[NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question
Derek Koopowitz
derekkoopowitz at gmail.com
Tue Oct 20 16:06:26 AKDT 2009
Absolutely. I've written down several names already.
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 20, 2009, at 3:02 PM, "Dave" <DaveL322 at comcast.net> wrote:
> Yes!! Sounds like another volunteer for the next cycle!!!
>
> Derek, can we start compiling a list of new volunteers?
>
> Regards,
>
> Dave
>
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-
> discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Richard Lewis
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 5:17 PM
> To: General pattern discussion
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question
>
> Hmmmm.......Who is "they"......shouldn't it be "we"......as I
> stated, this particular issue was not chosen by me as a battle to
> fight in this go round of sequence development, but it sounds like
> you may be just the right guy to bear the cross on the issue in the
> next rules cycle....:)
>
> Richard
> From: RON HANSEN <rcpilot at wowway.com>
> To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 3:59:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question
>
> Then they should consider adjusting the sequence development
> guidlines.
>
> As other have mentioned. The hardest maneuver in sportsman is the
> cuban eight - cobra combo. Likewise, the stall turn - top hat in
> intermediate. Both were ill conceived. The sequence committee
> should focus focus on these issues and put less emphasis on
> individual maneuvers.
>
> I'll just keep pissin' in the wind:)
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Richard Lewis" <humptybump at sbcglobal.net>
> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 4:17:37 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada
> Eastern
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question
>
> I made the same point a while back regarding coordinated rolls, just
> before I "volunteered" <grin> to be on the sequence committee. I
> also got the same hair on fire repsonses from some of the list
> regulars...sometimes I think we lose sight of how many pattern
> fliers are out there that aren't on this list or rarely contribute
> to the list and it is easy to confuse the opinions of a narrow range
> of vocal list regulars with the overall sentiments of pattern fliers
> at large.
>
> Four point rolls and slow rolls are much better teaching tools than
> blazing through 2 or 3 consecutive rolls. I use my Dad as an
> example....his head literally does explode at contests when flying
> Sportsman in front of judges and I would much rather coach him
> through learning to use rudder in a 4 point roll than telling him
> to nose it up a litlte, jam on the elevator and try to give a bit of
> down at the right time in 2 consecutive rolls. Heck I've even seen
> him try 4 point rolls on his own when sport flying just for fun.
>
> Unfortunately they are not allowed in the sequence development
> guidelines for intermediate that are being used today to steer the
> sequence development process and I was not going to be the crusader
> that challenged this in the sequence contruction guidelines in this
> round of sequence development. I think that my contributions to the
> group brought a fresh set of opinions and eyes to the process and I
> hope that the sequences that are presented will be approached with
> an open mind from the armchair quarterback club.
>
> Richard Lewis
>
> From: RON HANSEN <rcpilot at wowway.com>
> To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 2:39:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question
>
> Mark you just supported my point. Sean is learning to use elevator
> on his rolls in sportsman as he should before moving up. I bet most
> sportsman pilots don't use elevator at all before moving up (I'm
> guilty of that). I also have seen a lot of intermediate pilots fly
> 2 rolls without using rudder. I've even had folks tell me not to
> use rudder on my 2 rolls. I believe this is bad advice. Slow rolls
> and point rolls in intermediate would force intermediate pilots to
> learn to roll with rudder before moving up. Requiring advanced
> pilots to learn slightly more complicated rolling maneuvers (yet
> less complicated rolling maneuvers than masters) would lessen the
> gap between classes.
>
> I've never used crack. Hg yes everyday twice a day:)
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Atwood" <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>
> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>, jpavlick at idseng.com
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 2:32:06 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada
> Eastern
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question
>
> Ron?? You’re smokin’ crack again. STOP that… Or wait, was
> that playing with Mercury…”No ill effects”…
>
> You’ve been flying Intermediate for several years and you’re
> close to moving out of it. On the other end though are the guys jus
> t leaving Sportsman. Adding point roll’s or any of the things you m
> ention would make their heads explode. I’m just trying to get Se
> an (son) to roll well with elevator and not pitch up 20deg before st
> arting. We’ll get that down in Sportsman, but we’ll save
> learning to slow roll, or even add rudder through the roll in a ½ re
> verse Cuban for Intermediate.
