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

Fri Sep 24 08:42:05 AKDT 2010

This always seems to come back to forced advancement.  It seems like
that rule was written for a time that doesn't apply today, because
everything John said is right.  

These discussions are moot anyways because as far as I know, no one
enforces the advancement rules the way they are written.  We just don't
have people dominating a class, yet refusing to advance to the next
class when they do dominate.  Rules like this should go by the wayside
to remove the fear factor of new pilots starting, thinking they have to
advance at a specified rate even when they don't necessarily compete
against anyone in their class and end up winning.

Just my $.02 worth.

- Robert Beaubien

- NSRCA District 7 Webmaster

-

"No trees were harmed in the sending of this message, however a large
number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced."

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Dave
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 9:32 AM
To: 'General pattern discussion'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: Proposed NSRCA sequences for 2011
andbeyond

John,

I'm not quite sure how to respond as I think my commentary made perfect
sense.

I'll try it another way -

The US has a substantial number of pilots that do not aspire to
international competition.  Many Masters pilots have expressed the
opinion that if they were required to fly a more difficult schedule, or
fly multiple schedules, they would drop out of the event.  So why force
them into a class that contains elements they clearly don't want, and
for which they have virtually no input or control?  How does chasing
people out of the event benefit pattern in the US?

With respect to "ALL the lower classes and maneuvers are selected by
someone else(the sequence committee)"

I couldn't disagree more.  The Seq Com has always been comprised of
pilots from all classes, and the direction taken by the Seq Com has
always been based on survey results and feedback from the masses.
"Someone else" is us, just like the judges are us.

Regards,

Dave Lockhart

________________________________

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of John
Gayer
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 12:09 PM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: Proposed NSRCA sequences for 2011
and beyond

That makes no sense. Every other country has resolved the issue of
having their own internal classes and then finally advancing their best
pilots to F3A. Just because the maneuvers are selected by an
international committee on which we are represented is not a reason to
preclude F3A from an advancement process. We only have Turnaround
pattern in this country because the FAI led the way and we decided to
follow rather than go the way of the dodo.
>From my point of view, ALL the lower classes and maneuvers are selected
by someone else(the sequence committee). For F3A that committe is
international. So what?

John Gayer
NSRCA 632

On 9/24/2010 8:36 AM, Dave wrote: 

I believe the practical perspective is that FAI-F3A is an AMA class, but
it does not run in accordance with AMA rules (except where FAI is
silent), and AMA has virtually no control over F3A.  Given AMA has no
control over F3A, that is a key point in not requiring advancement to
F3A from Masters.

Regards,

Dave Lockhart

________________________________

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Gene
Maurice
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 8:18 AM
To: 'General pattern discussion'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposed NSRCA sequences for 2011 and
beyond

Sorry, FAI is an AMA class, 406,  it's only that the Sporting Code
supersedes, doesn't replace, the AMA rule book and the exemption from
advancement. >From the 2009-2010 rule book:

RADIO CONTROL PATTERN 

For events 401, 402, 403, 404, 406. 

7. Pattern event classes: The Pattern event shall

be divided into five (5) classes. The first four (4

shall (in order of increasing difficulty) be 

referred to as Sportsman, Intermediate, 

Advanced, and Masters. The fifth class shall be 

referred to as the FAI class. The Sportsman class

is supplemental (see Supplemental and 

Provisional Rules, page 2). Competitors must be

advised prior to the start of the contest of any 

planned deviations from standard AMA rules 

pertaining to the events they have entered. 

19. FAI Pattern Maneuvers: The FAI class 

shall fly according to the current FAI RC 

Aerobatics (F3A) rules. The noise limit shall be 

the current noise limit used in AMA competition 

for classes 401-404, except in the case of a USA 

Team Selection contest, where the noise limit 

shall be the current FAI noise rule. The builder-

of-the-model rule, if any, shall not be enforced. 

The AMA Competition Regulations will be 

applied when the FAI Sporting Code is silent on, 

or does not provide guidance concerning the 

conduct or rules of the FAI - F3A events. 

  8.2.5: There is no mandatory 

advancement into FAI from the Masters class. 

Contestants may enter their current AMA class 

or the FAI class at any contest but not both.

Gene Maurice

gene.maurice at sgmservice.com

Dallas, GA

AMA 3408

NSRCA 877

PACSS.sgmservice.com

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Dave
Harmon
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2010 12:19 AM
To: 'General pattern discussion'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposed NSRCA sequences for 2011 and
beyond

Hi Vince....well....FAI/F3A is not an AMA class.....Masters and below
ARE....so...FAI/F3A cannot be a destination class for an AMA event.

Dave Harmon

NSRCA 586

K6XYZ[at]sbcglobal[dot]net

Sperry, Ok.

From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Vicente
"Vince" Bortone
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 9:24 PM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposed NSRCA sequences for 2011 and
beyond

I think that making FAI-F3A destination class will be easier natural
solution.  How we are going to organize local contests having one
additional class?

Vicente "Vince" Bortone

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Harmon" <k6xyz at sbcglobal.net> <mailto:k6xyz at sbcglobal.net> 
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> 
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 7:12:00 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposed NSRCA sequences for 2011 and
beyond

>> time because the new class would 

be populated from the other classes....like Masters and Intermediate.<<<

arrrrgghhh......I meant Advanced......another class between Advanced and
Masters.

Sorry....

Dave Harmon

NSRCA 586

K6XYZ[at]sbcglobal[dot]net

Sperry, Ok.

nfo/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/20100924/e2bab327/attachment.html>