[NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA Leadership / New Sequences - My thoughts - Long

[Whodaddy Whodaddy]

Adopting p from FAI is a terrible idea .. if i feel the need to fly fai ill do it ..the arguments of separation of difficulty between master and fai may be valid .. But who gives a crap .. If i or anyone has the desire to move to fai its a personnel choice with that choice takes commitment to the move .. quit trying to creep masters into a pre school for FAI .. i dont fly fai i fly master by choice . 

Gary

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 20, 2017, at 12:38 AM, Frackowiak Tony via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:
> 
> Also, I would be willing to bet good money that the process used by the FAI to develop the F3A schedules is not as well thought out as the process established within the NSRCA. Or, perhaps excepting this cycle, as well done.
> 
> Tony Frackowiak
> 
>> On Jun 19, 2017, at 9:31 PM, John Gayer via NSRCA-discussion wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> I find it interesting that when we discuss using sequences developed and used internationally there is substantial resistance and a lot of not invented here, loss of control, etc. We can certainly overcome the loss of control by keeping a modification capability when we encounter something undesirable in a  sequence we want to use. Not invented here can save us a lot of work,
>> 
>> On the other hand, when we talking about rewriting rules for using 12S batteries or eliminating/reducing weight restrictions for AMA classes, there is a hue and cry that we have to stay in lockstep with FAI or the sky will fall.
>> 
>> I don't understand either position. We should take advantage of work done around the world but not be bound to it. If we can build a better mousetrap for less money, that's great. If we can't, then take advantage of published and available work wherever it comes from. P19 is not terribly exciting but it is easier than either the current or the new Masters sequence. 
>> 
>> Keeping that in mind, I suggest we accept P19 as the Masters schedule for next year only on a trial basis. 
>> In the meantime, a committee should be formed to formulate a plan for future sequences.  The three sequence rotation makes a lot of sense to me for Sportsman and Intermediate. Advanced could go that way too but probably should adapt to whatever longterm plan is adopted for Masters. I would suggest having forms available at contest to survey contestants throughout the year about their sequences.
>> At the end of the year, the committee would publish recommendations for how to generate sequences for all classes. A recommendation I could make right now is that the board ensures the committee adheres to the guidelines and charter. The committee could make changes to the documents but would need board approval for those changes prior to implementation or ask for a waiver. 
>> 
>> John
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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