<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="State"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on"><font size=2
color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;
color:navy'>Del</span></font></st1:place></st1:State><font size=2 color=navy
face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>,<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I’ve been involved with the sequence
committees pretty regularly for close to 20 yrs now. It has always been a struggle
to get feedback BEFORE and DURING the process of developing new sequences
(commentary after development has always been far more voluminous). Recent
sequence efforts have been as or more attentive than in the past, and the
amount of data/input to base the new sequences on has been more than in the
past. The simple fact is that the average plane at the average contest is
capable of more demanding maneuvers than in the past. So yes, this is
reflected in part by more difficult sequences, but mostly it is a reflection of
the input from those in the pattern community that completed the survey and
took the time to interact with the volunteers that worked on the new sequences.
Care has been taken to keep the entry level from escalating. Obsolescence has
never been a goal.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Regards,<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Dave<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font size=2
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] <b><span style='font-weight:
bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>Del K. Rykert<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Friday, July 27, 2007 3:46
PM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> NSRCA Mailing List<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] CB
member RFC on Proposed MastersSequence for 2009/2010</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><strong><b><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Hi Vance..</span></font></b></strong><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><strong><b><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'> I do
have a couple of thoughts I need to share with your statement in reference to
equipment. Are you under the assumption that all competitors are using
digital servos and 1.60 or supercharged engines? Their was a time, in the
not to distant past, when maneuvers were not created that mandated the latest
and greatest equipment to fly them. Is it your intent and or that of the NSRCA
to make older equipment intentionally obsolete except in the entry classes? </span></font></b></strong><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><strong><b><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'> </span></font></b></strong><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'> <st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on"><em><i><font color=blue face=Arial><span style='font-family:Arial;
color:blue'>Del</span></font></i></em></st1:place></st1:State></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>----- Original Message ----- </span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <</span></font><a
href="mailto:patterndude@tx.rr.com"><font size=2 face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>patterndude@tx.rr.com</span></font></a><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <</span></font><a
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"><font size=2 face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</span></font></a><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 12:41 AM</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] CB member RFC on Proposed
Masters Sequence for 2009/2010</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>> I'm on the contest board and there are more active
pattern pilots on it now <br>
> than ever before. The recent change to 2 year cycles also happened
with a <br>
> breakup of contest boards. Our board is exclusively to approve
pattern. <br>
> Can't get much more focused than that. The process is cumbersome and
I <br>
> can't say I endorse it, but I'm going to work with it so the board support
<br>
> pattern and the collective wishes of the NSRCA.<br>
> <br>
> The timeline is in the AMA CB Procedures doc, which I have in front of me <br>
> right now. There are many steps but the critical ones are simple:<br>
> Basic (initial) Proposals submitted by Sept 30<br>
> Dec 15, prelim votes by CB cast (1st cut to see which proposals are
properly <br>
> formed and should continue)<br>
> Mar 1, Cross proposal deadline (alternate proposals accepted to achieve an
<br>
> approved initial proposal)<br>
> May 15, Final ballots sent to CB and final vote is completed<br>
> Jan 1, new rules take effect.<br>
> <br>
>>From this you can see that the process takes about 1 year and 3 months.
<br>
> Proposals in this Sept (07) take effect Jan 09.<br>
> <br>
> This is the "normal" cycle, but there are off cycle proposals of
type <br>
> safety, emergency, urgent or interpretation. I don't know about the
board, <br>
> but I'm totally open to any and all proposals as the workload to read,
take <br>
> the pulse of my district and vote/comment is far less than keeping up with
<br>
> this list!<br>
> <br>
> Comment on sequences:<br>
> *All sequences have squeezes and rough spots. The more we worry
about them <br>
> the harder it is to change sequences when we want to. Fly them as
best you <br>
> can and try to do better than the next guy.<br>
> <br>
> *Masters should never conciously trend to easier sequences. Sure one
may be <br>
> easier than the last, but this shouldn't trend. It should be held at
a <br>
> constant difficulty at least, and other classes are stepping stones to it.
