[NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA candidate rules proposal surveyisavailable

[J N Hiller]

John I felt the same about the telemetry rule and as I was composing my
response to Scott it occurred to me that a modified auto pilot to light
indicator lights on the airplane to advise the pilot of 'Wings Not Level'.
Being neither specifically allowed or prohibited it could be used as well as
perceived as an unfair advantage.
The ongoing problem of maintaining the list seamed overwhelming until I got
to the 'Intent' part of the rule which led me to believe that a CD could
likely rule on the use of unlisted devices as either in compliance with the
intent or not.
As rapidly as technology advances there is no way to get in front of it.
Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of John Ford
Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2012 6:23 AM
To: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA candidate rules proposal
surveyisavailable

I don't often post on this list, but for what it is worth, the survey has
proposals that are timely and that reflect the issues of the day as I recall
from so many discussions on the flight line. I didn't immediately think the
BoD forced my hand or made assumptions that were premature.
I think I am able to complete the survey without being influenced by the
wording of the preamble. However, I trust that the results of the survey
will be tabulated and posted here prior to taking them to the AMA.
On the other hand, asking for opinions on this list about the proposals is
risky business since at least one of the proposals is a historical hot
potato (Contestant Classification). Personally, I feel that a lot more is
broken about our development classes than the ability to move up or down
from one class to the other. (...that comment alone is good for at least 247
vitriolic responses, I'm sure)
All the other proposals are hard to argue against, although the
Equipment/Telemetry rule would be a nightmare to enforce, in my opinion. Not
right or wrong, just hard to enforce.

Without indicating what I voted on the survey, I'm OK with the process.
Gonna be interesting to see the results.

John


--- On Sat, 2/11/12, J N Hiller <jnhiller at earthlink.net> wrote:

From: J N Hiller <jnhiller at earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA candidate rules proposal survey
isavailable
To: "General pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Date: Saturday, February 11, 2012, 7:17 PM
Peter I did exactly what you are suggesting by sending my suggestions for
changes to the initial proposal directly to Scott for the contest board's
consideration when writing the final proposal to be submitted to AMA.

I didn't post it here because these discussion topics quickly deteriorate to
off subject usually private conversations.
Of all the posts today I haven't seen any discussion on the content of the
proposals. If we fail to express constructive suggestions the proposals will
likely be submitted in their present configuration.

I apologize in advance if some of you find my remarks offensive it isn't
meant to be.
Jim



-----Original Message-----
From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of Peter Vogel
Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2012 2:59 PM
To: General pattern discussion
Cc: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA candidate rules proposal survey
isavailable

I fail to see why the board's opinion on the rules proposals as written is
relevant.  They are doing what I would expect the board of an org like outs
to do:  asking the membership for their opinions on the proposals.

The only thing I would have liked to see was a fourth option on the survey
questions:  ' I would support this proposal with modifications:  ' with a
text field for verbatim feedback on the modifications.

Peter+

Sent from my iPhone4S

On Feb 11, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Dan Curtis < warrior523 at att.net
<http://us.mc1205.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=warrior523@att.net> > wrote:
That is not what is written in the introduction.  I would like to see each
board member answer the question on this membership list, are they for it as
it is stated or are they for the process in general?

Dan

  _____

From: Scott McHarg < scmcharg at gmail.com
<http://us.mc1205.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=scmcharg@gmail.com> >
To: General pattern discussion < nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<http://us.mc1205.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.
org> >
Sent: Sat, February 11, 2012 2:49:29 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA candidate rules proposal survey is
available

Dan,
   I guess you'd have to ask each individual member of the BoD.  I can tell
you that prior to finalizing what you see as a candidate proposal, we
presented where we were and what we were working on to the BoD in a
telephonic meeting.  Although they did not have the proposals in their hand,
each proposal was explained and the floor was open for discussion.  Not one
single person said something to the contrary other than they felt we were
doing a good job and we were on the right track.  That says to me that we
were pursuing what was asked of us.  The survey will then tell us if our
community feels the same.

Scott
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Dan Curtis < warrior523 at att.net
<http://us.mc1205.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=warrior523@att.net> > wrote:
As I asked in the previous post, does the current board feel that these
proposals are valid and good for the pattern community.  This is what is
states in the survey introduction and is this a fact?

The survey could have also had a question asking if the membership or the
community feels that any changes are needed at this point and time.

This survey, with its introduction statement, seems to show a bit of
predispostion.

