[NSRCA-discussion] Length of 2011 Masters Sequence

Wed May 6 07:14:40 AKDT 2009

No FAI hand me downs. Just take out three maneuvers, that's more time  
for other things.

Robert Satalino
rcairbob1 at comcast.net

On May 5, 2009, at 11:23 AM, mike mueller wrote:

>
> Mark we have plans for splitting Masters into 2 groups around here.  
> Anything else is a disaster. Mike
>
>
> --- On Tue, 5/5/09, Atwood, Mark <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Atwood, Mark <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>
>> Subject: RE: [NSRCA-discussion] Length of 2011 Masters Sequence
>> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca- 
>> discussion at lists.nsrca.org>, "mups1953 at yahoo.com"  
>> <mups1953 at yahoo.com>
>> Date: Tuesday, May 5, 2009, 10:57 AM
>> Hear Hear!!
>>
>> I love flying long sequences...hate judging them.  There
>> needs to be a balance.  Not just for the sake of the judges,
>> but also to accommodate the length of the contest.
>>
>> At a big D4/D5 contest we'll usually have 5-6 FAI
>> pilots and 15 or 16 masters pilots.  Currently the masters
>> pattern is a MINIMUM of 10 minutes per pilot (maybe not in
>> the air, but you have to really have people on their toes to
>> even get 6 flights in an hour).  With 16 masters pilots,
>> that's 2 hours and 40 minutes of flying per round if
>> you're humpin'.   Six rounds means 16 hours of
>> flying for JUST masters guys.  Assuming you have 2 lines,
>> that means one of those lines is dedicated to Masters for
>> the entire contest AND assume you have 16 hours to fly.
>>
>> We never have 16 hours to fly.  Rarely can we get people to
>> stay until 6pm on Sunday (9am - 6pm with a lunch break both
>> days) and most fields have the sun in the box either in the
>> morning or afternoon which shortens the flying day even
>> more.
>>
>> Now add to those woes that you only have 5-6 FAI guys
>> judging.  You need 32 man hours of judging, so even if you
>> mix in a group of Advanced flyers it's a loooong time in
>> the chair.
>>
>> Bottom line, regardless of whether it's P-09 (probably
>> not a good choice at this point) or a home brewed
>> pattern...it needs to follow the FAI trend of getting a
>> little shorter.
>>
>> My .02
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf
>> Of Archie Stafford
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 11:38 AM
>> To: mups1953 at yahoo.com; 'General pattern
>> discussion'
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Length of 2011 Masters
>> Sequence
>>
>> Verne,
>>
>> This started when I suggested to the sequence committee
>> that we need to
>> shorten the masters pattern.  Flying it is fine, but I
>> think we need to take
>> into account the guys who have to sit and judge it.  I
>> heard several guys in
>> FAI judging this weekend about how long a sequence it is.
>> Which wouldn't be
>> near as bad except for the fact Masters is usually the
>> largest class at most
>> contests.  I think we need to consider the length of time
>> in the judges
>> chair for those that have to judge it as well.
>>
>> Arch
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf
>> Of mike mueller
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2009 10:31 AM
>> To: General pattern discussion
>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Length of 2011 Masters
>> Sequence
>>
>>
>> The current pattern puts E. guys at a bit of a
>> disadvantage. It pushes my
>> setup a little further than I prefer. It is a great pattern
>> and I compliment
>> the designers for having a nice flow. Mike
>>
>>
>> --- On Tue, 5/5/09, verne at twmi.rr.com
>> <verne at twmi.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>> From: verne at twmi.rr.com <verne at twmi.rr.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Length of 2011 Masters
>> Sequence
>>> To: "General pattern discussion"
>> <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
>>> Date: Tuesday, May 5, 2009, 10:24 AM
>>> If it sounded as though I were complaining that the
>> current
>>> Masters schedule takes too long, I wasn't. Just
>>> commenting that it takes a lot longer than the
>> previous one.
>>> For me, eight minutes from takeoff to landing approach
>> (my
>>> timer is started on takeoff and is almost always
>> beeping
>>> during my landing). I fly at what I would call a
>> medium
>>> speed most of the time.
>>>
>>> I'm also against flying the FAI-P schedule.
>> I'd
>>> rather fly a home-grown variant that we create
>> ourselves.
>>>
>>> Verne Koester
>>>
>>>
>>> ---- Stuart Chale <schale at optonline.net> wrote:
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 8.5.285 / Virus Database: 270.12.17/2095 - Release
>> Date: 05/04/09 06:00:00
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/e299503c/attachment.html>