<DIV>Hey now.... </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You have the option you know.. You could all live in California.. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><IMG src="http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/tsmileys2/03.gif"></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Chris<BR><BR><B><I>John Konneker <jlkonn@hotmail.com></I></B> wrote:</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid"> <STYLE> .hmmessage P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body.hmmessage { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma } </STYLE> I have been impressed by the spirit of fair play and sportsmanship in the NSRCA since returning to pattern.<BR>I feel though that there has been an oversight in the rules that I think now could be corrected.<BR>I just got in from flying my Focus II for the first time since last October.<BR>It (I) was terrible! The long winter layoffs here in the northern climes imposes a real hardship on pattern pilots living here.<BR>To
be fair I would like to propose an adjustment to the maneuver k-factors based on the annual mean temperature and <BR>extreme lows (I want to leave out highs) of where one lives. <BR>For example my lowest k-factor would be 10 for landing and takeoff and then go up from there according to degree of difficulty of<BR>maneuver. In some cases I can see 20+ easily.<BR>Folks like Derek, Ron Davies, Chris Fitzsimmons living in California would have highest k-factors of 1...who knows...maybe even fractional or minus. These k-factors would be assigned by pilot and voted on only by members that have at least 24" of snow each year.<BR>What do you all think?<BR>I want to be fair.<BR>JLK<BR>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE><BR><p> 
<hr size=1>Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. <a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51733/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ "> Try it now.</a>