[NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement

Wed May 13 11:33:09 AKDT 2009

I’m not really arguing with you on that point.  There’s little need to change more than once a season.  Like I said, there’s little need to change period.  This only happens once in a while.  So seldom in fact, I just feel that there’s no need for a rule at all.  Rather than try to anticipate all the likely scenarios that may or may not occur, just let people fly what they want to fly, and see what happens.  I think you’ll find that the VAST VAST majority do nothing different than today, a few will do as you suggest…change the class they’re in for the season.  But there could be some odd circumstance that warrants something different.    Is this “Sport” so critical to anyone that we need to legislate against it??

Like I said earlier…it’s working well for FAI/Masters.  Fewer rules are better in my opinion and this is one that’s just not needed.

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Richard Lewis
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 3:23 PM
To: aabdu at sbcglobal.net; General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement

You're supposed to go from winning Intermediate to bringing up the rear in Advanced, that's the basic idea of moving up.  If everyone stayed in Intermediate until they could win Advanced, then we'd be arguing to keep forced advancement......Do you want/need to go back to Intermediate?  If the rule was that you had to fly a declared class or higher for a season, how would circumstances of life changes over "5 or 6 seasons" come into play.....Without forced advancement, you could start the season in Sporstman every year if you need to.....I'm still not sure what scenarios could occur within a single 5 or 6 month contest season that would necessitate someone moving from Advanced to back to Sportsman in the middle of that season.

If you've practiced all winter 3-4 times a week in Advanced, flown two contests, and then change jobs, or lose an airplane mid-season and can no longer practice regulary, is anyone going to move back to Intermediate?  Sequences only change in the off-season, not sure why that would cause anyone to have to move down during a single season?  If I flew Masters last year, and was scared to fly a new Masters sequence for some reason, then I could declare for Advanced in the upcoming season....

Richard

________________________________
From: Anthony Abdullah <aabdu at sbcglobal.net>
To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 1:40:34 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement
Gotta agree with Mark on that one. I went from winning the district championship in Intermediate to bringing up the rear in Advanced. Other than being a hack of a pilot it was a matter of circumstance. I started and finished graduate school, we lost my primary and conveniently located flying field, I changed jobs, and then when I thought I was all set for a great come back year, I lost my primary competition plane early in the spring. This was all over the course of 5 or 6 seasons and the sequence changed at least once during that time.

Mind you, I have not quite pointed out of advanced but I can certainly understand how a change in circumstances can change a person's ability to be competitive in a certain class.

Anthony
NSRCA #759

--- On Wed, 5/13/09, Atwood, Mark <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com> wrote:
From: Atwood, Mark <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement
To: "'nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org'" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Wednesday, May 13, 2009, 12:27 PM

Has this caused a problem beteen FAI and Masters?  People are free to move about

there and it works well.  I doubt there would be constant movement.

Regarding moving back, it has less to do ith ability or age (though those are

both factors) than situation.  Simply changing jobs can take you from being able

to practice 3-4 times a week, to 3-4 time a summer. Add a new sequence to that

mix and suddenly your ability to participate in the higher class is gone.

I just don't see the problems with movement. There's so little in

FAI/Masters that's its hard to believe there would be a lot in lower

classes.

--------------------------

Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld

----- Original Message -----

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org

<nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org>

To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>

Sent: Wed May 13 12:12:56 2009

Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement

I disagree that we should make it so that people can move from class-to-class

on a contest-by-contest basis.  If we remove forced advancement, then we

elimitate the problem of people being forced into a class they feel they are not

ready for.  That, by itself, solves the problem that may cause someone to

"need" or "want" to move back a class after

"trying" it out and finding they are not "ready" (meaning

they cannot win it on the first try????).  Folks will know if they are ready to

fly the next level, the sequences are not secret and can be practiced/flown by

anyone on their own time.  In order to cause them to consider their decision

carefully, they should be required to stay a minimum of a season in their chosen

class (move up if they like, not down)...If after that seaon, they want to

swallow their pride and move back, so be it....a season, even in the southern

districts is only 5 or 6 contests at most for most pilots.

Now if we are considering an older flyer who may not have the skills/ability to

compete in Masters any longer, that's a different story, and what I've

read and heard from MAsters pilots, once a person flies for some time as a

Masters pilot, they are just not gonna swallow their pride and move back to

Intermediate, no matter how easy it may be...

If we are considering the flier who tops out at Advanced and want to stay there

permanently.  No forcred advancment solve that one too....

   _____

From: "Atwood, Mark" <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>

To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>

Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 9:26:50 AM

Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] WRAP UP - Advancement

I’m in favor of it being a guideline, but I don’t think that verbiage

belongs in the rule book.  That’s best left for the NSRCA web site or some

other medium to describe.

As for moving down, that’s sort of the whole point.  To allow people to

choose where they want to fly, up or down the classes as their time, skill, etc

allows.   By nature you have to be competitive to enjoy this facet of the hobby.

 If you find yourself in a situation where you are no longer competitive,

(again, lack of time, money, skill, etc) then most will simply get frustrated

and quit.  I’d much prefer to see someone take a step backward, and continue

to have a rewarding experience, than to lose them from the sport.

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org

[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Ron Hansen

Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 7:01 AM

To: 'General pattern discussion'

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

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com/> <http://www.avg.com/>

Version: 8.5.285 / Virus Database: 270.12.27/2112 - Release Date: 05/13/09

07:04:00

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

Version: 8.5.285 / Virus Database: 270.12.27/2112 - Release Date: 05/13/09

07:04:00

_______________________________________________

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: 270.12.27/2112 - Release Date: 05/13/09 07:04:00
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20090513/ae1ab335/attachment.html>