[NSRCA-discussion] Proposed NSRCA sequences for 2011 and beyond
Jon Lowe
jonlowe at aol.com
Wed Sep 22 16:57:41 AKDT 2010
Third time MAY be a charm...
Derek,
You answered part 2 of my email. Thanks!
I'd still like to see the proposed revisions today if possible. They need to be posted now for feedback to the committee. I also didn't get an answer of exactly when the VP's will vote, this year. What is the date of the vote?
Jon
-----Original Message-----
From: Derek Koopowitz <derekkoopowitz at gmail.com>
To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Wed, Sep 22, 2010 7:11 pm
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposed NSRCA sequences for 2011 and beyond
Jon,
Based on the preliminary votes I think the removal of the schedules from the rule book will pass (I'll keep my fingers crossed), which essentially means that we could possibly wait until 12/31/2010 before the NSRCA board announces the new schedules for 2011/2012. That won't happen (waiting until 12/31) since it isn't fair and doesn't make sense. I've revised the guide which includes a defined timeline and I'm just waiting on some minor adjustments to be made before I have the board review and approve the guide. Here is the draft timeline that is in the revised guide:
1.0 Sequence Submittal Process
Thefollowing is the recommended timeline for the development and submission of newsequences. Sequence development shouldalways start in the year prior to when the sequence is to be replaced. For example, if the Masters sequence (2 yearlifecycle) is to be replaced in 2013 (X) then work on the development of a newsequence should start in 2011 (X – 2). What follows is a timeline showing the activity (task) and the month theactivity should start:
TASK TIMELINE
Assign and approve CommitteeChairperson October - year X – 2
Committee Chairpersonrecruits Committee Membership October – year X - 2
BoD approves CommitteeMembership November – year X - 2
Establish development schedule December – year X - 2
Review designcriteria/receive BoD approval for changes December – year X - 2
Develop preliminary changes/sequencesand flight test January through March – year X - 1
Publish for public comment onNSRCA website/K-Factor April through May – year X - 1
Finalize changes/sequenceselection based on comments June through August – year X - 1
Submit proposedchanges/sequences to BoD for approval September – year X - 1
Publish approved sequences onNSRCA website/K-Factor October – year X -1
New sequences in use January – year X
Hopefully this answers your question.
-Derek
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Jon Lowe <jonlowe at aol.com> wrote:
Derek,
When, exactly, do the District VP's vote on this? A "couple of weeks" doesn't mean much to me. When, exactly, do we get to see the "new and improved" masters sequences? Why aren't they posted now? Why do we have to wait until after "the end of the weekend"? It would appear that they would want as much feedback as they can get, especially at this late date.
When is the schedule for final approval and announcement of the new sequences going to be added to the Sequence development guide? There is a schedule of sorts in there, but it doesn't state when final sequences will be announced. You asked this at the NSRCA Board Meeting this year, and I asked this shortly after the Nats, and got blown off, here:
http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_9759516/anchors_9899988/mpage_1/key_/anchor/tm.htm#9899988
So I'm asking again since the guide hasn't been revised in this area.
Since the AMA contest board final vote isn't due to be announced until 30 Sep (ballots were only due to the AMA on 15 Sep), are you sure we will be able to revise our own sequences? Do you have advanced info from the AMA that it passed?
Jon Lowe
-----Original Message-----
From: Derek Koopowitz <derekkoopowitz at gmail.com>
To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Wed, Sep 22, 2010 6:10 pm
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposed NSRCA sequences for 2011 and beyond
Pattern length for each class has been a design criteria for a number of years and it has been used very successfully to build current and past sequences. Since we are using each of the classes as a building block to the next higher class, it makes sense to use each sequence to work on and build flying skills. One can only do so much with maneuvers in a class before it becomes too intense for the pilot and wears them out (in the lower classes) - that's why Sportsman has box entry/exit breaks during the sequence. BTW, the rules also state that a CD can have Sportsman fly their sequence back-to-back if they'd like to fly a little longer.
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 3:53 PM, John Gayer <jgghome at comcast.net> wrote:
Derek,
When it comes to the pattern length we should all have a say. Why should the Masters pattern have more maneuvers and take longer than any other pattern? You cannot say there is no impact on other flyers and their judging duties when Masters is often the largest class and use more than their share of the contest time as well. You could say that the "content" of each class pattern should be up to those with "skin" in the game.
There was nothing in the survey that stated "Vote only for the patterns in the class you are flying or may fly next year". Nor do I believe that such a statement should be added.
John
On 9/22/2010 4:30 PM, Derek Koopowitz wrote:
Dave,
After writing my reply to you I got to thinking again and I don't agree with your assessment. This is about selecting a sequence that matter to the people that fly it not to the people that judge it or to the people that may have to wait around to fly again because of a large Masters turnout.
Flame away...
-Derek
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Dave Burton <burtona at atmc.net> wrote:
Derek,
I really object to your definition of who has “Skin in the game” - We all do if we pay our dues and attend contest.
The “skin” is the impact of a long vs. short sequence for every Masters flyer, Flyer who will be flying Masters in the next two years, every flyer/non flyer who judges at a contest, and every other flyer in all the other class who have to wait until the typically large Masters class finishes whatever sequence they fly.
So, whether I fly Masters in the next two years or not, I intend to let my opinion be known to my district VP and I expect him to give my view the same weight of any other opinion from “Masters” flyers or others.
This is an issue that should not be decided by only “Masters” flyers.
Dave Burton
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 5:31 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.
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3152 - Release Date: 09/22/10 02:34:00
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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/20100923/e1b563b1/attachment.html>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list