<html>
<head>
<style>
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Verdana
}
</style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
And there was controversy<g><BR> <BR>> From: ghwatson@comcast.net<BR>> To: nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 13:04:53 -0500<BR>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format<BR>> <BR>> In the past AMA was successful in obtaining volunteers from the surrounding<BR>> community, elderly, girl/boy scouts, etc. Couldn't these types of<BR>> volunteers perform admin functions of the weights and measure process? This<BR>> would also be a great time to get an equipment list survey filled out maybe<BR>> even a contestant photos...<BR>> <BR>> ~Glen W<BR>> 2009 no show who failed to contact Dave G -- please accept my apology<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> -----Original Message-----<BR>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Ron Van Putte<BR>> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 12:20 PM<BR>> To: General pattern discussion<BR>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format<BR>> <BR>> Two minutes per airplane may result in a job five hours long. The <BR>> other half of the equation is that assigning several pilots to do the <BR>> job means that they wouldn't have to judge, depleting the judging <BR>> pool. We had several individuals who did a LOT of judging this <BR>> year. Dave Guerin was pulling his hair out, until the volunteers <BR>> came up to offer to do extra judging sessions.<BR>> <BR>> Ron VP<BR>> <BR>> On Jul 30, 2009, at 12:01 PM, Archie Stafford wrote:<BR>> <BR>> > I think that part is easy. Dont give them a choice. It becomes part <BR>> > of what is required. If everyone starts early it wouldnt be that <BR>> > bad. Only takes a max of 2-3 minutes a plane.<BR>> ><BR>> > Arch<BR>> ><BR>> > Sent from my iPhone<BR>> ><BR>> > On Jul 30, 2009, at 11:57 AM, Ron Van Putte <vanputte@cox.net> wrote:<BR>> ><BR>> >> If all airplanes that compete will be weighed/measured on the day <BR>> >> of checkin, there had better be a non-flying group to do the job. <BR>> >> Competitors are not likely to be willing to spend the whole day <BR>> >> weighing/measuring up to 150 airplanes (many pilots have backup <BR>> >> airplanes) when they could be out practicing.<BR>> >><BR>> >> Ron VP<BR>> >> .<BR>> >> On Jul 30, 2009, at 8:32 AM, Derek Koopowitz wrote:<BR>> >><BR>> >>> Mike,<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> Thanks for responding. The board discussed a lot of these ideas <BR>> >>> the week after the Nats and we've been working on a list of stuff <BR>> >>> that we're going to ask Dave to implement next year. Pretty much <BR>> >>> what you've outlined below is in that list with some variations.<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> We're also going to fully enforce weight/size on all planes that <BR>> >>> compete - everyone will be weighed and measured on the day of <BR>> >>> check-in - each plane will be "stickered" as they qualify and if <BR>> >>> anyone fails to make weight or size then they'll have the whole <BR>> >>> day on check-in day to make modifications but will need to be <BR>> >>> weighed and measured again before the check-in period ends (and <BR>> >>> pass) before they'll be allowed to fly. Random weight checks <BR>> >>> will also be made throughout the event (random process to be <BR>> >>> determined later).<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> -Derek<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org [mailto:nsrca- <BR>> >>> discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of michael s harrison<BR>> >>> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 5:30 AM<BR>> >>> To: 'General pattern discussion'<BR>> >>> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] FW: nats format<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> From: michael s harrison [mailto:drmikedds@sbcglobal.net]<BR>> >>> Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 3:45 PM<BR>> >>> To: 'Don Ramsey'<BR>> >>> Subject: nats format<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> After considerable thought and reflection, I would like to share <BR>> >>> my views of the nats and the classes flown. I believe we have <BR>> >>> been very fortunate to have an excellent group of volunteers that <BR>> >>> work and sacrifice to make the nats happen. That group is led by <BR>> >>> the event director Dave Guerin, who has worked tirelessly and <BR>> >>> unselfishly for years at this job. I believe he has responded to <BR>> >>> our desires to make this the best national event possible. With <BR>> >>> that in mind, there are some changes I believe we can make that <BR>> >>> would be a win-win for everyone and reduce the workload as well.