
> knows what venues work for them and so on. FF can do their own thing as
> well. Why tie soaring and FF together and so on??
>
>
>        Tony wrote:
>
>        Matt:
>        Yes, it is just difficult to tell if it is actually feasible.  The
> problem is that it requires a large site for Pattern/Pylon/IMAC and will
> require another large site for Soaring/Outdoor FF.  It may be very
> difficult
> to actually find places that can handle this group.
>
>
>
>
>
>        Tony Stillman, President
>
>        Radio South, Inc.
>
> 139 Altama Connector, Box 322
>
> Brunswick, GA   31525
>
>  1-800-962-7802
>
> www.radiosouthrc.com <http://www.radiosouthrc.com/>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
>
>
> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> <
> http://us.mc623.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.o
> rg>
>  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/b41ad965/attachment.html>