[NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement

Wed May 13 06:24:41 AKDT 2009

Here is the rule for reclassification right off the AMA website:

8.1.2: Exception: Consideration will be given to requests for reclassification to a lower class for various reasons, such as disability or breaks from participation of several years. For a flier to be reclassified to a lower rank, that person must make application (using a form supplied by AMA HQ) to be signed by a Contest Director and forwarded to the petitioners District Contest Board representative and Vice President for their approval. 

You may find your AMA Contest Board rep. by looking in the back of AMA Model Aviation magazine.  The members are listed every other month

immediately after Greg Hahn's "Focus on Competition" column.  The most recent listing is on page 153 of the May 2009 issue.  The "Vice

President" signature required is not the NSRCA VP but your AMA District VP.  That too can be found in the back of each Model Aviation.  The form

is not listed on the AMA website because it is a two part form...one of those that generates a second copy when filled out.  The nice person at

AMA scanned a copy for me that I am willing to email to anyone interested in seeing what it looks like.  What it asks for beside the three signatures

is the pilots infomation...name, AMA#, etc. and a brief explanation of why the request is being made.  I can't speak for AMA but I would be willing

to bet if you called them and asked if you could make two copies of what they sent me and filled it out in duplicate they'd take it.

I asked the AMA person if they had ever seen a request denied.  They said in the 5 years they had been doing them they had seen very, very

few and that they had never heard of one being denied.  I then asked how long the process took once the form was received by AMA?  

Answer: 

"Once the form is received here the only thing we do is mail it out to the member because at that point it has already been approved or disapproved by the Contest Board and District VP."

So, the only person who's signature is required that may not know the pilot is the AMA VP.  I would assume that signature 

would not be a problem since a CD and CB member had already recommended the change.  A note from the appropriate

NSRCA DVP would only help.

This getting too long so I won't go in to why I think eliminating the rules as they are would be a big mistake but it looks

to me anyone that trully believes they are in the wrong class can get if changed if they are willing to do a little work.

Hope this helps!

JLK

Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 06:17:35 -0700
From: humptybump at sbcglobal.net
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement

Guidelines do not belong in rulebooks.  If you are gonna be rid of advancement wording then do it, but don't clutter up the rulebeook with useless verbage that has no power of enforcement, we have enough of that already with the S&G BS.

The current rules address the move down and give a person the ability to petition a CD and their district contest coordinator for a move down for "various reasons".  Examples of various reasons are listed as a long break in flying or change in ability, but are NOT explicitly limited to these reasons.  Now, just because a pilot "tries" Master and finds himself not competitive it does not mean that they are not "ready" to fly Masters and should be allowed to move back.  It just means they need more practice to get a trophy.  It's not like the Masters sequence is a secret until you get to see it at the first contest you sign up for it...:)

IMO....Get rid of forced advancement and add wording for that forces a class declaration at the begining of the calendar year (first contest) that does not allow moving down during the season.

Richard

From: Ron Hansen <rcpilot at wowway.com>
To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 6:01:02 AM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement

I’m in favor of making advancement a guideline.  Perhaps we need to cover advancement as part of good sportsmanship and maybe include the ability for the district to vote on whether someone is abusing the absence of a mandatory advancement rule.  For example, leave it to the discretion of the District VP or a majority vote of the district members.  If the district decides someone needs to move up the competitor would have the option to stay where he or she is and not qualify for prizes and district points or move up at the end of the year.

What about the ability to move down?  For example, someone tries Masters for one or two contests and then decides they are still not ready and wants to move back down.  Do the current rules properly address this?

Ron

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of ronlock at comcast.net
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 8:12 PM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement

Years ago when the Sportsman sequence was rather short, some CD's were doing the sequence twice.   A rule was written to codify the practice, and provide suggested procedures on exit/entry between the sequences, and handle scoring of one take off & landing, but two sequences.  It's still in the book,  para 14.8.   Given current length of Sportsman sequence, it's rarely used.

Ron Lockhart

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill's Email" <wemodels at cox.net>
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 7:37:29 PM (GMT-0500) Auto-Detected
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement

Snaproll4 at aol.com wrote: 

CD's used to have the ability to have Sportsman fly twice which isn't in the rule book.  They now can have an Expert class which isn't in the rule book.  Can CD's suspend the advancement rule?  Just thinking out loud.

Steve 
Interesting question. The AMA gives CDs broad powers to waive rules as they see fit, but those usually pertain to the safe operation of a contest. The caveat is that the CD must publish any variations within 30 days of the event and it is best to list them in the sanction application. Changes can be made on the spot due to weather, etc., but it would be hard to see how advancement fits into that. So I suspect taht it would be difficult for a CD to do waht you suggest. What a CD could do I suppose is to allow a certain individual to fly a lower class, but again, that might be a stretch.

_______________________________________________ NSRCA-discussion mailing list NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4065 (20090511) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20090513/4b968f69/attachment.html>