<!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 6.00.6000.16788" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=role_body style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 topMargin=7 rightMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>
<DIV>The Venus II and the Spot-On 120 and the Leo 110 and........ all good
airplanes in the Sportsman/Int/Advanced clases</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Don</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 1/29/2009 6:22:12 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
ed_alt@hotmail.com writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>Agreed.
There's the Aquila and...<BR><BR>Ed<BR>----- Original Message ----- <BR>From:
<seefo@san.rr.com><BR>To: <jpavlick@idseng.com>; "General pattern
discussion" <BR><nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org>;
<homeremodeling2003@yahoo.com><BR>Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 1:46
PM<BR>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] K-Factor morphed into Grow
Pattern<BR><BR><BR>><BR>> Pattern really needs a new competitive ARF to
enter market at a reasonable <BR>> price point. Something like $500. In
fact.. it needs several of them so <BR>> people can have choices in what to
fly.<BR>><BR>> With IMAC, you can get an airplane of the same size (2m),
RTF including <BR>> engine and radio for what the majority of the ARFs cost
for a pattern <BR>> airplane airframe only.<BR>><BR>> Getting the
costs under control should be #1 priority.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
---- krishlan fitzsimmons <homeremodeling2003@yahoo.com>
wrote:<BR>>> Well said John..<BR>>><BR>>> On another note,
didn't this start out as a "please take an online vote" <BR>>>
email.<BR>>><BR>>> On even another note, Imac is a different bird.
More people may be <BR>>> interested in flying IMAC IMO because there is
the freestyle. Foamies <BR>>> have made a great impact so that anyone
can huck in their front yards. <BR>>> Kids are really into the foamies
and the freestyles because they are fun, <BR>>> and impressive. We lack
this fun type of flying in their minds. (Not to <BR>>> me, 3d is
somewhat boring to me, except for foamies)<BR>>> As someone stated
earlier, pattern doesn't have the market flooded with <BR>>> $400-500
arfs that almost every person at my field and other fields <BR>>>
locally have. If we did, I know of many people at my field that would buy
<BR>>> one. They have told me so. Every time I bring a new plane to the
field, <BR>>> people ask me how much, and where can they get one. When I
tell em how <BR>>> much, their face drops...Wanna grow pattern, do
something like Hester. <BR>>> He's on the right track IMO. Look at all
the ads in the larger magazines, <BR>>> how many pattern planes do you
see in those ads?<BR>>><BR>>> Chris<BR>>><BR>>> --- On
Thu, 1/29/09, John Pavlick <jpavlick@idseng.com> wrote:<BR>>>
From: John Pavlick <jpavlick@idseng.com><BR>>> Subject:
[NSRCA-discussion] K-Factor morphed into Grow Pattern<BR>>> To: "General
pattern discussion" <nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>>> Date:
Thursday, January 29, 2009, 7:01 AM<BR>>><BR>>> Jim,<BR>>>
Interesting observations. In my neck of the woods (Connecticut) there is
<BR>>> almost NO IMAC or Pattern competition so I don't see any of this.
Part of <BR>>> the reason for that is that it's hard to find large, open
areas where <BR>>> you're allowed to fly model airplanes. Let alone have
an organized <BR>>> contest. My state pretty much sucks in that regard.
There sems to be <BR>>> plenty of room for shopping centers and
"retirement communities" however.<BR>>><BR>>> Even with these
restrictions, I've managed to enlighten a few people and <BR>>> make
them aware of Precision Aerobatics. By this I mean IMAC AND Pattern.
<BR>>> Some people just don't want to fly Pattern, whereas others simply
don't <BR>>> want to fly IMAC. That's fine as far as I'm concerned but
the point is <BR>>> they need to know about them. That's where I think
Patttern and the NSRCA <BR>>> suffers the most. People simply don't know
that we exist. We need to <BR>>> increase our visibility if we want to
attract new members. We DON'T need <BR>>> to change anything with how we
fly, how we judge, etc. At least not to <BR>>> attract new people. All
we need to do is let them know we're here and <BR>>> that they can fly
with us if they want to. No pressure to join. Just take <BR>>> your
basic sport model to a contest and fly a few rounds in Sportsman. <BR>>>
Don't buy a new radio or airplane. Don't worry about the weight or size.
<BR>>> Just show up. If we want to grow Patttern, that's one of the
things that <BR>>> we<BR>>> need to do. If printed copies of
the K-Factor at local hobby shops will <BR>>> help with that cause (it
just might), then send me a box so I can drop <BR>>> them off.
