[NSRCA-discussion] FW: Proposed NSRCA sequences for2011 andbeyond
Dave
DaveL322 at comcast.net
Fri Sep 24 14:46:14 AKDT 2010
John,
Please correct me if I am wrong -
With regard to the Aussie advancement system, is it not possible for a pilot
to stay in a mid level class forever? Never achieving promotional points
and never dropping below minimums?
You point out that more complex maneuvers and winning at higher levels are
drivers for pilots to improve and advance, but they are not the only
drivers. Many pilots practice pattern alone and never compete, because they
are singularly driving themselves to a higher level. There is a limit to
competitive drive..and a limit to personal drive. I'd suggest you have more
of both than most, and that is not a bad thing - for you.
I think the point that you are missing yourself, or not seeing as valued by
others is that many are happy at a given level, and don't want to be pushed
further. They have climbed as far as they want to, have resources for, are
comfortable with, etc. If they are pushed further unwillingly, they quite
possibly will leave the event.
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 5:19 PM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: Proposed NSRCA sequences for2011
andbeyond
Glen,
If you don't want to be forced to move to FAI, then you must accept that
there are those in other classes who do not wish to advance to the next
class either. Peer pressure and the challenge of learning more complex
maneuvers and doing better at a higher level are expected to work for
Sportsman through Advanced but not for Masters?
While F3A maneuvers are controlled by the FAI, there is nothing
international about doing a loop with an integrated 8 point. It is,
however, a challenge to do well. Why are so many of the Masters flyers
disinterested in new challenges, new maneuvers, new competition? These are
the things that drove them to excel in the lower classes and in Masters and
then it all stops?
I would think that winning the NATS in any class would lead one to look
around and say "where's the next hill to climb?"
I firmly believe there needs to be some changes made in the advancement
process. It should be the same across the board for all classes including
Masters.
In the past I have suggested abolishing the current advancement rules and
replacing it with the following:
A competitor will select the class to be flown during the calendar year.
This selected class may be any higher class or the next lower class than
that flown in the previous calendar year. The set of classes referred to is
401-404 and 406.
This would at least make advancement requirements consistent for all
participants and is very easy to enforce.
John Gayer
AMA 75102
NSRCA 632
ex Sportsman, Advanced, Expert. Master, F3A and now thoroughly challenged by
Advanced(again)
On 9/24/2010 2:22 PM, Glen Watson wrote:
...I probably meet Dave's description of a Masters' pilot who chooses not to
compete in an International class. There are many personal reason why this
is the case. i.e. desire, age, dollars, time etc.
It's amazing to me the same issues are raised year-to-year about changing
the current establishment (AMA rules) to meet one's needs. Instead of
trying to force someone like me to move-on to FAI why can't the pilots who
view someone like me as a potential sandbagger work a bit harder in their
respective class to become as competitive as they can. I do not mean to
come across arrogant, just voicing my opinion regarding attitude's I've
witness from the pattern community.
I recognize the level of time, money and commitment it takes to achieve
excellence. That's why I enjoy the sport of pattern, it's the challenge of
being competitive within the stated rules.
~Glen Watson
AMA 136878
NSRCA 2293
_____
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 11:32 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" <mailto:k6xyz at sbcglobal.net> <k6xyz at sbcglobal.net>
To: "General pattern discussion" <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
<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
_______________________________________________
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/ea67aa45/attachment.html>
More information about the NSRCA-discussion
mailing list