<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial>Lance: Well said. Bill Glaze</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=patterndude@comcast.net href="mailto:patterndude@comcast.net">Lance
Van Nostrand</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, February 28, 2006 9:49
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] **
Klipped to repost ** Why not morePatternguys?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Rick,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>this thread has gotten so long probably no one
will even read this, but I like your post. It might not be a good
generalization, but if the recent Olympics were a reflection of what our
society has become, then the decline of anything that requires humility is
inevitable. Ithe Olympics were full of gripers and posers. Some
complained about their hockey teammates, some actually said during the
olympics that they didn't matter, one snowboarder did a showoff move and lost
the gold. sure they are great athletes but maybe we all have too much
self esteem. Pattern does not appeal to people with artificially high
self esteem. it's the pin for the self worth bubble. Only the
grounded survive.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Deflated,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>--Lance</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=rickwallace45@hotmail.com
href="mailto:rickwallace45@hotmail.com">Rick Wallace</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, February 28, 2006 11:43
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] **
Klipped to repost ** Why not more Patternguys?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<P>There's a lot of goodness in this discussion - cost, complexity,
intimidation caused by turnaround -certainly all are factors in a guy's
decision to fly Pattern. </P>
<P>Maybe there's another - maybe people aren't as interested in truly
competing now as, say, 20 years ago. Society, as well as engines, planes,
and sequences, has changed quite a lot.<BR>-- Not too many years ago
everyone on the kids ball team didn't get a trophy. The best teams won and
got trophies, and the rest got mentioned. You had to play to get an award;
bench warming didn't get you a trophy. <BR>-- A school kid might actually
receive a failing grade if his work didn't meet the standard, even at the
risk of causing a 'crisis in self esteem.'<BR>-- Cadets at places like West
Point were rank ordered in General Order of Merit from #1 to (last) based on
academics, 'military aptitude' and other factors - and the number was
public. </P>
<P>Is the American system of "we're all winners" where 'failure' is a dirty
word partly to blame for reduced attendance in a hobby/sport whose
essence is competition?</P>
<P>Further, not too many years ago, it was an accomplishment to solo an R/C
airplane, and the main R/C avenues for showing advanced skills were Pattern,
Scale (often at the same contest) and racing. There's LOTS more out
there now in R/C flying- -- and besides R/C planes, there are TONS more
leisure activities than flying toy airplanes. Real cars, boat, R/C cars,
video games, computers, MP3, phones, hundreds of TV channels--- - there
are more things for a person to spend his time on than there is time -
at least that's true of my life and those around me.<BR><BR>So why pursue
something that's hard (like R/C flying) in the first place, and then go
WAYYY out into the fringes of the hobby to actually compete - which
involves <BR>-- buying toys not generally available at the local hobby
shop<BR>-- LOTS of hours spent at the field flying the same sequence over
and over (try THAT on your average local fellow sport pilot...) -probly at
times when other pilots aren't even present<BR>-- and then spend an entire
weekend driving a LONG way to a contest- in preference to spending time w/
the neighbors or family ??? </P>
<P>and where at the end of the day most of us will be greatly humbled by
being told we're NOT wonderful at it, and where we'll watch somebody else
get the trophy or the plaque... and we go home with just a handfull of score
sheets outlining all the stuff we screwed up... </P>
<P>Yah, I think there's more to the current level of participation than just
the perceived need for expensive toys, or the difficulty of turnaround
sequences. </P>
<P>But there ARE still guys who have fire in their bellies and who want to
do that maneuver just a little better this time than last, and who
compete with themselves as much as with the other guys in their class. </P>
<P>And there ARE still guys who believe that you don't win Second place...