:)<BR>>><BR>>> John Pavlick<BR>>><BR>>> BTW - I
actually did learn about the NSRCA through the K-Factor after a <BR>>>
club member handed me a copy that he picked up somewhere. Once I knew
<BR>>> that Patttern was still alive in my area (I had taken a LONG
hiatus) I <BR>>> built a new airplane, started going to contests and
joined the NSRCA.<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> --- On Thu, 1/29/09,
Woodward, Jim (US SSA) <jim.woodward@baesystems.com> <BR>>>
wrote:<BR>>><BR>>> From: Woodward, Jim (US SSA)
<jim.woodward@baesystems.com><BR>>> Subject: Re:
[NSRCA-discussion] Electronic versus Paper K-Factor Poll<BR>>> To:
"General pattern discussion"
<nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org><BR>>> Date: Thursday, January
29, 2009, 2:16
PM<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>><BR>>><BR>>><BR>>><BR>>><BR>>><BR>>>
JN – there is more to the comparison of IMAC/Pattern than the traceable
<BR>>> history to the TOC or available ARF scenario. I think Jay hit on
it <BR>>> something important other day stating something to the effect
that, “… if <BR>>> you are not in FAI or Masters you are left on your
own.” (forgive me if <BR>>> it wasn’t Jay or I misquoted). Pattern and
IMAC are totally different in <BR>>> many ways and being that I’m
involved in the District/Leadership of each, <BR>>> I’ll list a few in
no particular order:<BR>>> 1. Basic, Sportsman, Intermediate in IMAC: in
a 50 person contest, there <BR>>> are 5 Unlimited, 5 Advanced, and 40
persons spread almost equally between <BR>>> the lower
classes<BR>>> 2. Sportsman, Intermediate, Advanced in Pattern: In a 20
person contest, <BR>>> maybe 3-4 FAI, 7-10 Masters, 8-10 spread between
lower classes.<BR>>> 3. R/C Clubs view holding an IMAC Contest as a
money-making event. Not so <BR>>> sure for the pattern
event.<BR>>> 4. Not such a rush to move up in classes in IMAC: IMAC
changes sequences <BR>>> yearly and has unknowns flown each contest, all
classes except for Basic. <BR>>> IMAC classes get harder in a hurry. For
instance the intermediate class <BR>>> will have a 90 degree rolling
turn in it and numerous snaps rolls, also a <BR>>> spin. There is no
mercy on unknowns… sometimes they are more difficult <BR>>> than the
normal sequence, sometimes easier, sometimes just different. <BR>>>
There is not an expectation that all pilots will reach the “destination”
<BR>>> class. There is no destination class in IMAC.<BR>>> 5.
Piloting differences? I find the average IMAC pilot is a fairly high
<BR>>> skilled R/C pilot that is learning the precision side of things.
You <BR>>> might watch a OK sequence, but later in the evening see them
throwing it <BR>>> down on the deck in aggressive Freestyle most of us
would dare try. The <BR>>> Pattern guys grow-up precision and can fly a
higher scoring stall turn <BR>>> and have better sequence-fundamentals
(and positioning), but lack in some <BR>>> of the other R/C
roundness.<BR>>> 6. The IMAC ranks have a lot of guys “who used to fly
pattern” in them. I’ve <BR>>> heard it all as to why they stopped flying
pattern and here it is <BR>>> (believe me or not , up to
you):<BR>>> a. Pattern is too political at the top<BR>>> b.
Feeling of Topped out – it didn’t matter how much I practiced, I <BR>>>
couldn’t improve my scores or beat that one guy<BR>>> c. Best flights
aren’t winning rounds<BR>>> d. Didn’t fit in<BR>>> e. These are
opinions range from normal pilots, to “top guys” that only <BR>>> fly
IMAC now<BR>>> 7. Flying/Positioning – I love the pattern way of flying
in a box, with a <BR>>> centerpole – I FREAKIN-HATE the IMAC way of
writing sequences with “sort <BR>>> of left, sort of right” maneuvers. I
understand why it is done and such, <BR>>> but I’d take the box anyday.
Flying the box in pattern is its <BR>>> “own-significant-difficulty”
which makes the less complex maneuvers <BR>>> harder to do. The IMAC way
lets them “load-up” each maneuver into a <BR>>> super-complex deal –
very hard to score well I may add too. However, its <BR>>> all part of
the pie.<BR>>> 8. Winning? In pattern, a win means you flew the
sequences the best. This <BR>>> is cool because often you can “beat” a
better pilot, by flying the <BR>>> maneuver you need to know how to do
better than the other guys. In IMAC, <BR>>> usually the “best” pilots
wins, because it is a combination of flying the <BR>>> known and
unknown.<BR>>> 9. Planes? Pattern planes fly the best, but are harder to
fly well. <BR>>> Pattern planes are less affected by small changes in
atmospheric <BR>>> conditions, or good/bad engine days – IE -- you
almost always have enough <BR>>> power in a pattern plane regardless of
sequence flown. IMAC - totally <BR>>> different. Humidity
(specifically), can DRASTICALLY affect the speed of <BR>>> your plane.
