[NSRCA-discussion] Proposed NSRCA sequences for 2011 and beyond

[Derek Koopowitz]

HA!  Another survey question perhaps for next year...

On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 4:59 PM, John Fuqua <johnfuqua at embarqmail.com>wrote:

>  Derek
>
>
>
> Having flown the short sequence I find it more difficult than the current
> Masters sequence.   My put is that it really does not need much tweeking.
>  Of course we could throw out scored takeoff and landing and have 19
> airborne maneuvers.
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
> *From:* nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org [mailto:
> nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] *On Behalf Of *Derek Koopowitz
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 22, 2010 4:31 PM
> *To:* General pattern discussion
> *Subject:* [NSRCA-discussion] Proposed NSRCA sequences for 2011 and beyond
>
>
>
> Over 10 months ago the NSRCA Sequence Committee completed its work on the
> new sequences.  These were posted on the NSRCA website for review and
> comment - see below:
>
>
>
> http://nsrca.us/proposedsequences/2011sequences.html
>
>
>
> Included in all this material was a draft document that outlined the
> process on how sequences are developed, tested and approved and the
> makeup/content of the sequences based on the class it is meant to serve.
>  This document is titled "NSRCA Procedures, Standards and Guidelines for AMA
> R/C Precision Aerobatics Sequence Development".  A mouthful, but it does
> outline a lot of information.  It details the charter for the Sequence
> Committee, sequence development standards and guidelines for all classes,
> catalog of maneuvers for all classes and the process that the NSRCA will
> follow in designing, testing and approving changes to sequences, or for
> proposed sequences.  These sequence development standards and guidelines
> have been in place for about 4 years now and have been used very
> successfully to build the current set of sequences that everyone is flying
> today, in addition to the prior Masters sequence (and the new one as well).
>
>
>
> Overall we received positive comments on the proposed sequences from
> Sportsman through Masters.  As you know, there were two sequences developed
> for Masters, a long sequence using the standard 23 maneuver count and a
> short sequence using 19 maneuvers.  In the time since we posted the
> sequences, some informal surveys were also made on the NSRCA website as well
> as on RCU asking for a preference of either the short or long Masters
> schedule.  The overwhelming majority of respondents chose the short
> sequence.  However, these surveys were a little flawed in that we didn't
> really know who was voting for them - were they all judges/pilots who voted
> because they didn't want to judge a long sequence, or were they really
> current and/or future Masters pilots that really did want to fly a shorter
> sequence.
>
>
>
> Since the release of the proposed schedules, and some post Nats comments,
> the sequence committee has been hard at work making some tweaks to the short
> schedule with a view to increasing the difficulty level of the short Masters
> sequence to bring it into line with the long Masters sequence and also to
> ensure that we weren't lowering the bar in difficulty by introducing a
> shorter sequence.  Bear in mind that the short sequence is only 19 maneuvers
> (17 of them flyable) so raising the difficulty level is a challenge if one
> is to avoid using some existing F3A type maneuvers, or "airplane killers",
> and to only use maneuvers that match the philosophy that we've embraced for
> a number of years.  Since we've never developed a short Masters sequence, we
> need to make sure we get it right and that it not only provides a challenge
> to those that fly it but that it still provides a somewhat relatively higher
> jump for those pilots that are moving up from Advanced.  We realize that
> creating a perfect schedule is not going to happen - we won't be able to
> please every pilot that moves up from Advanced, nor will we be able to
> please some former F3A pilots that think the schedule is too easy and isn't
> enough of a challenge.  There has to be a balance.  The Sequence Committee
> came up with some good positive changes and these are being vetted/tested as
> I write this.  They've received extremely positive feedback from everyone
> that has either flown the newer short sequence on a simulator or using their
> pattern plane at the field.  By the end of this weekend we'll know for sure
> whether it is a keeper or not.
>
>
>
> When we do post the revised sequence I would like all of you that have
> "skin in this game", meaning you are a current Masters pilot or will be
> moving to Masters in the next year or two, to please contact your NSRCA
> District VP and let them know what your preference is - short or long
> sequence.  The reason they need to know is that the NSRCA board will vote in
> the next couple of weeks to approve all the proposed sequences and also to
> select which sequence the Masters class will be flying in 2011/2012.
>
>
>
> The Sequence Committee is comprised of Joe Lachowski, Dave Lockhart, Verne
> Koester, Bill Glaze, Archie Stafford, and Richard Lewis.  They've put in an
> extraordinary amount of work on these sequences and documentation and
> deserve huge kudos from everyone!  Thanks guys - your work is very much
> appreciated!
>
>
>
> We've also created a Sequence Committee section on the NSRCA website which
> will have more information soon.  It will contain the updated draft
> documentation and all the proposed sequences in one location.  You can get
> to the new section from the main menu - just look for Sequence Committee -
> it is near the bottom of the menu.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20100923/7dd4d40c/attachment.html>