you lose First. </P>
<P>I'm not sure Pattern is for everyone - but there's certainly a place for
it in the hobby! </P>
<P>Exiting the soap box... </P>
<P>Rick </P>
<P>(Besides, if the Pattern guys die out, who'll test fly all the other
guys' new models and set their needle valves for them and demonstrate that
lightness rather than 'beefing up that kit design' may be the right
answer??)</P>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #a0c6e5 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"><FONT
style="FONT-SIZE: 11px; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">
<HR color=#a0c6e5 SIZE=1>
From: <I>"Grow Pattern" <pattern4u@comcast.net></I><BR>Reply-To:
<I>NSRCA Mailing List <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org></I><BR>To:
<I>"NSRCA Mailing List"
<nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org></I><BR>Subject: <I>Re:
[NSRCA-discussion] ** Klipped to repost ** Equipmentcostandpartiicpation
--</I><BR>Date: <I>Tue, 28 Feb 2006 11:23:09 -0500</I><BR><BR>
<META content="Microsoft SafeHTML" name=Generator>
<STYLE></STYLE>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Dave, </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>
No personal criticism intended but, the problem
with looking at this from the position of a successful FAI pilot,
especially if you were a good pilot from a very young age, is that
you can't really feel that "leap of faith barrier" that a regular pilot
feels, then or today. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I have spent most of last year with
regular-club-pilots. Not a few guys that I practice pattern with. Did
not have a pattern-plane with me. They were sort flyers that were
pretty good aerobats with their own planes. based upon what I
learned, I can tell you that turnaround is massively daunting to
them. Much more daunting, in fact , than trying out a difficult 3-D
high alpha maneuver.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>You can't ignore the fact that pattern pilots
left our sport in droves around and after 1985, and never came back. These
guys were not the top liners. They were, however, the mainstay of the
sport. They showed up, paid their fees (said another way paid for the
trophies), they had a great time, created a fun environment and cared more
about taking part than actually winning. They flew pretty simple planes
that could still do most of center maneuvers today. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>This is the group that is still missing in
pattern. They were the ones that attracted new members. They were
reachable and certainly not intimidating. It may well not be the
schedules. IMAC, with more difficulty schedules attracted a large new
following because you could fly your CURRENT plane in their classes. There
are now plenty of pattern ARF's but the same thing is not happening,
at least not yet.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>If we knew why we could probably fix
it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Regards,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Eric.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=DaveL322@comcast.net
href="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net">DaveL322@comcast.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA Mailing List</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, February 28, 2006
10:59 AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] **
Klipped to repost ** Equipment costandpartiicpation --</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Turnaround style pattern reduced noise, noisefootprint, and
overflight area. Pattern would have died (in some areas at least)
without the change to turnaround. The case could certainly be made
that a reduction in numbers of pattern pilots was on the horizon, and
while turnaround reduced the numbers of some, saved the event for
others.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Properly designed schedules can act as building blocks - turnaround
style or not.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Yes, the turnaround schedules today are more difficult than the
non-turnaround schedules of the past, and at the highest levels, it does
help distinguish the top pilots. The increase in difficulty across
all classes is not solely attributable to the turnaround format.
Today's entry and mid level classes are of higher difficulty because
"we" have made them to be that way - continually escalating the
difficulty in the entry and mid level classes with every rules cycle to
alleviate "boredom" and give the lower classes the same amount of
airtime as Masters/F3A. Show me an Intermediate Pilot that can
consistently a rectangular box (ends over the turnaround poles, flat
lines at top and bottom of box) at 150m, and I'll bet you have a future
NATs Champion in almost any class.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Today, I believe the average pattern competitor today is interested
in moving up in class when they can competently fly the class - compared
to the past, when moving up was done after a higher degree of polish was
achieved. Today, it seems the challenge of pattern is getting
through a sequence, and many move up before really learning the
fundamentals in a sequence - compared to the past, when the challenge
was to perfect a sequence, not merely survive it. This is not to
knock anyone currently flying pattern - just an observation on the
changes I've seen. Being able to learn and complete a new manuever
or sequence is a worthy goal, just as is perfecting a manuever or
sequence that is easy to do, but hard to refine. I do quite a bit
of coaching, and the vast majority of the time when a pilot has a
problem with a specific maneuver, it is not the specific maneuver that
is the issue - fixing the maneuver requires taking steps backwards to
fix the! underlying basics which were are flawed - and likely would have
been better learned if more time had been spent in the prior class
(or classes).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>If the appeal of the event is now more focused on more exciting and
flashy maneuvers and longer sequences, compared to precision flying,
then that is exactly the direction pattern has moved. Nothing
wrong with that, if that is what "we" want. A well executed
pattern sequence is very boring to most, and the elements that appeal to
the average pattern guy are not noticeable to the average spectator -
that is something that has always been, and always will be.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards,</DIV>
<DIV><BR>Dave Lockhart</DIV>
<DIV><A
href="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net">DaveL322@comcast.net</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>