<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> They are:<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> 1. Have a finals for advanced<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> a. 8 finalists<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> b. 3 rounds<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> c. Judged by advanced or intermediate judges(qualified <BR>> >>> volunteers)<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> d. The site is open so it is not a space issue<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> e. 24 flights would take app 3 hours<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> f. Do on 4th day<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> g. Count the prelims as a 1000 normalized score<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> h. Count 3 of 4 scores for the winner<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> 2. Modify masters accordingly<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> a. 3 round finals<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> b. Count prelims as a 1000 normalized score<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> c. Count 3 of 4 for the winner<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> d. 10 finalists<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> e. 30 flights about 5.5 hours<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> 3. Fai<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> a. 3 rounds final<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> b. F-11 flown 1 time<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> c. Each unknown(1&2) flown once<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> d. Count the semi-final F-11 scores only as a single 1000 <BR>> >>> normalized score<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> e. Count 3 of 4 for the winner<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> f. 10 finalists<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> g. 30 flights about 5.5 hours<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> Rationale behind changes:<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> Advanced<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> This would make for a very exciting and fun event for the <BR>> >>> advanced class. It would make the 4th day a very real part of <BR>> >>> the nats for them. This format is totally self contained with no <BR>> >>> additional personnel required. It could be started and finished <BR>> >>> before the masters and fai is done.<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> Masters<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> Masters is in a real sense an endurance contest. How many times <BR>> >>> does someone have to fly the same sequence to prove he is the <BR>> >>> best in that class. The present system is 10 times! The only <BR>> >>> argument is the equal exposure issue-which may have merit. The <BR>> >>> system I propose addresses that issue and takes less time. I <BR>> >>> raised the number of finalists to 10 to close the argument that <BR>> >>> someone is cutout of the finals because of unequal exposure. <BR>> >>> Counting the prelim as one of the 4 scores is, in my opinion a <BR>> >>> legitimate score to keep-having been earned over a period of 3 <BR>> >>> days under a number of variables. Assuming incorrect scoring <BR>> >>> (bias, unequal exposure, etc.), the competitor has 3 flights to <BR>> >>> erase that concern. Any 3 flights count so the prelims score can <BR>> >>> be dropped.<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> FAI<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> The argument for doing 2 Finals pattern is that at the world <BR>> >>> event in the semifinals, there is not equal exposure of the <BR>> >>> pilots and the pool is so large that conditions can change <BR>> >>> substantially over the course of doing the semifinals. This <BR>> >>> rationale wouldn't apply at the nats. The semifinals at the nats <BR>> >>> is only 2 flights with 20 pilots, using the prelim score as a <BR>> >>> 1000 normalized score. Therefore, the 2 F patterns can be <BR>> >>> combined to be a score carried over into the finals event. The <BR>> >>> finals then becomes a single F pattern and 2 unknowns. Count 3 <BR>> >>> of 4 scores. I would recommend doing the F schedule first, then <BR>> >>> the 2 unknowns. I believe all the other pilots would love to see <BR>> >>> FAI unknown finals flown by some of the best pilots in the world. <BR>> >>> It would be a showcase event.<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> To conclude:<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> I believe this is a win-win for everyone. We would add finals to <BR>> >>> advanced; both the Masters and FAI finals would be shortened; the <BR>> >>> best pilots would be showcased; more pilots would be in the <BR>> >>> finals; fewer personnel to do the finals.<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> There is no perfect system. I am sure there will be objections <BR>> >>> of some kind, but I believe this system has real merit and should <BR>> >>> be implemented.<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> Respectfully<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> Mike Harrison<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<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<BR>> <BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<BR>> NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion<BR><br /><hr />Windows Live™ SkyDrive™: Store, access, and share your photos. <a href='http://windowslive.com/Online/SkyDrive?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_CS_SD_photos_072009' target='_new'>See how.</a></body>
</html>