<br>
> The jump from Advanced to Masters last time was not enough as we beat that
<br>
> to death on the list. Now we've swung the other way. Shouldn't
we balance <br>
> the steps, not change the target difficulty level?. Now let me take
this a <br>
> bit farther (maybe too far) The Masters sequence we flew a few years ago <br>
> with YS120SCs were the same difficulty as the current sequences we now fly
<br>
> with 1.60 2 strokes and improved supercharged 4 strokes. Airplane
design <br>
> has improved and so have the computer radios. We used to have
coreless <br>
> servos, now digital. Consider that maybe we should have harder
sequences if <br>
> we want to compare ourselves to our predecessors.<br>
> <br>
> *I think the current feeling is that Sports, Int, Adv should change less <br>
> frequently than Masters since designing building blocks is much harder
than <br>
> single sequences and many pilots move up after a few years. What
I've heard <br>
> as the goal is to change the stepping classes no faster than every 4
years, <br>
> but change Masters every 2.<br>
> <br>
> *Let's not reorient the sequences to accommodate a new technology.<br>
> <br>
> I do not want to form my opinion in a vacuum so feel free to comment.<br>
> --Lance<br>
> <br>
> ----- Original Message ----- <br>
> From: "Mark Atwood" <</span></font><a
href="mailto:atwoodm@paragon-inc.com"><font size=2 face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>atwoodm@paragon-inc.com</span></font></a><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>><br>
> To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <</span></font><a
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"><font size=2 face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</span></font></a><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>><br>
> Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2007 12:20 PM<br>
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposed Masters Sequence for 2009/2010<br>
> <br>
> <br>
>> Ron (RVP), Can you lay out for all of us the chronology of what
has to<br>
>> happen to get a new sequence in?<br>
>><br>
>> I think this would be enlightening to most as to what a PITA it is <br>
>> calendar<br>
>> time wise.<br>
>><br>
>> I.e. To put the process in place that Ed is suggesting, I think would
put <br>
>> a<br>
>> new sequence out at least 4 years from the "start" of
creating it.<br>
>><br>
>> So I'd be curious to see the timeline..<br>
>><br>
>> "We need a new sequence..." - Day 1<br>
>><br>
>> Form a committee - x weeks or months<br>
>><br>
>> Create sequence - X Months<br>
>><br>
>> Review by NSRCA Board/put out for survey - X Months<br>
>><br>
>> Blah blah blah...<br>
>><br>
>> AND THEN...work backwards for the AMA process...<br>
>><br>
>> Submission to the AMA for the 20XX year rules has to occur years
before it<br>
>> goes into effect (prelim vote, changes, final vote, publication, etc
etc)<br>
>><br>
>> I think Ron has a feel for the required process, but I'd love to hear
what<br>
>> the beginning to "in effect" time lag is for a new sequence
under the AMA<br>
>> rules process.<br>
>><br>
>> -M<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On 7/26/07 11:59 AM, "Ed Alt" <</span></font><a
href="mailto:ed_alt@hotmail.com"><font size=2 face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>ed_alt@hotmail.com</span></font></a><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>>> Doug:<br>
>>> I agree that we should not have a panel of non-enthusiasts in
charge of <br>
>>> the<br>
>>> actual sequence design. I don't think I stated my point too
well. The <br>
>>> SIG<br>
>>> does contain the best source of knowledge to construct
sequences. Given <br>
>>> the<br>
>>> right structure to how the committee is formed and how their work <br>
>>> overseen<br>
>>> is what is criitical. I don't think NSRCA has this process
quite right <br>
>>> yet.<br>
>>> This isn't meant to criticize anyone, but I think that
more thought has <br>
>>> to<br>
>>> be put into how we manage the process in the future.<br>
>>><br>
>>> It seems to me that the Sequence Committee work should first pass
muster<br>
>>> with the NSRCA board, who should review it to make sure that it
certain<br>
>>> criteria are met, not whether personally like it or not.
