<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16587" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>My assessment of what I have seen the last many
years is that pilots drop out because they are tired of flying pattern for any
number of reasons, but it is not really the class they are flying in. It
is a number of other reasons. However, they choose to blame the
advancement requirement because it is convenient as a scapegoat.
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Understanding there is no perfect system no matter
what you attempt, then I say leave it as it is. Use the AMA appeal system
to go back. We have a very competitive busy region and we know who's who
and we are leniet where need be. Never been an issue. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Mike</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=rcmaster199@aol.com
href="mailto:rcmaster199@aol.com">rcmaster199@aol.com</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> Monday, February 04, 2008 3:17
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Expert
Class??</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>"""My gut feeling based on what I have personally witnessed is that most
who spend the time to try and compete in the FAI class can reasonable make it
through an F round without fear of crashing. Sure they may not score an
8 on that mult-rolling loop thingi-majig, but they will get a 3 or a 4 on it
and move onto the next maneuver. By the end of the season they might
even get a 6 on it and will have improved their flying. """"</DIV>
<DIV>I agree in letter.....problem is with spirit of the thing. Guys appear to
get frustrated with low scores no matter how much they practice the tough
maneuvers. There is little "payment" and that frustrates.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>"""I think it was unanimous (or very close if I recall correctly) that
FAI move to the 4 P, 2 F, and finals setup""""</DIV>
<DIV>That's great and I certainly appreciate the arrangement. How has it been
managing the Judging (both quantity of and quality of) in this
arrangement?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>""""At the end of the day flying F or not, the same people are going to
win, it wont change the results."""''</DIV>
<DIV>I agree........BUT, Having flown Pattern for around 30 years now, it
seems to me that we, the ones that don't get to fly on World teams, just want
to fly well in front of our peers and have something positive to show for all
of that hard practice (read, expenses in both money and time)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>""""""""Starting this year team results at the WC are based on all rounds
not just the prelims."""""""</DIV>
<DIV>Best argument yet proposed for F flights (as opposed to against)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>MattK</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: Chad Northeast
<chadnortheast@shaw.ca><BR>To: NSRCA Mailing List
<nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>Sent: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 11:58
am<BR>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Expert Class??<BR><BR>
<DIV id=AOLMsgPart_3_cce8814d-fef4-4c96-a11d-1fa4e3239d9c>It seems to me that
most of the resistance to flying FAI flying F at local events is coming from
Masters fliers? Maybe this is simply demographics (its the largest class
of flyers), but I dont see a lot of FAI guys on the list saying they dont want
it. I find this quite intriguing! I have some questions for the
Masters pilots who don't want F flown in FAI locally.<BR><BR>a) is this
because you don't want to be bothered judging two different sequences?<BR>b)
is this because you one day wish to move to FAI and don't want to be bothered
learning to fly two sequences?<BR>c) is it because you feel it will hurt local
contest attendance?<BR><BR>My gut feeling based on what I have personally
witnessed is that most who spend the time to try and compete in the FAI class
can reasonable make it through an F round without fear of crashing. Sure
they may not score an 8 on that mult-rolling loop thingi-majig, but they will
get a 3 or a 4 on it and move onto the next maneuver. By the end of the
season they might even get a 6 on it and will have improved their
flying. <BR><BR>A few years back we had a vote at the Nats of all FAI
pilots in attendance about how to continue running the Nats. Either to
stay the course of 6 P rounds and finals, or move to the Worlds arrangement of
4 P, 2 F, then finals. I think it was unanimous (or very close if I
recall correctly) that FAI move to the 4 P, 2 F, and finals setup. This
would mean a LOT of pilots who had no real chance of making the finals would
suddenly be flying the F pattern. I know for fact that some of these
pilots went back to Masters at future Nats, and I would ask them if they are
disappointed in the direction that the Nats took? <BR><BR>However, only a few
years (maybe two years) after that decision, FAI had one of the largest
turnout's at the Nats in the past 10 years. Why is that? Well, I
have been to 4 world championships and can tell you that there is not a single
other event that comes as close to the WC as the US Nats does, simple as
that. I think the large majority of FAI fliers would welcome flying
F....its in the nature of those who compete in that class IMO.
