<html>
<head>
<style>
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
FONT-SIZE: 10pt;
FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma
}
</style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
But, that dosen't mean it can't happen further down the line on future sequences. What the international community comes up is out of our control still.<BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<HR>
From: don.ramsey@suddenlink.net<BR>To: nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 09:54:40 -0600<BR>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] changed topic to killing Masters?<BR><BR>
<META content="Microsoft SafeHTML" name=Generator>
<STYLE>
.ExternalClass EC_p.MsoNormal, .ExternalClass EC_li.MsoNormal, .ExternalClass EC_div.MsoNormal
{margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:'Calibri','sans-serif';}
.ExternalClass a:link, .ExternalClass EC_span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;text-decoration:underline;text-underline:single;}
.ExternalClass a:visited, .ExternalClass EC_span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;text-decoration:underline;text-underline:single;}
.ExternalClass EC_p.MsoPlainText, .ExternalClass EC_li.MsoPlainText, .ExternalClass EC_div.MsoPlainText
{margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:'Times New Roman','serif';}
.ExternalClass EC_span.PlainTextChar
{font-family:'Times New Roman','serif';}
.ExternalClass EC_span.SpellE
{;}
.ExternalClass .EC_MsoChpDefault
{;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;}
.ExternalClass EC_div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
</STYLE>
<DIV class=EC_Section1>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>I really don't understand all the discussion about the P pattern difficulty and how it would cause an exodus from Masters if flown.<SPAN> </SPAN>Here it is:</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>1.<SPAN> </SPAN>Rev. Split S & Split S Combo, 2/4-pt. roll first, full roll second, inv. Exit<SPAN> </SPAN>4</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">This is the Double <SPAN class=EC_SpellE>Immelman</SPAN> the Advanced pattern did year before last.</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>2.<SPAN> </SPAN>Half reverse <SPAN class=EC_SpellE>cuban</SPAN> 8, two ½ rolls in opposite direction<SPAN> </SPAN>3</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">No difficulty here.</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>3.<SPAN> </SPAN>Three horizontal rolls in opposite direction<SPAN> </SPAN>4</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">The beginning classes did 3 rolls for a number of years.<SPAN> </SPAN>These are in opposite direction and more difficult but Masters does opposite rolls now.</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>4.<SPAN> </SPAN>Stall turn, 2/4-pt. roll up, ½ roll down<SPAN> </SPAN>3</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">No difficulty here.</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>5.<SPAN> </SPAN>Top hat, 4/8-pt. roll over top, inverted exit<SPAN> </SPAN>4</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">Timing is a problem here but no real difficulty.</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>6.<SPAN> </SPAN>Half outside loop, inverted entry<SPAN> </SPAN>1</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">No difficulty here.</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>7.<SPAN> </SPAN>Triangle loop, with ½ rolls in each leg, inverted exit<SPAN> </SPAN>4</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">This was a Masters type maneuver not long ago.</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>8.<SPAN> </SPAN>Figure 9, two ½ rolls in opposite direction on downline, inverted entry<SPAN> </SPAN>3</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">Can get rushed but not difficult.</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>9.<SPAN> </SPAN>Stall turn, ¾ roll up, 1 ¼ snap roll down<SPAN> </SPAN>5</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">OK, it's got a 1-1/4 snap on the downline. </SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>10.<SPAN> </SPAN>Pull-push-push humpty bump, ½ rolls up and down, inverted exit<SPAN> </SPAN>3</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">No difficulty here.</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>11.<SPAN> </SPAN>Reverse 4-pt. roll (2/4-pt in one direction, 2/4-pt opposite), inverted entry and exit<SPAN> </SPAN>4</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">Masters maneuver.</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>12.<SPAN> </SPAN>Half square loop, full roll up, inverted entry<SPAN> </SPAN>2</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">No difficulty here.</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>13.<SPAN> </SPAN>Two outside loops from top, <SPAN class=EC_SpellE>full</SPAN> integrated roll over top 90 degrees of second loop<SPAN> </SPAN>5</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">Some difficulty but not dangerous and learnable.</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>14.<SPAN> </SPAN>Two turn spin, inverted exit<SPAN> </SPAN>3</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">No difficulty here.</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>15.<SPAN> </SPAN>Cuban 8, 4/8-pt. roll and full roll in 45 degree <SPAN class=EC_SpellE>downlines</SPAN>, inverted entry<SPAN> </SPAN>4</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">Masters type maneuver in past.</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>16.<SPAN> </SPAN>Half square loop on corner, ½ rolls 45 degree uplines, inverted exit.<SPAN> </SPAN>3</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">No difficulty here.</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><SPAN> </SPAN>17.<SPAN> </SPAN>45 degrees down, with negative snap roll, ½ roll on exit</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText><B><SPAN style="COLOR: red">This was <SPAN class=EC_SpellE>was</SPAN> an advanced class maneuver 2 years ago.</SPAN></B></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>I think ever Masters model flying today will do these P pattern maneuvers easily.<SPAN> </SPAN>There is a maneuver in P-11 that will be more difficult but we have had similar maneuvers in Masters before.<SPAN> </SPAN>The F pattern is different.<SPAN> </SPAN></P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>Don</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Ed Alt<BR>Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 4:55 PM<BR>To: NSRCA Mailing List<BR>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] changed topic to killing Masters?</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>Sounds about right to me.</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>Ed</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>________________________________</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> From: seefo@san.rr.com</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> To: nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 13:14:10 -0800</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] changed topic to killing Masters?</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Actually, I think the solution is to just decide once and for all that Masters will not be the training ground for FAI and make the Masters sequence the destination difficulty. I suspect that’s actually been done several times and people just keep trying to change it.