[NSRCA-discussion] Maintaining schedule/class continuity: Was:Acceptable use policy for the list...

Wed Oct 13 11:52:04 AKDT 2010

The FAI sequence committee ought to let ours do their work.  The F11 sequence is a disaster.  1 1/2 reverse cuban with a whole bunch of crap in it followed by an end box inverted half cuban eight = a mess.  Also, a snap followed by a 4/8 opposite AND a snap with a 4 pt opposite in the same sequence.  What were they thinking?  No one could have ever actually flown that mess before putting it on paper.

Jon Lowe

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Glaze <billglaze at bellsouth.net>
To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Wed, Oct 13, 2010 2:35 pm
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Maintaining schedule/class continuity: Was:Acceptable use policy for the list...

Verne:
I couldn't agree more.  In the length of time I've been flying Pattern, I haven't seen a schedule of figures that was bad--some may have been better than others, (notice: operative word:  "MAY") but there hasn't been a lousy one that I've seen; this wasn't magic.  I think you're spot on for commending those people on the previous comittee.  Thanks for doing so.
Bill Glaze

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

From:   Verne Koester   

To: 'General pattern   discussion' 

Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2010 3:13   PM

Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion]   Maintaining schedule/class continuity: Was:Acceptable use policy for the   list...

Just   so there’s no confusion, I’m complimenting and crediting the PREVIOUS Sequence   Committee that created the schedules we’ve been flying for the past few years.   I’m on the current committee and hope that the schedules that will serve   pattern in the next few years do so as well as the schedules we’ve been   flying. Just my opinion, but I’ve watched the trends for a couple decades now   and you can really harm the sport, particularly Sportsman and Intermediate   with schedules that are way out of whack with the skill set at those levels.   The increased activity level we’re seeing in and around D4 in Sportsman   through Advanced are directly related to the success of those schedules. I   remember Troy Newman, Joe Lachowski, and possibly Dave Lockhart being on that   committee as well as others and they’re to be commended for getting us back on   track.

Verne   Koester

From:   nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org   [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Atwood,   Mark
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2010 11:44 AM
To: General   pattern discussion
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Maintaining   schedule/class continuity: Was: Acceptable use policy for the   list...

Verne,   I couldn’t agree more.  The schedule committee has done a fabulous job   but I think we as a group have to stay very vigilant that we maintain a common   “Gap” and progression between the classes.  That does NOT mean we can’t   or shouldn’t keep up with the times.   But the balance is very   important and I think we currently have that (if by luck or design I don’t   know or care).   My son is going to try and jump from Sportsman to   intermediate in the spring and it will be a HUGE one for him.  BUT… we   went out to fly the maneuvers last week in stages and while he can’t put   together the whole sequence yet, I don’t think he scared himself making the   attempt.   A few of the maneuvers had some pucker factor… the double   immelman was the first time he had ever pushed through an outside half loop,   but since you immediately  roll to an upright and comfortable   orientation, he immediately relaxed and after 2 or 3 times I could tell it   won’t be a problem.

That’s   how the transitions should be.  Exhilarating, but not   frightening.   

Again   to the sequence committee..well done.

-M

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 Verne   Koester
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2010 10:40 AM
To:   'General pattern discussion'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion]   Acceptable use policy for the list...

I’m   confident that the schedules created by the previous Sequence Committee has a   lot to do with it. The trick now is to keep the class transitions and   difficulty levels the same as they are now. The quickest way to lose a new   Sportsman pilot is to make Intermediate too big of a jump in difficulty   level.

Verne

From:   nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org   [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Atwood,   Mark
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2010 9:34 AM
To: General   pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Acceptable use   policy for the list...

It   has to be a cycle.   Our area (D4) use to be a hotbed for pattern in   the 80’s but through the 90’s and aught’s we saw a very steady decline in   participation.  But the last 3-4 years has seen a resurgence of pattern   activity and a host of new participants.   We still have a large   masters class of long time competitors, but our contests now have a solid   contingent of Sportsman and Intermediates showing up to many contests.    Our district champs had 10 in Advanced…   A combination of long time   old blood, some new advancements from Intermediate, and some former   participants that are coming back to the scene.

I   have NO idea what triggered this, but I like it J

-Mark

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 Ronald   Van Putte
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2010 9:18 AM
To:   General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion]   Acceptable use policy for the list...

It'll be interesting to see what happens next. The survival   of our newsletter is tied directly to the number of advertisers.  If   those who sell products related to our hobby don't think it is profitable to   continue advertising in the K-Factor, our newsletter will founder.  I'm   sure the poor economy is part of the problem.  As the owner of a small   hobby shop, I can tell you that my sales this year will be about half of what   they were 5-7 years ago.

It appears that the number of competitors is down in the   southeast.  I was stunned to see only 12 competitors at the O.J. Stillman   contest in Jacksonville just over a week ago.  That contest normally has   numbers in the high 20s - low 30s.  The Huntsville contest in September   used to be a major contest, but there were so few contestants that we were   either flying, calling or judging all the time.  I know that numbers like   that will cause clubs to think twice about hosting another contest.    After a hiatus of almost ten years, my club, the Eglin Aero Modellers,   is hosting a contest in just over a week.  I hope the number of   competitors is sufficiently high, because, if they are, I'm sure we will   continue hosting the contest.  If not, there won't be another   contest.

Ron

On Oct 6, 2010, at 1:32 PM, Keith Hoard   wrote:

So how many competitors do we have left?

Sent from   my iPhone

On Oct 6, 2010, at 13:11,   mike mueller <mups1953 at yahoo.com>   wrote:

 I'm sure some see it as a small deal but if           you are a competitor and attempting to abide by the rules you may have           a completly different perspective. For that reason I think the rules           in place are well thought out and I think Derek is correct in pointing           it out. MIke

--- On Wed, 10/6/10, Keith Hoard <khoard at gmail.com>           wrote:

From: Keith Hoard           <khoard at gmail.com>
Subject:           Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Acceptable use policy for the list...
To:           "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date:           Wednesday, October 6, 2010, 12:49 PM

I'll second that!!!

Sent from my           iPhone

On Oct 6, 2010, at           12:03, "GEORGE KENNIE" <geobet4 at verizon.net>           wrote:

I think             this was meant as an advisory. 

I don't             think you'd want to call him in January only to find out that they             were no longer an

available             item when you had expected them to be.

I have             always found his updates to be useful information and his use of our             site to be discreet !

As he is             not the only purveyor amoungst our group to utilize the site for a             heads up and certainly 

not             abusing the privelidge, it would seem to me that these types of             advisories should be allowed

without             recriminations.

I think a             discretionary reaction should prevail.

G.

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

From: Derek Koopowitz 

To: NSRCA List 

Sent:               Wednesday, October 06, 2010 9:51 AM

Subject:               [NSRCA-discussion] Acceptable use policy for the               list...

I’d just like to point out a               reminder for everyone about the list’s acceptable use policy…               please see:

_______________________________________________
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/20101013/b036a624/attachment.html>