<BR><BR>At the end of the day flying F or not, the same people are going to
win, it wont change the results. It will add another level to the
contest, and it will improve the flying of anyone in that class. How can
that be anything but win-win? Will flying F hurt or help local contest
attendance?<BR><BR>I realize being from Canada I don't have any say in US
pattern....but we fly exactly the same Masters up here, and there are similar
thoughts about flying F at local events up here, so all the comments and
thoughts on the matter cross the border to us :) There are definitely a
few events that will be running both sequences this season, it will be
interesting to see how they make out.<BR><BR>Also, not sure if this has been
mentioned or not. Starting this year team results at the WC are based on
all rounds not just the prelims. So having F flown at local events can
give the team fliers a lot more exposure to it than they would previously
otherwise have had. <BR><BR>Jason said he is gone to E-fest so someone
has to take over LOL :)<BR><BR>Chad<BR><BR>----- Original Message
-----<BR>From: Anthony Romano <<A
href="mailto:anthonyr105@hotmail.com">anthonyr105@hotmail.com</A>><BR>Date:
Monday, February 4, 2008 8:32 am<BR>Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Exper
Class??<BR>To: NSRCA Mailing List <<A
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A>><BR><BR>>
<BR>> HMMM. Ponder this<BR>> Masters is the largest class at just about
any contest in the country.<BR>> Masters presents a large judging load.
<BR>> Many want to leave Masters as it stands.<BR>> Many Masters pilots
are frustrated by the extreme depth and <BR>> competitiveness of the
Masters class.<BR>> A number of pilots want to fly FAI but are not ready
for F sequences.<BR>> Many FAI pilots don't have the resources to prepare
for 2 sequences.<BR>> Many of the top FAI pilots don't participate because
we don't <BR>> fly F sequences.<BR>> <BR>> Adding an expert
class that flies the current P could help. <BR>> Sequence development and
rules are already done. It would <BR>> increases the judge and competitor
pool while improving the <BR>> level of flying and judging. Really no more
work in scoring. So <BR>> other than an extra set of awards, which most
would gladly <BR>> waive, what harm would it cause?<BR>> <BR>>
If my club would let me CD a contest again I would try it. Once <BR>> again
I agree with Jason. Should I be worried?<BR>> <BR>>
Anthony<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> From: <A
href="mailto:jshulman@cfl.rr.comTo">jshulman@cfl.rr.comTo</A>: nsrca-<BR>>
<A
href="mailto:discussion@lists.nsrca.orgDate">discussion@lists.nsrca.orgDate</A>:
Sun, 3 Feb 2008 16:49:09 -<BR>> 0500Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] changed
topic to killing Masters?<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
Sorry Doug, that makes too much sense and follows the basis of <BR>> the
way pattern is supposed to be. That's unacceptable...lol.<BR>>
<BR>> 8.2.5. There is no mandatory advancement into FAI from the
<BR>> Masters class. Contestants may enter their current AMA class or
<BR>> the FAI class at any contest but not both.<BR>> <BR>> If
a pilot does not like the way FAI is flown, he does not have <BR>> to fly
it. An Expert class seems like a logical "solution" , but <BR>> I believe
it has been shot down many times before. Wouldn't this <BR>> be a great way
to get the one's who want more of a challenge <BR>> than Masters, but don't
want to fly F, a class of their own? It <BR>> could even be an "FAI type"
of class where Masters is still the <BR>> highest class to advance into but
pilots can jump into and out <BR>> of Expert at any time. Establish a rule,
written or not, that <BR>> the pattern can not have any integrated rolling
loops or <BR>> circles. This would allow the FAI pilots to continue to fly
FAI, <BR>> not just half of it. Masters and Expert pilots could judge FAI,
