[NSRCA-discussion] Masters Pattern the long and short

[Derek Koopowitz]

This document has existed for several years already and has been refined as we've gone through a couple of sequence changes.  It has been posted on the website for at least 6 months - since the new sequences were released. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 28, 2010, at 7:20 AM, "Atwood, Mark" <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com> wrote:

> I have to say as a CB member looking to vote on this proposal to allow the NSCRA to control the sequences this document is CRITICAL to having this go through.  The biggest concern we have is either a radical shift in schedules, or worse, a slow series of progressive changes that alter the intent of the discipline.    The assumption is that the SIG is best to control and evolve the sport, and to keep things current with changes in the hobby.  But without a fairly strict guideline that controls the process, we could be subjected to the whim of a few. 
> 
>  
> 
> In other words…I’m very glad this document and process already exists.  It will make it much easier to pass this proposal, which I think already has wide support at least in my district.
> 
>  
> 
> Mark Atwood
> 
> Paragon Consulting, Inc.  |  President
> 
> 5885 Landerbrook Drive Suite 130, Cleveland Ohio, 44124 
> 
> Phone: 440.684.3101 x102  |  Fax: 440.684.3102
> 
> mark.atwood at paragon-inc.com  |  www.paragon-inc.com
> 
>  
> 
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Joe Lachowski
> Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 9:53 AM
> To: NSRCA Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Pattern the long and short
> 
>  
> 
> A draft version is posted on the NSRCA website along with the schedules. I do have a finalized version of it, but the one posted should give anyone a good idea. The majority of it is complete and accurate.  I'll send Derek the latest to replace what is up on the NSRCA website right now.
>  
> 
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 09:19:50 -0400
> From: rcmaster199 at aol.com
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Pattern the long and short
> 
> Joe,
> 
>  
> 
> I assume you mean that a document was created to serve as guideline for Sequence creation. Sort of an SOP for Sequences. Can the document be found anywhere? You may want to publish in the KF such that folks will understand better what you and team consider when creating the AMA schedules
> 
>  
> 
> Matt
> 
>  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Lachowski <jlachow at hotmail.com>
> To: NSRCA Discussion List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Wed, Jul 28, 2010 7:44 am
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Pattern the long and short
> 
> I think we have a pretty good document put together for sequence development now. I guess the board will have to establish a permanent Sequence committee much like the Judging Committee.
>  
> 
> Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 22:26:44 -0400
> From: rickwallace45 at gmail.com
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Masters Pattern the long and short
> 
> Agree that the short sequence makes better sense overall. If we decide we hate it, we can change it again in two years.
> 
>  
> 
> ** A procedural question -- It looks like the Pattern sequences will be removed from the rulebook as a result of current rules proposals. Would love to hear what the NSRCA will put in place for sequence management, maneuver descriptions, etc.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Rick Wallace
> 
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 8:07 PM, Don Ramsey <donramsey at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> After flying the long and short proposed Masters pattern for 2011, I’m in favor of the short one.  In our district there can be 12+ Masters pilots at a contest.  This is a very long sit in the judging chair for the judges and they may be needed more than once.  If you just want to fly that can be done in practice but don’t make the judges suffer through the long sequence for that reason.  Think about how you would like to judge the long pattern if there were 14 pilots flying. Electric guys will also be easier on the batteries.
> 
>  
> 
> My opinion,
> 
> Don
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20100728/7759074e/attachment.html>