[NSRCA-discussion] Length of 2011 Masters Sequence

[John Gayer]

Vince,What changes did you propose to the FAI pattern for use in 
masters? Naturally once we modify the FAI pattern for use in Masters, it 
must become an "American Pattern" by definition as it will be in the AMA 
book. The Australians do something similar for their Expert class. And 
for those of you objecting to using the FAI maneuvers for Masters, there 
is a striking resemblance between the current Masters pattern and FAI P7.
Also. adding another class to make up for the inability of top Masters 
class pilots to move up is a terrible idea. Many parts of the country 
struggle to get contest attendance over 15-17 contestants. The last 
thing we need is to spread the lack of competition over another class.

John


Vicente "Vince" Bortone wrote:
>
> We send the proposal already early this year.   It is exactly like 
> Brian mention below.  It is up to AMA and NSRCA to get it done.  If 
> you want to read a copy send me and e-mail.  I will forward to you.
>
>  
>
> Vicente "Vince" Bortone 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian" <brian_w_young at yahoo.com>
> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2009 8:43:48 AM GMT -07:00 US/Canada Mountain
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Length of 2011 Masters Sequence
>
> My tendancy is to want to adopt the FAI but make some revisions that 
> keep it in the realm of possibilities for all current pilots flying 
> masters as well as the current  planes. There is some stuff in the FAI 
> that would cause a loss in participation if masters adopts it absolutly.  
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Kane <getterflash at yahoo.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 8:27 AM
> To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Length of 2011 Masters Sequence
>
>
> I'm with you on this one . . .  There might have been a time when the 
> Masters and FAI schedules were interchangeable, but not anymore. For 
> me personally it is the rolling circles or loops that would knock me 
> out. I have enough trouble making straight rolls look good.
>
>  Bob Kane
> getterflash at yahoo.com
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Ron Van Putte <vanputte at cox.net>
> To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2009 10:15:53 AM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Length of 2011 Masters Sequence
>
> Let me post a dissenting input.  If the Master class pilots were 
> "plenty good enough" to fly the FAI P maneuver schedule, we'd be in 
> FAI.  I have no desire to fly the FAI P or any other FAI sequence that 
> is selected by anyone else but pilots in the U.S.  The Master class is 
> the U.S. destination class.  Leave FAI and its maneuver schedules to 
> those who want to compete on the international level.
>
> Rant over.
>
> Ron
>
> On May 5, 2009, at 9:02 AM, michael s harrison wrote:
>
> > Joe,
> >
> > It has probably been mentioned before but I would recommend simply 
> using the existing-whatever is at that time- FAI P pattern for the 
> masters sequence and allow it to be replaced by the upcoming P pattern 
> every cycle.  The pilots are plenty good enough and it would really 
> simplify things and put everyone on the same page.  I believe it would 
> be exciting and fun.
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> > From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org 
> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Joe 
> Lachowski
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 8:05 AM
> > To: NSRCA Discussion List
> > Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Length of 2011 Masters Sequence
> >
> >
> >
> > There has been some discussion on whether it is time to shorten the 
> length of the Masters sequence for 2011. A Poll has been set up on RCU 
> to get the current crop of Masters pilots and future Masters pilots 
> opinions.
> >
> > http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_8742141/tm.htm
> >
> > Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync. Check it out.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20090506/064d0023/attachment.html>