[NSRCA-discussion] Proposed 2015 sequences

Mon Jul 28 05:23:28 AKDT 2014

I do, and yes I think it’s simply the reality of any competition.   Technology changes in every sport, and the sport adapts to the technology.  I also think the idea of never moving back in classes is a stigma we need to eradicate.   There are a myriad of valid reasons that someone would and should move back a class without issue.  There comes a point in the hobby where it transitions from mostly competitive, to mostly social.  Age, vision, desire, expense, life, all can get in the way of the burning pursuit to be the very best, but our passion for the hobby and the people in it cause us to want to stay in this competitive niche for the social value AND… SELF competition.  Keeping our skills, setting our own goals, etc.     None of that should hold back the competitor that is still climbing the ladder and striving to make our world team.

I’d also argue that nothing being introduced in this cycle does anything to change the needed equipment, and is all well within the skill of any Masters pilot.  Is it a slippery slope to more complex maneuvers?  Probably.  But that’s the point.  By the time another cycle has come around, pilots will be more comfortable with that simple roll over the top.  Moreover, the current “top designs” will have two more years to bleed into the used market, and trickle down to the lower classes as they always have.  Few are still flying the late 90’s designs that would struggle with a long sustained knife edge or be incapable of a KE loop.  It’s been 10 years since the KE loop was introduced into FAI and at this point those designs have infiltrated down through even the Sportsman ranks, long before the maneuver has worked into even the Masters pattern.

So yes… I realize it will drive a few away.  But I think it will be a net positive for the overall health of the sport, and for our overall competitiveness.

Mark Atwood
Paragon Consulting, Inc.  |  President
5885 Landerbrook Drive Suite 130, Cleveland Ohio, 44124
Direct: 440.229.2502 |  Fax: 440.684.3102
www.paragon-inc.com<http://www.paragon-inc.com/>

[cid:image001.png at 01CE481F.E6A56C70]

On Jul 28, 2014, at 9:05 AM, Del R <drykert2 at rochester.rr.com<mailto:drykert2 at rochester.rr.com>> wrote:

While I do not dispute your thoughts and writing Mark do you accept and realize that this also drives the casual and medium dollar pilot backwards or away?  As long as you accept that is part of what drives people away from being able to compete then you are also a realist.

    Del
        x nsrca 473
----- Original Message -----
From: Atwood, Mark via NSRCA-discussion<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
To: NSRCA General<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2014 9:11 PM
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposed 2015 sequences

Integrated rolling maneuvers were only introduced to FAI in the last 10 years.  Over that time Masters has stayed fairly stagnant with regard to any type of new maneuver or difficulty.  I was flying masters when they introduced 2 rolls in opposite directions and we all had a similar thought… “I have to roll the OTHER way???  This isn’t FAI….”   We adjusted.

The gap between Masters and FAI is growing rapidly.  If we want Masters to prepare pilots for FAI than we need to keep the gap reasonable.  Yes, Masters is a destination for some.  So is Advanced…heck, so is Intermediate.  But that doesn’t change their primary purpose of being stepping stones to improve our flying, culminating with FAI.

Mark Atwood
Paragon Consulting, Inc.  |  President
5885 Landerbrook Drive Suite 130, Cleveland Ohio, 44124
Direct: 440.229.2502 |  Fax: 440.684.3102
www.paragon-inc.com<http://www.paragon-inc.com/>

<image001.png>

On Jul 27, 2014, at 8:42 PM, Whodaddy Whodaddy via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> wrote:

Several masters pilots at the NATS indicated they would return to advanced because of the roller...It was indicated that who cares how easy it might be masters is not FAI ..

An hour glass in advanced seemed a bit much for that class imo..
Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 27, 2014, at 10:07 AM, Dale Olstinske via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> wrote:

We would be asking for final BOD approval in Oct.

Dale

On Jul 27, 2014, at 8:05 AM, Chuck Hochhalter via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>> wrote:

When will these be approved?

Chuck

Sent from my iPhone
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto: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/20140728/69f8eb1f/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 6692 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20140728/69f8eb1f/attachment.png>