>
> Rolling with rudder is usually the last thing someone perfects as
> they’re cleaning up the hardward in Intermediate getting ready to mo
> ve onto Advanced.
>
> Mark Atwood
> President
> Paragon Consulting
> office ~ 440-684-3101 ext. 102
> mark.atwood at paragon-inc.com
>
> IT Solution Providers: Custom Software Development. Staff
> Augmentation.
>
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-
> discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of RON HANSEN
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 2:37 PM
> To: jpavlick at idseng.com; General pattern discussion
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question
>
> When I suggested that intermediate and advanced be more difficult
> what I was suggesting was that we need to build up more gradually.
> For an example, I believe two horizontal rolls done using rudder and
> elevator is more difficult than one slow roll or one 4 pt roll. I
> learned to roll using rubber and elevator by starting with a 4 pt
> roll. I've heard others doing the same. I agree that this can be
> taken to extremes. For example, I've heard folks suggest that
> intermediate add 3 rolls. I believe this will cause pilots to drop
> the rudder and only use elevator which I believe is detrimental
> later on (all rolls should include rudder and elevator). Maybe move
> the 4 pt roll and the slow roll down to intermediate and add some
> more complicated rolling maneuvers such as 2 half rolls reversed
> inverted to inverted or 2 half rolls reversed knife edged to knife
> edge. These or similar changes would close the gap between the
> various classes.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Pavlick" <jpavlick at idseng.com>
> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 1:59:50 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada
> Eastern
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question
>
> Having the turnarounds AND box exits in Sportsman is a good thing, I
> think. As long as the turnarounds are not cross-box maneuvers (like
> a Humpty) then I don't think it's asking too much of a Sportsman
> pilot to try to keep things in the box until they get a break (box
> exit). This is very good at preparing them for Intermediate (NO box
> exits) as Pete said, yet it gives them some way to correct their
> lines.What tends to happen to ALL of us is this: One little error
> moves your line. Then another moves your line some more. Until
> you've learned how to correct your lines smoothly and / or simply
> not make those errors in the first place (or at least make them to a
> lesser degree) the errors accumulate and without box exits, you only
> have cross-box maneuvers to help you correct them. Sportsman doesn't
> have any cross-box maneuvers so how would they correct their line?
> With box exits of course.
>
> As a few people have said - and I say this all the time: the
> sequence you fly contains the maneuvers which you are judged on.
> This doesn't mean that you can't fly different maneuvers and / or
> sequences when you practice. Do you guys just go to the field and
> fly your sequence over and over every time? If so then I think
> you're missing out on something very important. The difficulty
> between Masters and Sportsman is (and should be) somewhat extreme.
> Yet there are only 4 classes that must deal with this range of
> skills. It's nearly impossible to make each progression seamless.
> You must learn at least some new skills on your own. You can't
> expect that by repeatedly flying Advanced, you'll somehow magically
> be prepared to fly Masters when you point out. Trust me, you won't.
> VBG
>
> John Pavlick
>
>
> --- On Tue, 10/20/09, Pete Cosky <pcosky at comcast.net> wrote:
>
> From: Pete Cosky <pcosky at comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question
> To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Date: Tuesday, October 20, 2009, 1:04 PM
>
> I partially agree with your last post but those building blocks have
> to come from somewhere. From my experience, I moved out of Sportsman
> 4 years ago and then stopped flying to help raise my son until this
> year when I got to fly again in Intermediate. My flights were ugly
> but at least I had an idea of how it all had to go together because
> I learned those building blocks in Sportsman. IF what is proposed
> were to have happened in my particular case it would have been quite
> the obstacle to overcome and probably would have taken some of the
> fun out flying pattern for me.
>
> If a pilot needs work on geometry, and I know I sure do, then take
> the time to practice the given maneuver outside the sequence. Go and
> burn a few tanks flying the problem maneuvers and nothing else.
>
> My opinion is Sportsman is fine the way it is and it lays a good
> foundation for the progression in the classes.
>
>
> _______________________________________________ NSRCA-discussion
> mailing list NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> Internal Virus Database is out of date.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.420 / Virus Database: 270.14.3/2415 - Release Date:
> 10/05/09 06:19:00
>
> _______________________________________________ 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/20091021/47e986bd/attachment.html>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list