<BR>> FAI and Expert judge Masters, FAI and Masters judge Expert.<BR>>
<BR>> Sportsman- gets feet wet<BR>> Intermediate- likes wet
feet<BR>> Advanced- ready to learn more<BR>> Masters- ready to fly more
of what was learned<BR>> *Expert- the imaginary perfect in-between class
<BR>> FAI- wants to be challenged beyond what was learned<BR>>
<BR>> I really hope that here locally (D3) we don't do away with the
F <BR>> sequence. But if that is what the majority decide is best for
<BR>> the class, so be it. I know of 4 pilots that want to continue to
<BR>> fly F, and they already compete in FAI.<BR>>
Regards,Jasonwww.jasonshulman.comwww.shulmanaviation.comwww.composite-arf.com
<BR>> <BR>> -----Original Message-----From: nsrca-discussion-<BR>> <A
href="mailto:bounces@lists.nsrca.org">bounces@lists.nsrca.org</A> [<A
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-?">mailto:nsrca-discussion-</A><BR>> <A
href="mailto:bounces@lists.nsrca.org">bounces@lists.nsrca.org</A>]On Behalf Of
Doug CronkhiteSent: Sunday, <BR>> February 03, 2008 4:14 PMTo: 'NSRCA
Mailing List'Subject: Re: <BR>> [NSRCA-discussion] changed topic to killing
Masters?<BR>> <BR>> Actually, I think the solution is to just decide
once and for <BR>> all that Masters will not be the training ground for FAI
and <BR>> make the Masters sequence the destination difficulty. I suspect
<BR>> that’s actually been done several times and people just keep <BR>>
trying to change it.<BR>> <BR>> If people want to fly FAI, then
they have to just deal with the <BR>> problems that go along with it. No
more complaining that the <BR>> jump from Masters to FAI is too hard or
they don’t have the <BR>> right airplane, because well.. too bad. <BR>>
<BR>> Seems like this topic goes around the list AT LEAST once a
year.<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> From: <A
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</A>
[<A href="mailto:nsrca-?">mailto:nsrca-</A><BR>> <A
href="mailto:discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</A>]
On Behalf Of <BR>> <A
href="mailto:vicenterc@comcast.netSent">vicenterc@comcast.netSent</A>: Sunday,
February 03, 2008 12:43 PMTo: <BR>> NSRCA Mailing List; NSRCA Mailing
ListSubject: Re: [NSRCA-<BR>> discussion] changed topic to killing
Masters?<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Jason,<BR>> <BR>>
<BR>> <BR>> I agree. Another solution is get the Master
class the <BR>> level that was 8-10 years ago. It was between
Advanced and <BR>> FAI-F3A. It was natural for pilots wining Masters
to move <BR>> to FAI and not like we see now more moving from F3A to
<BR>> Masters. It is clear to me that the new Master schedule is
<BR>> equal or harder than the new P schedule. <BR>> <BR>>
<BR>> <BR>> --Vicente "Vince" Bortone<BR>> <BR>>
<BR>> <BR>> -------------- Original message -------------- From:
"JShulman" <BR>> <<A
href="mailto:jshulman@cfl.rr.com">jshulman@cfl.rr.com</A>> <BR>>
<BR>> So if FAI pilots, that are flying FAI now, want to fly FAI (P
<BR>> and F), and Masters pilots, that are flying Masters now, want to
<BR>> fly Masters, what are we really "discussing"? Are we looking for
<BR>> a middle class to call Masters + for the guys that want to fly P
<BR>> and not F or Masters? Sounds like the addition of an Expert <BR>>
class in AMA to give the fliers in Masters, that want a P type <BR>> of
sequence, a place to go? <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
Regards,Jasonwww.jasonshulman.comwww.shulmanaviation.comwww.composite-arf.com
<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
<BR>> <BR>> -------------- Original message -------------- From: "John
<BR>> Fuqua" <<A
href="mailto:johnfuqua@embarqmail.com">johnfuqua@embarqmail.com</A>>
<BR>> I have been following this discussion with some relutance to <BR>>
jump in. As a current Masters pilot and old time F3A flyer <BR>> I to
once pushed to have the Master schedule be the P <BR>> schedule. But
you guys need to look at what FAI has done <BR>> to the P schedule.