Dan

  _____

From: Scott McHarg < scmcharg at gmail.com
<http://us.mc1205.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=scmcharg@gmail.com> >
To: General pattern discussion < nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<http://us.mc1205.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.
org> >
Sent: Sat, February 11, 2012 2:29:53 PM

Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA candidate rules proposal survey is
available

Gentlemen,
   As you can see from the forums, everyone of us has our own opinion.  The
BoD asked us to make "proposals".  These are not "the rules" nor are they
set in stone.  We came up with said proposals based on input from
individuals who took the time to email, phone and post their requests.  The
survey is doing exactly what it was meant to do, get everyone's opinion
based on what we laid out there.  If you don't like it, that's fine.  This
is simply a starting point.  The results of the survey will tell us whether
we are on, off or close to what our community wants.  Once the survey
finishes, the results will be taken back and, if needed, proposals amended.
I'd suggest that the results will indicate what percentile are in favor of
vs. those that are against.  I don't think any of you would expect everyone
that flies pattern to get in a room and try to formulate proposals based on
every single opinion in that room.  That would be a nightmare.
   The Board of Directors recognize that change is a possibility but not
necessarily warranted in all cases.  Again, that would be the purpose of the
focus group to try to get something done and out there for the community to
weigh in on.  At that point, the amended proposals are then taken to the BoD
for endorsement and then to the AMA Rules Committee which, in reality, is
the group that must find out if these proposals are realistic and what the
community wants.  AMA owns precision aerobatics, not the NSRCA and the NSRCA
does not make the rules.  The 5500g rule came from other development classes
that  are around the world i.e. France and South Africa who have implemented
said changes to their development classes.  MAYBE the number is off to an
extent.  MAYBE we don't need that kind of increase.  I guess that's what the
survey will tell us.  I'd suggest telling all that you know to get out there
and take the survey if you feel strongly about something.  This is how we
begin the process.

Scott
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Vicente "Vince" Bortone <
vicenterc at comcast.net
<http://us.mc1205.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=vicenterc@comcast.net> >
wrote:
So is this a second survey?  I remember one few months ago and didn't have
those proposals.  I am confused now.

Vicente "Vince" Bortone
----- Original Message -----
From: Dan Curtis & lt;warrior523 at att.net
<http://us.mc1205.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lt%3Bwarrior523@att.net> &gt;
To: General pattern discussion & lt;nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<http://us.mc1205.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=lt%3Bnsrca-discussion@lists.n
srca.org> &gt;
Sent: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 19:17:53 -0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA candidate rules proposal survey is
available
I was re-reading the post about the survey and am really having a problem
with
the 4th paragraph.  It says:
The NSRCA BoD encourages your support in responding to the survey as the
changes
are believed to be appropriate for the continued growth and sustainment of
AMA
pattern.

Is this actually saying that our board of directors is for the changes
stated in
the survey.  This is really hard to believe and even harder to fathom.

Where did these "candidate rule proposals" come from?  Why the 5500 gram
weight
rule?  Where did that one come from?  This whole thing seems strange and my
goodness how many times have some of these isssues been hashed before?

Dan Curtis
________________________________
From: Scott McHarg < scmcharg at gmail.com
<http://us.mc1205.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=scmcharg@gmail.com> >
To: General pattern discussion < nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<http://us.mc1205.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.
org> >
Sent: Fri, February 10, 2012 12:24:44 PM
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA candidate rules proposal survey is
available
The NSRCA Board of Directors (BoD), in consideration of NSRCA bylaws
indicating
that the NSRCA should take responsibility for making a consensus statement
to
the AMA Rules Committee on rules pertaining to Radio Control Aerobatics, has
convened a Rules Proposal Committee.  The purpose of this committee is to
prepare candidate rule proposals for endorsement by the NSRCA BoD.  The
committee is chaired by Scott McHarg and its members include Jon Carter,
John
Gayer, Michael McEvilley, and Rick Sweeney.

The NSRCA BoD requested the rules committee to craft proposals with a focus
on
safety and contestant participation concerns.  The rules committee was
further
requested to craft proposals in consideration of the varying and oftentimes
conflicting opinions of the individuals that comprise the AMA pattern
community,
while recognizing that change is warranted. In response to NSRCA BoD
direction,
the rules committee has developed four (4) candidate proposals for
endorsement
by the NSRCA BoD.

In the spirit reflected by the direction of the NSRCA BoD, this survey is
offered to provide the AMA pattern community the opportunity to review,
consider, and provide feedback by supporting or not supporting each of the
candidate proposals to the NSRCA BoD.  This survey is not a vote; it is only
a
means for the NSRCA BoD to gather information to be used in making their
final
determination of those proposals to be endorsed by the NSRCA.

The NSRCA BoD encourages your support in responding to the survey as the
changes
are believed to be appropriate for the continued growth and sustainment of
AMA
pattern.

Finally, it should be understood that individual AMA members are free to
submit
commentary on these proposals to the AMA Contest Board, and are also able to
submit individual proposals on the same topics as those endorsed by the
NSRCA
BoD.
 This survey will be available until midnight March 1, 2012 and may be taken
only once.  The survey is available at www.nsrca.us <http://www.nsrca.us/>
and you must be registered
with the website and logged in but being a current member is NOT required.
Thank you for your understanding and participation in this rules proposal
survey.
--
Scott A. McHarg
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<http://us.mc1205.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.
org>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion



--
Scott A. McHarg

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<http://us.mc1205.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.
org>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion



--
Scott A. McHarg
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<http://us.mc1205.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.
org>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
<http://us.mc1205.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=NSRCA-discussion@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/20120212/80cc8f07/attachment.html>