Power requirements change hugely with sequence/class changes. <BR>>> For
instance, unlimited need a truly unlimited power setup. Not so easy
<BR>>> to move up without changing equipment. A 40% plane is easier to
fly <BR>>> “wings-level”, but the judging penalties<BR>>>
are 0.5 point per 5 degrees, instead of 1 point per 15 degrees.<BR>>>
10. Organizational view on Judging – I don’t know what the NSRCA stance
<BR>>> is on judging right now. In IMAC, there is HUGE $$$ spent on
judging <BR>>> programs, seminars, and creating a national standard for
judging. How do <BR>>> they do this? They fly in people from all around
the country for a <BR>>> national-type of judge certification. These
guys then go forth and carry <BR>>> the message.<BR>>> a. Why do
they do this? Because they know that regional differences and <BR>>>
biases, or cheating of any kind, can kill-off an organization. They put a
<BR>>> huge leadership and organizational priority on getting judging
right. – <BR>>> if you know me – you know I like
that.<BR>>><BR>>> So, there are many, many differences between the
two. Personally, I <BR>>> gravitate towards flying the pattern plane.
However, the “competitive” <BR>>> factors in IMAC are solid too and
given the activity around my neck of <BR>>> the woods, you can’t pass it
up. So what’s the point, I guess the point <BR>>> still is that the
total formula is working for IMAC. The NSRCA formula is <BR>>> not. What
can we take from the differences to tune-up our own game? And <BR>>>
regarding the K-factor – in today’s economy it is hard to justify <BR>>>
business decisions that don’t break even.<BR>>>
Jim<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> From:
nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org <BR>>>
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of J N
Hiller<BR>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 8:48 PM<BR>>> To:
General pattern discussion<BR>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Electronic versus Paper K-Factor Poll<BR>>><BR>>> IMAC v/s Pattern
is almost an apples to oranges comparison. IMAC <BR>>> popularity can be
traced to the TOC and the general appeal of large <BR>>> colorful high
performance readily available aircraft but mostly <BR>>> visibility.
Pattern flying is absent from many local clubs but large <BR>>>
aerobatic airplanes are represented nearly everywhere. The big airplanes
<BR>>> attract the press and interests spectators. Pattern by comparison
is <BR>>> extremely repetitious and boring to those not directly
involved.<BR>>> I didn't want to get into this here but I question how
many non-pattern <BR>>> folks would read a free K-Factor. There is a
free sample available there <BR>>> now. Is anybody finding it? The
problem I find is "Pattern" visibility. I <BR>>> couldn't get Google to
find the NSRCA when querying aerobatics, RC <BR>>> aerobatics or
pattern, however IMAC showed up. It's as if some amount of <BR>>> prior
knowledge is needed before an outsider can gain access to pattern <BR>>>
activity.<BR>>> AMA doesn't do a very good of job explaining competition
events or <BR>>> activity and if you don't know follow the SIG you are
kind of out of <BR>>> luck. How dose an outsider become aware of and
interested in any <BR>>> competition event without knowing where to
look?<BR>>> As for the K-Factor, the publication is second to none. I
have been <BR>>> receiving them since it was several folded 11 x 14
sheets from a copy <BR>>> machine. The content has for the most part
remained about the same; <BR>>> mostly contest results and district
news. It's more of a competition <BR>>> newsletter with content of
interest to those involved and of questionable <BR>>> interest to
outsiders or the mildly interested. There is little seed for <BR>>>
growing interest in any rulebook event on the Internet. It only happens
<BR>>> at the local level with people having fun.<BR>>> To be
active competitors in either IMAC or pattern requires a fair amount
<BR>>> of disposable income and time commitment. We draw from the same
shrinking <BR>>> pool of people willing to commit to a weekend out of
town to participate <BR>>> in what appears to be a very regimented
activity flown near the limit of <BR>>> visibility for many. Bigger
really is better and we (Pattern) is somewhat <BR>>> restricted by
trying to remain compatible with FAI.<BR>>> I have probably gone on too
long but I don't believe our salvation lies <BR>>> in a free K-Factor,
not that it shouldn't be, it just won't draw many to <BR>>> our
sport.<BR>>> Sorry Derek, forgive me for splattering this even
more.<BR>>> Jim Hiller<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> -----Original
Message-----<BR>>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org
<BR>>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of
Troy Newman<BR>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 3:44 PM<BR>>>
To: General pattern discussion<BR>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Electronic versus Paper K-Factor Poll<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>>
Jim,<BR>>><BR>>> What is really amazing is locally here in AZ and
Sothern California IMAC <BR>>> contests attract 60-70
pilots.<BR>>><BR>>> IMAC membership is up near 1000 members. They
have an online only <BR>>> newsletter. Not even a
magazine.<BR>>><BR>>> Why would it be horrible to emulate an
organization that is successful <BR>>> like
that.<BR>>><BR>>> They can’t be doing anything right they are just
IMACers<BR>>> Just something to think about.<BR>>><BR>>>
Troy_______________________________________________<BR>>>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>>>
NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion_______________________________________________<BR>>>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>>>
NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>
_______________________________________________<BR>> NSRCA-discussion
mailing list<BR>> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>>
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
<BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></FONT><br/><font style="color:black;font:normal 10pt arial,san-serif;"> <hr style="margin-top:10px"/><b>Know Your Numbers</b>: Get <a href="http://www.walletpop.com/credit/credit-reports?ncid=emlcntuswall00000002">tips and tools</a> to help you improve your credit score.</font></DIV></BODY></HTML>