What is that<br>
>>> criteria? That needs to be better defined. It appears
to take the form <br>
>>> of<br>
>>> tribal knowledge. One attempt to put some structure to evaluating
a <br>
>>> sequence<br>
>>> is via a tool that Dave Lockhart developed , which I think is very
<br>
>>> useful.<br>
>>> However, is this developed to the point it needs to be?
Whatever method <br>
>>> we<br>
>>> use to create and evaluate should be well understood and applied<br>
>>> consistently.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Beyond how we establish consistency within our SIG, it seems that
the EC<br>
>>> role ought to be to review that their flock of SIGS followed AMA <br>
>>> guidelines<br>
>>> for producing their work, not to define exactly how they produce
the work<br>
>>> product (the sequences in this case). So, the EC should
demand that the <br>
>>> SIG<br>
>>> has a defined procedure and that the SIG leadership has assured <br>
>>> compliance<br>
>>> through their oversight and ultimately, their signatures on the
product.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Ed<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>>> From: Doug Cronkhite <</span></font><a
href="mailto:seefo@san.rr.com"><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>seefo@san.rr.com</span></font></a><font size=2
face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>><br>
>>>> Reply-To: NSRCA Mailing List <</span></font><a
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"><font size=2 face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</span></font></a><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>><br>
>>>> To: NSRCA Mailing List <</span></font><a
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"><font size=2 face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</span></font></a><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>><br>
>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Proposed Masters Sequence for
2009/2010<br>
>>>> Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 08:04:26 -0700<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Just because you CAN change them every year doesn't mean you
have to or<br>
>>>> should. I agree with you that the lower classes should have
some<br>
>>>> stability so newer pilots have a chance to build the
foundation the<br>
>>>> higher classes require.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I think the SIG should absolutely have control of the
schedules, as the<br>
>>>> people leading the SIG are generally actively involved in the
sport.<br>
>>>> Other than Tony Stillman, are any of the EC active in pattern?
Because<br>
>>>> if they're not, then I don't think they can make an accurate
assessment<br>
>>>> of the needs of the SIG. Tony may be the only one on the EC
who even<br>
>>>> flies anything on a regular basis now.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> -Doug<br>
>>>><br>
>>>>> I like variety in schedules too, but I think there is a
balance to<br>
>>>>> strike with the lower classes. It's a lot of effort
each year to<br>
>>>>> learn a new sequence. Once you have enough
experience flying<br>
>>>>> aerobatics, you can focus on new sequences without
detracting from the<br>
>>>>> other improvements you want to make.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Re. giving the SIG all the control, I would not want to
see that<br>
>>>>> happen. In the case of IMAC, the SIG leadership
became very IAC<br>
>>>>> centric and made changes that work against being able to
learn<br>
>>>>> fundamentals before moving up, in favor a being a carbon
copy<br>
>>>>> miniature of IAC. Just look at what the IMAC lower
class sequences<br>
>>>>> now contain and consider what problems they represent for
learning<br>
>>>>> fundamentals. I think you need an effective
counterbalance to help<br>
>>>>> keep sanity to the sequence design.<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Ed<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
>>>> </span></font><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</span></font></a><br>
<font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>>>>>
</span></font><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion"><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</span></font></a><br>
<font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>>>><br>
>>> _________________________________________________________________<br>
>>> </span></font><a href="http://newlivehotmail.com"><font size=2
face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>http://newlivehotmail.com</span></font></a><br>
<font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
>>> </span></font><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</span></font></a><br>
<font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>>>>
</span></font><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion"><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</span></font></a><br>
<font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
>> </span></font><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</span></font></a><br>
<font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>>>
</span></font><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion"><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</span></font></a><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'> <br>
> <br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
> </span></font><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</span></font></a><br>
<font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>> </span></font><a
href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion"><font size=2
face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</span></font></a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>