</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> If people want to fly FAI, then they have to just deal with the problems that go along with it. No more complaining that the jump from Masters to FAI is too hard or they don’t have the right airplane, because well.. too bad.</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Seems like this topic goes around the list AT LEAST once a year.</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of vicenterc@comcast.net</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 12:43 PM</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> To: NSRCA Mailing List; NSRCA Mailing List</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] changed topic to killing Masters?</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Jason,</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> I agree.<SPAN> </SPAN>Another solution is get the Master class the level that was 8-10 years ago.<SPAN> </SPAN>It was between Advanced and FAI-F3A.<SPAN> </SPAN>It was natural for pilots wining Masters to move to FAI and not like we see now more moving from F3A to Masters.<SPAN> </SPAN>It is clear to me that the new Master schedule is equal or harder than the new P schedule.</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> --</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Vicente "Vince" Bortone</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> -------------- Original message --------------</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> From: "JShulman" </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> So if FAI pilots, that are flying FAI now, want to fly FAI (P and F), and Masters pilots, that are flying Masters now, want to fly Masters, what are we really "discussing"? Are we looking for a middle class to call Masters + for the guys that want to fly P and not F or Masters? Sounds like the addition of an Expert class in AMA to give the fliers in Masters, that want a P type of sequence, a place to go?</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>><SPAN> </SPAN>Regards,</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Jason</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> www.jasonshulman.com</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> www.shulmanaviation.com</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> www.composite-arf.com</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> -------------- Original message --------------</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> From: "John Fuqua" </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> I have been following this discussion with some relutance to jump in.<SPAN> </SPAN>As a current Masters pilot and old time F3A flyer I to once pushed to have the Master schedule be the P schedule.<SPAN> </SPAN>But you guys need to look at what FAI has done to the P schedule.<SPAN> </SPAN>Here is link to the F3A rules.<SPAN> </SPAN>http://www.fai.org/aeromodelling/documents/sc4</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> FAI has reduced the total maneuvers to 19 including a non scored takeoff and landing.<SPAN> </SPAN>AMA Master is 23 including a scored takeoff and landing.</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Going to FAI would certainly speed things up (which is what FAI intended for large contests like WC to speed up the prelims and get to the real contest).</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Not sure this is what AMA/NSRCA membership wants for a destination class.</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> John</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> ________________________________</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Del Rykert</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 7:14 AM</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> To: NSRCA Mailing List</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] changed topic to killing Masters?</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Hi Dave..</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> I never saw anyone suggesting to do away with the Masters class.. I have thought of another restriction/factor. Some of the FAI maneuvers require a specific designed plane to do them well. If you don't have such an aircraft in your stable you can be looking at a prohibitive change to switch to those type of planes or live with the self imposed handicap. Granted, some of the best can make a good showing in FAI type maneuvers but when needing the 1 point advantage in a high K-Factor maneuver it does drive the contestants to seek the best sled that works for them.</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> A good friend pointed out something I had lost sight of once.<SPAN> </SPAN>He acquired a newer designed airplane to his stable that performed the maneuvers he was flying so much easier. The design choice alone was raising his scores by almost 1 point per maneuver. With only a little bit of practice with new plane. He never appreciated the handicap he self imposed until having better equipment. Heck.. I still have coreless servos and not a digital do I own..<SPAN> </SPAN>How far behind am I? LOL.</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>><SPAN> </SPAN>Del</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> ----- Original Message -----</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> From: Dave Burton</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> To: 'NSRCA Mailing List'</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2008 7:33 PM</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] F at locals?</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Del, I’ve never advocated doing away with the Master’s class. I only suggested adopting the most current FAI P maneuver schedule and fly Master’s as a separate class as we do today. Masters pilots would not be required to advance to the FAI class unless they chose to do so. Seems to me like it solves several problems. It allows a CD to have more flexibility in arranging flight lines, a larger pool of knowledgeable judges, eliminates the need for NSRCA (or others) to come up with a new schedule periodically for the Masters Class. I don’t think there is any difference in the difficulty level of the P schedule and the Masters schedule today and would not require any greater skill level than Masters does today IMO.</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>> Dave Burton</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText> </P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>_________________________________________________________________</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail®-get your "fix".</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>_______________________________________________</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>NSRCA-discussion mailing list</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</P>
<P class=EC_MsoPlainText>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</P></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE><br /><hr />Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail®-get your "fix". <a href='http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx' target='_new'>Check it out.</a></body>
</html>