<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Tony</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">I think any kind of qualifications for
the NATS is a bad idea, for several reasons. </font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">1. For 99.9% of us this is a hobby.
We can call it a sport, but its a hobby. Why? Because 99.9% of us work
a real job, and very very few make any money from participation in this
hobby. </font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">2. Elevate the stature of the NATS?
To who? The Canadians? The Mexicans? The Anti AMA organization who does
not have a NATS? We have a "Worlds" and it requires qualification,
so in essence this is already what you are asking for. Right now anyone
who goes to the NATS has a higher (false) stature at the local level anyway.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">3. Because it is a hobby, with contests
run by hobbyist, and most AMA people are volunteers, I cannot imagine how
in the world the AMA or NSRCA could ever organize and execute and fair
qualification system. I derive this opinion based on the "many"
(sarcasm) people within both the AMA and NSRCA that line up at nomination
time to serve as an officer. Local AMA clubs, AMA regional reps,
and especially the NSRCA has a hard time finding anyone to do day to day
work. If you volunteer to be nominated, you can almost be assured that
you can be President.... Heck the NSRCA is so loaded with politics
that officers quit in the middle of terms, and people execute personal
agendas both in the rules formation and even personal aspects at the NATS.
AMA and NSRCA should only promote to increase participation.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">4. There are some who may only attend
the NATS and do well and even win. Why would we want to make them attend
local stuff to qualify when they do not need it. This applies mostly the
top FAI guys. They do not need the local level to excel, and they can step
in at the NATS and kick eveyone's butt. Why inconvienience them from their
job, family or whatever? If they can show up at the NATS and win
is that not still getting the best?</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">5. Last-I used to be much more involved
with pattern than I am now. My kids are of the age that it is more important
to spend time doing their activities than mine, as they will be gone before
I realize it. I cannot make 6-7 contests (in 6 months) like I used to,
and making the NATS is tough too, but if I did decide that I could make
the NATS, the last thing I would want to worry about is having to make
3 contests in a row to "qualify" for the NATS. Actually this
point is the same as #1-its a HOBBY. Those whom want different move up
to FAI and "qualify" for the Worlds.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">A suggestion.....</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Start with the FAI USA team. Why does
that selection contest allow whomever wants to show up fly at that contest?
Implement a qualification sytem for the USA team selection contest first.
The Semi-Pros (not so sure we have 100% "pros" anywhere) in these
ranks should love it, because then those top 6 (who are we kidding... it
may only be 5 who truly have a chance) nationwide flyers going for those
3 spots do not have to sit thru 3 days of wannabe FAI schmoes.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">I cannot imagine that a qualification
system would do anything but hurt NATS attendence. I do not understand
the point of it at all. The NAT is not overloaded. I agree that it
is not bad to discuss anything, but if you really think this is a #1 priority
topic (I have not seen any others tossed out there), then I think it shows
your personal disconnect with the AMA pattern community,402,403,404. </font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Signed,</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Peace, Love and Smarter Missiles.........</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
<br>
Gray Fowler<br>
Senior Principal Chemical Engineer<br>
Radomes and Specialty Apetures<br>
Technical Staff Composites Engineering<br>
Raytheon</font>