[NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences

Wed Aug 20 10:22:04 AKDT 2014

Is the Advanced pattern too difficult?  Here are the Advanced maneuvers.

Double Immelmann – Did this maneuver 2 patterns ago with an inverted roll at
the bottom.

Humpty Bump – done forever

Slow Roll – done forever

Shark’s Tooth – doing it now

Avalanche – done forever

Stall Turn – done forever with all kinds of rolls

Sq on Corner – Intermediate is doing it in current sequence without the one
½ roll

Figure 9 – no problem here

Hourglass – a new harder maneuver that requires planning

Stall turn – done forever

Four point roll  – done forever

Top Hat – done forever

Cobra Roll – only difficulty is snap and Advanced does a 45 downline snap
now

½ Square – done forever

Triangle – done forever and the bottom radius is done from upright

½ reverse Cuban – done from a high base but should be relatively easy

Three turn spin – done forever

The hourglass is the difficult maneuver but it has been designed so the ½
roll in the downline allows a positive pull to make the horizontal bottom.
With the figure 9 being the setup maneuver there should be little difficulty
in positioning it to have plenty of altitude at the bottom.  Maneuver 17, ½
reverse Cuban eight, is done from a high base but is just a 45 downline with
a ½ roll then a push to into a partial loop.  Looks different but pretty
easy to do.

I didn’t do as well flying the Masters sequence the first time as I did with
the Advanced.  More planning and one aircraft setup maneuver is the key.
The square on corner with knife edge corner may require a little more setup
but not a maneuver that is going to hurt any models. The integrated
maneuvers are welcome.  Before I flew the pattern I thought the reverse top
hat might be a challenge but it was not bad.  I like this pattern even if is
only going to be for one season.

Don

From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of Ron Hansen via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 6:29 AM
To: 'John Ford'; 'General pattern discussion'; 'lucky macy'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences

I’m going to come at this from a completely different direction.  I fly
advanced and will fly whatever sequence the sequence committee sends my way.
If I find out I can’t fly it safely then I will move back to intermediate.
My expectation is that I won’t fly a sequence that I don’t feel I can fly
safely in taxing situations like high winds or low light conditions.  I
don’t think the sequence committee should design a sequence to make sure I
or we can fly competitively.  I have a lower threshold, I just expect to be
able to fly it safely especially in taxing situations.  If I thought I could
move up to Masters and fly it safely in taxing situations then I would move
up.  I don’t expect to move up to Masters and fly it competently or even
competitively. 

It seems there are enough members who are seriously concerned about the new
sequences.  So why do we need to make such a rash decision to make the
advanced and masters sequences more difficult at this time?  Let’s lower the
difficulty for this cycle and in the meantime let’s send out another survey
where we can vote on these issues and move on.  It seems like we are putting
the cart before the horse.

Ron

From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of John Ford via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 3:01 PM
To: lucky macy; General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences

I agree with Lucky. 

I don't know how many people have mentioned to me over the years that the
top pilots stopped attending local contests when the TOC was in full
swing
not necessarily for the wrong reasons, but because being competitive
at the TOC took 110% of time and resources. 

There is an attraction to contests by virtue of the halo effect of the top
pilots
simply because everyone wants to see what they use, how it is set up,
how they fly
chat about trimming, chat about nothing at all, just to chat,
etc, etc.

When they did show up, it sent the message that they valued the event, and
valued the sport.

Same is true of any other sport, I guess.

John

On Aug 19, 2014, at 1:48 PM, lucky macy via NSRCA-discussion
<nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:

speaking of WOW factor and TOC...

Yes, highly visible TOC (largest aviation purse prize at the time whether RC
or full scale) encouraged the big and bold engines/airframes but neither
insider or general media coverage made more than a brief mention on how the
pilots were exactly chosen and how it was years of pattern devotion that got
them the skills and the invite to the TOC in the first place.  And as a
caller for a TOC pilot one year and having a ringside seat to TOC pilots
talking to the 'fans' and to the occoasional reporter, they didn't promote
pattern themselves either whenever I was listening.  Ha, I never heard one
ever mention pattern or suggest to fans to give pattern a shot.  Didn't mean
it never happened when I wasn't around but I was keenly interested in the
pattern connection back then as I had just started to compete myself so was
very sensitive to anything said about it, or lack there of, and that
impression never left me.  Pattern just didn't get it's due recognition
starting at least back in the mid 90s.  If the die hard fans really didn't
get the pattern connection beyond the 'yeah he's probably a good pattern
flyer too' then how would joe average club flyer ever see it and be
motivated?

