Since there are 12 AMA districts it really does take a majority to get a proposal through the contest board. I also think that we really need to run this by the membership to ensure that they are behind a proposal like this - just because you and I and a few others think that we should do away with this rule doesn't mean that the majority of the membership feel the same way.<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Feb 4, 2008 11:07 AM, Dave Burton <<a href="mailto:burtona@atmc.net">burtona@atmc.net</a>> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<div lang="EN-US" vlink="purple" link="blue">
<div>
<p><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d">Scrapping the mandatory advancement rule is an excellent approach. Where you when I submitted rules proposals in two different cycles to do just this? I could have used the support as it was soundly shouted down. I won't do that again. But it needs to be done. I'm one of those 67 year old flyers trapped in Masters/FAI who can't move down where my present skill levels would be more appropriate. Don't know if I would choose to back a class, but anyone should have the option of flying the class most appropriate for them IMO. I think peer pressure would keep the trophy hounds from staying. One reason Masters is so crowded is ex FAI flyers who can't hack it with the top FAI guys anymore and move back to Masters where they can compete.</span></p>
<p><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d">Dave Burton</span></p>
<p><span style="FONT-SIZE: 11pt; COLOR: #1f497d"> </span></p>
<div style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none">
<p><b><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt">From:</span></b><span style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> <a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a> [mailto:<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Derek Koopowitz<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, February 04, 2008 1:47 PM<br><b>To:</b> NSRCA Mailing List<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Exper Class??</span></p></div>
<div>
<div></div>
<div class="Wj3C7c">
<p> </p>
<div>
<p>There is a discussion going on the District 7 list at the moment about not forcing people to move up a class (using points). Case in point is a pilot that was forced out of Intermediate into Advanced and has crashed 2 Angels Shadows due to "pilot error" (he admits it). He is 67 years old and his skill levels just don't warrant him being in Advanced.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p></div>
<div>
<p>Eric Henderson's last article in Model Aviation about the points system in the NSRCA just proves this issue - I'm in full agreement with Eric on this and would like to see the points system scrapped. We definitely need to cater to the pattern pilot that is very uncomfortable flying a new class (they've pointed out of their current class) and would like to stay put until they feel more comfortable. This can also happen if a new sequence is developed for their class and the pilot is uncomfortable flying it as well in a contest. Shouldn't we allow them to move back a class until they feel comfortable with the new sequence (as Chris and Mike suggested)?</p>
</div>
<div>
<p> </p></div>
<div>
<p style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt">I would hate to lose a pilot to pattern (and a long time supporter of pattern) because the system forced them to do something that they just aren't comfortable with doing.</p></div>
<div> </div></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div>