Here is link to the F3A rules. <BR>> <A
href="http://www.fai.org/aeromodelling/documents/sc4 "
target=_blank>http://www.fai.org/aeromodelling/documents/sc4 </A>;
<BR>> FAI has reduced the total maneuvers to 19 including a non scored
<BR>> takeoff and landing. AMA Master is 23 including a
<BR>> scored takeoff and landing. <BR>> <BR>> Going to
FAI would certainly speed things up (which is what FAI <BR>> intended for
large contests like WC to speed up the prelims and <BR>> get to the real
contest).<BR>> <BR>> Not sure this is what AMA/NSRCA membership
wants for a <BR>> destination class.<BR>> <BR>> John<BR>>
<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> From: <A
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</A>
[<A href="mailto:nsrca-?">mailto:nsrca-</A><BR>> <A
href="mailto:discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</A>]
On Behalf Of Del RykertSent: <BR>> Sunday, February 03, 2008 7:14 AMTo:
NSRCA Mailing ListSubject: <BR>> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] changed topic to
killing Masters?<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Hi Dave..<BR>>
<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> I never saw anyone
suggesting to do away with the Masters <BR>> class.. I have thought of
another restriction/factor. Some of <BR>> the FAI maneuvers require a
specific designed plane to do them <BR>> well. If you don't have such an
aircraft in your stable you can <BR>> be looking at a prohibitive change to
switch to those type of <BR>> planes or live with the self imposed
handicap. Granted, some of <BR>> the best can make a good showing in FAI
type maneuvers but when <BR>> needing the 1 point advantage in a high
K-Factor maneuver it <BR>> does drive the contestants to seek the best sled
that works for <BR>> them. <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> A good
friend pointed out something I had lost sight of <BR>> once. He
acquired a newer designed airplane to his stable <BR>> that performed the
maneuvers he was flying so much easier. The <BR>> design choice alone was
raising his scores by almost 1 point per <BR>> maneuver. With only a little
bit of practice with new plane. He <BR>> never appreciated the handicap he
self imposed until having <BR>> better equipment. Heck.. I still have
coreless servos and not a <BR>> digital do I own.. How far behind am
I? LOL. <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Del
<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>> <BR>>
From: Dave Burton <BR>> <BR>> To: 'NSRCA Mailing List' <BR>> <BR>>
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008 7:33 PM<BR>> <BR>> Subject: Re:
[NSRCA-discussion] F at locals?<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Del,
I’ve never advocated doing away with the Master’s class. I <BR>> only
suggested adopting the most current FAI P maneuver schedule <BR>> and fly
Master’s as a separate class as we do today. Masters <BR>> pilots would not
be required to advance to the FAI class unless <BR>> they chose to do so.
Seems to me like it solves several <BR>> problems. It allows a CD to have
more flexibility in arranging <BR>> flight lines, a larger pool of
knowledgeable judges, eliminates <BR>> the need for NSRCA (or others) to
come up with a new schedule <BR>> periodically for the Masters Class. I
don’t think there is any <BR>> difference in the difficulty level of the P
schedule and the <BR>> Masters schedule today and would not require any
greater skill <BR>> level than Masters does today IMO. <BR>> Dave
Burton<BR>> <BR>>
_________________________________________________________________<BR>>
Helping your favorite cause is as easy as instant messaging. You <BR>>
IM, we give.<BR>> <A
href="http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join"
target=_blank>http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join</A>
</DIV>
<DIV id=AOLMsgPart_4_cce8814d-fef4-4c96-a11d-1fa4e3239d9c
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; MARGIN: 0px; COLOR: #000; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, Sans-Serif; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fff"><PRE style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt"><TT>_______________________________________________ NSRCA-discussion mailing list <A href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A> <A href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target=_blank>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</A> </TT></PRE></DIV>
<DIV class=AOLPromoFooter>
<HR style="MARGIN-TOP: 10px">
More new features than ever. Check out the new <A
href="http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/mailtour/aol/en-us/text.htm?ncid=aolcmp00050000000003"
target=_blank>AOL Mail</A>!<BR></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>