Doesn't help that many of the once recognizable pattern names that could
still be flying and getting coverage aren't.  I'm thinking Mike McConville,
Peter Goldsmith, Dave Von Linsowe, Mike Klein and a host of others now with
that used to kick butt in pattern. Makes one wonder, did a generation fly
pattern with the main incentive to become TOC pilots?  No more TOC, no more
incentive for a large chunk of the ultra skilled and competitive types?
Makes you really appreciate the Shulman and the Hyde types who keep going at
it after they've been to the top of the mountain that doesn't exist anymore.

> To: jsf106 at gmail.com; nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 09:35:40 -0700
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences
> From: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> 
> Your right, we as individuals need to be visible locally and encourage /
> help club members mildly interested in flying aerobatics. They may be
> getting board flying trainers in a racetrack pattern.
> The WOW FACTOR shifted away from pattern about the time the TOC fielded
> large aerobatic aircraft in a highly visible environment.
> Jim 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]
On
> Behalf Of John Ford via NSRCA-discussion
> Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 5:36 AM
> To: Whodaddy Whodaddy; General pattern discussion
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences
> 
> To my knowledge, I don't think I've heard too many (or any) pilots quit
> pattern because it was too hard to do, or too expensive, or anything else.

> IMAC and helicopters are at least as expensive, if not more, and the
> classes' difficulty levels mirror our own, in my opinion. 
> 
> What makes the difference is marketing. IMAC and helis are always high
> profile at any event, the promoters do a good job of "selling" the pilots
> and the equipment. Hobby shops always showcase the latest or the biggest.
> The magazine adds almost always choose IMAC or helis to promote radios,
> batteries, or fuels.
> 
> Back when Pattern was big and local contests had 40 pilots, the cover of
the
> magazines featured Hanno, Ivan, or Rhet, and the full-page glossy back
cover
> was of Ivan and his Summit 3, endorsing Carl Golberg widgets. 
> 
> Today, if you walk in off the street as a rank beginner and you try to
> "find" pattern, you gotta dig deep, go far, send lots of emails, and
finally
> you might (never for sure) come across a contest flyer. Then you go to the
> contest and you find a bunch of really nice people, willing to drown you
in
> advice and help, but you realize pretty quickly that this group of people
> are a bit off-center.sharply focused on planes, endless trimming,
practicing
> to the exclusion of all else, and sleeping on a bed of nails at night.
Above
> all, almost nobody knows they even exist in this little hidden world of RC
> idealism.
> 
> Go to a hobby shop and say you want to do helicopters.same reaction as
> walking into a ER saying you have chest pains. 
> Go to a hobby shop and say you want to do pattern.hmmm."well, there's a
guy
> I used to know that did some of that, I think, not sure if he's still
> around.haven't seen him for a few years"...
> 
> That's where the difference is. 
> 
> John
> 
> 
> On Aug 19, 2014, at 7:14 AM, Whodaddy Whodaddy via NSRCA-discussion
> <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
> 
> > K factors should be rethought .. An eight point role with my Phoenix 8
is
> alot different than with my current 2 meter .. Its like flying a gift now
> days other than centering of the maneuver yet retains the same or close to
> the same k factor as many years past... Food for thought... 
> > 
> > Once again the current proposed pattern needs fixed or the numbers will
> dwindle by at least one nxt year.. I can promise that..
> > 
> > 
> > Gary 
> > 
> > 
> > Sent from my iPhone
> > 
> >> On Aug 18, 2014, at 11:34 PM, John Gayer via NSRCA-discussion
> <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
> >> 
> >> Advanced and Masters are not our entry classes and should not affect
> future participation. Those new to pattern should begin in either
Sportsman
> or Intermediate depending on skill level. When a flyer feels he is ready
to
> move up, he will try flying the next class in practice. If it is too
> difficult to even see a way to fly that sequence reasonably, then that
pilot
> was not ready to move up and should stay in his current class another year
> (or more). We do not lose people because they stayed in their current
class,
> we lose them because they moved up when not ready and find they are
> outclassed without the vision, coordination, time to practice (or name
your
> reason) to be competitive. Not competitive for winning, just competitive. 
> >> Both Masters and Advanced can, and probably will be, changed next year.
> Any substantial problems can be addressed then. Many have tested these
> sequences. All have have flown them successfully, if not always happily.
We
> can go on and on about ugly maneuvers, difficulty levels and dislike of
> change but that happens every cycle. 
> >> 
> >> Just for comparison here are Advanced and Masters from 20 years ago.
> Overall both appear somewhat easier than the current sequences we are
flying
> but not a lot. Total KFactors are a bit lower. Also we are flying many of
> the same maneuvers. I hope you noticed the knife edge top of the cobra in
> masters. If you go back even further you can find a two roll loop in the
> days before retracts...
> >> 
> >> John Gayer
> >> 
> >> 
> >> <ejceefij.png><eibcgfea.png>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 10278 (20140819) __________