<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" 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"><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16525" name=GENERATOR><o:SmartTagType
name="country-region"
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:SmartTagType><o:SmartTagType
name="place"
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:SmartTagType><!--[if !mso]>
<STYLE>st1\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#ieooui)
}
</STYLE>
<![endif]-->
<STYLE>
<!--
/* 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:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:Arial;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle18
{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>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-US vLink=purple link=blue bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Sorry Dave, have to do this:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><FONT face=Arial><FONT color=#000080><EM>and this is (I think)
even more engrained after making several prior transitions (Int to Sport, Sport
to Advanced)</EM></FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><STRONG>Further proving my point that we need to
revert back to the old names: Novice, Sportsman, Advanced,
Masters</STRONG>.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Nice to know I've been demoted back to the lowest
level... let's see how that goes over in Lake Charles next weekend... I bet I
could take home a trophy!!!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Matt</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </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">Dave
Lockhart</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> Friday, August 17, 2007 8:40
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [NSRCA-discussion] I'm off to a
contest....</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">……so I won’t be
reading 100+ emails the next couple days. I started this new post
because I simply couldn’t decide how/which email to respond to. So,
forgive the somewhat scattered approach, but some thoughts I have after the
last few days –<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">- Why is Masters the
largest class? Maybe because guys like the class? Maybe because it
is a “comfortable home” without the added pressures/demands of F3A? Do
we want to force happy Masters into F3A (or maybe force them out of
pattern)? I’m not sure I see too many people dropping out of pattern on
their way from Adv to Masters. In any case, I think any changes to the
Masters pattern should be done with the greatest of care – it is the largest
single class on average at any given contest.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">- Difficulty between
classes. So what is the jump between Advanced and Masters is a little
bit bigger than the jump from other classes – I think it should be.
Pilots with more experience are the best suited to handle larger jumps.
Pattern pilots by nature (meaning approach to practicing and learning,
recognizing limits) are not likely to wreck planes learning new maneuvers for
Masters, and this is (I think) even more engrained after making several prior
transitions (Int to Sport, Sport to Advanced). Besides, maneuver
complexity itself is not the only measure of difficulty between classes.
Int is in part about learning what the box is – that is quite a challenge for
many. Sport has more complex maneuvers, as does Advanced. To be
competitive in Masters, you absolutely must be very skilled with the throttle
and know not only how to fly the maneuvers, but how to present/link the
maneuvers and present a seamless pattern.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">- Differences between
Masters and F3A. Many seem to think because the # of maneuvers, KFactor,
and maneuver types are similar between Masters and F3A (prelims), that there
is very little difference between Masters and F3A. I don’t
agree.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">1) To be
completive in F3A, you must fly at a higher level, and in all wind
conditions.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">2) To be
completive in F3A, you must be polished at both the prelim and finals
schedules – even if the finals schedule were the same difficulty level as the
prelims (and it isn’t by any stretch), this is not simply twice the work – it
is more like 4 times the work.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">3) To be
completive in F3A, you need to be quite comfortable with a library full of
integrated loop/roll maneuvers – and you need to be truly comfortable rolling
both directions in complex maneuvers.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Bottom line of which
is I would advocate a Masters schedule which is of similar difficulty (# of
maneuvers, KFactor, maneuver types, etc) to the F3A prelims is indeed a step
below F3A, and is indeed a good stepping stone to
F3A.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">- Point system /
Advancement.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">1) At the end
of the day, how many people are really affected by the point system?
Most advance when appropriate, if not sooner. My opinion is that many
advance as soon as they can consistently get through a pattern – and they move
up without developing any polish – which is fine is the goal is not
perfection. Recognize that participant levels in different classes in
different parts vary substantially, and vary with time (speaking for the
<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region>) – no point system is going to
be exactly right all the time, and if we choose to, we can adjust it any
number of ways. And I think the only thing that matters is that we
technically have a point system on the books which can be employed to force
promotion of a clear “sandbagger”. Does anyone want to see a pilot in
Int, Sport, or Adv who is not dominant in the class promoted to a higher level
where they may never be competitive, and may be chased out of the
event?<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">2) F3A is F3A,
and it is a quasi AMA class as it is referenced/listed in the AMA book.
I say quasi because the maneuver schedules are not determined by the US for
the US, and the amount of input the US has on the F3A schedules is quite
limited (how many can actually name the guy that represents the US to
FAI?). Forced advancement from Masters (which the <st1:country-region
w:st="on">US</st1:country-region> controls) to F3A (which the
<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region> has limited if any control over)
is not something I think should be pursued.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">3) The goal of
a feeder system of classes to “build” the best F3A Team for the
<st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region> is a great goal. However,
not everyone has the time/desire to pursue a spot on the US Team, and they
need a “home” as well. As I noted above, I think the current class structure
does a good job of feeding F3A, and it also has room for destination fliers in
Masters. Could a better feeder system be in place if Masters were not a
destination class? Maybe. But I think pattern as a whole in the
<st1:place w:st="on"><st1:country-region
w:st="on">US</st1:country-region></st1:place> (including F3A) would suffer if
any measurable number of current Masters pilots left the event due to changes
to improve the feeder system. The <st1:country-region
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region> pattern
community is perhaps unique in the world of pattern – at the top, we have very
substantial depth for fielding an F3A Team. We have enough pilots to
have 4 very competitive classes (including F3A) at the NATs every year.
The “feeder” system in the <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:country-region
w:st="on">US</st1:country-region></st1:place> is far better than most (if not
the best).<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Regards to
all<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Dave
Lockhart<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><A
href="mailto:DaveL322@comcast.net">DaveL322@comcast.net</A><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></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></BODY></HTML>