[NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences

Mon Aug 25 07:38:29 AKDT 2014

Lucky,

No one says you HAVE to start in Sportsman. Ed Alt came to Pattern from IMAC
and "started"  in Advanced.

FYI - Sportsman, at least at one point, was not "technically" even an
official Pattern class - it was a created as a provisional class to get
sport pilots involved in Pattern. My experience has shown me that here in
the Northeast (where the flying season is somewhat limited time-wise) there
are not very many "sport" pilots who can even fly a complete Pattern
sequence in the box right from the start. Add snaps and spins and you're
just looking to turn people away. If they're at that level I just tell them
to start in Intermediate or Advanced and see how it goes from there.

John Pavlick

Cell: 203-417-4971

idslogo2

Integrated Development Services

From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of lucky macy via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 3:25 PM
To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences

I actually wouldn't mind if the lower classes could be made 'funner' and
more challenging.  I don't know why spins and snaps can't be attempted in
lower classes than they currently are.  Spins and snaps are at the lower
level IMAC.  If someone doesn't like to compete in IMAC, it's in spite of
the fun knows, not because of them.

  _____  

To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 11:59:37 -0400
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences
From: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org

Basically, there has been quite a bit of deviation from the tradition here
that goes way back when performance was an issue and certain maneuvers were
just done a certain direction because of that. Rolling maneuvers were always
downwind, square loops for example upwind, top hat upwind, reverse Cuban 8s
upwind, Cuban 8s downwind, triangle loops downwind, square horizontal eight
downwind, center stalls and spins having turnaround maneuvers after them to
allow the pilot to bring the aircraft in or out because of wind drift while
in the stalled condition, etc. 

I think what has really brought about this deviation from the norm
significantly more this time around is the design of   recent FAI sequences
which have deviated a lot from what was done in the past.

Maybe we need to add more design parameters and boundaries to the sequence
guide spelling out direction of flight of certain classes of maneuvers  for
at least through Intermediate and to some extent Advanced and a little bit
in Masters. I guess you could peg the blame on me for missing this when I
put the original guidelines together with the committee at that time.  We do
have many of the parameters which help in designing a good sequence, but I
guess we may need a few more.

It is probably one of the reasons why there is such heated discussion on the
proposed sequences and that is partially due to the experience of the
current group of people on the sequence committee which is no fault of their
own. The previous committees had the advantage of having a few guys who had
many many years of involvement in past committees and just maybe they should
have been at the very least kept on in an advisory role. Hindsight I guess.

No one is really  to blame here. If anything it should be a learning
experience and  maybe some new parameters and boundaries need to be added to
the guideline design criteria for each class.

  _____  

To: jpavlick at idseng.com; nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 06:56:30 -0400
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences
From: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org

Yes, you're correct.  And as I recall, that sequence was described as being
the worse sequence ever developed by one of the current committee members.
I assume because maneuvers were flown in the wrong direction (Loop from top
(u), Top Hat (d), Double I (d), downwind Rev Shark's Tooth?)  Somewhere it
must be written that rolling maneuvers are always flown downwind but I can't
seem find it.

I was asking because the sequence building module I have in the scoring app
does define direction for the center maneuvers and these two kicked out as
suspect.  I guess I just went too far with the logic.   

From: John Pavlick [mailto:jpavlick26 at att.net] 
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2014 12:40 AM
To: 'Scott Smith'; 'General pattern discussion'
Subject: RE: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences

Scott - wasn't the Outside loop from the top maneuver back in the "old" 402
sequence (around 2006) done as an "upwind" maneuver? I can't find any of my
old call sheets but I think it was.

John Pavlick

Cell: 203-417-4971

idslogo2

Integrated Development Services

From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On
Behalf Of Scott Smith via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 4:36 PM
To: 'General pattern discussion'
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 2015 proposed sequences

A couple questions on the intermediate sequence:

Maneuver 6 Outside loop from the top (U) - Would that not typically be
considered a downwind maneuver?

And maneuver 12 Square Loop (D) - Would that not typically be considered an
upwind maneuver?

_______________________________________________ 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/20140825/09e1426c/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 735 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20140825/09e1426c/attachment.png>