<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
As I recall, the ONLY reason AMA is now flying turnaround is because
F3A went to a turnaround format. The "powersthatwere" were concerned
that our team would not have the relevant experience to compete on the
world stage. This started a process of conversion to turnaround by
including the FAI pattern and then expert turnaround in AMA pattern
contests.<br>
The pendulum has now swung the other way where the AMA pattern
community, while overly committed to turnaround, rejects the patterns,
rules and concepts of the FAI.<br>
<br>
While I no longer see a need to use the current(or past schedule as we
have already done) F3A pattern as the Masters pattern, I believe it is
important to address whatever is new and challenging in the upcoming
F3A patterns and consider introducing similar elements into the Masters
pattern.<br>
<br>
At the other end of the spectrum, I believe that the Sportsman class
should have the turnaround elements removed completely. Perhaps some of
the center maneuvers could be upgraded in difficulty at the same time.
The sportsman flyer needs more focus on learning the maneuvers and
where to place them. Making them fly the box simply insures that they
aree not in position to do a proper center maneuver. This is not
intended as a first step in getting rid of turnaround but rather
creating a progression in the learning process.<br>
<br>
John Gayer<br>
<br>
Bill Glaze wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:6C03615494154496A7636EB6ED66CA8C@glazecstp32xp"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<style>.hmmessage P {
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
BODY.hmmessage {
FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt
}
</style>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18828">
<div><font face="Arial">Ed:</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial">Why are we tied to FAI? Ed, certainly you
must realize that we are tied to FAI so that every 2 years we can send
a handful of model flyers to some foreign land to compete in a contest,
the results of which will be of interest to only a handful of people
here, and, certainly, won't boost interest in pattern for the general
model flying community. That's why!</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial">So there!</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial">Bill</font></div>
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-left: 5px; padding-right: 0px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;">
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;">-----
Original Message ----- </div>
<div
style="background: rgb(228, 228, 228) none repeat scroll 0%; font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -moz-background-clip: -moz-initial; -moz-background-origin: -moz-initial; -moz-background-inline-policy: -moz-initial;"><b>From:</b>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" title="ed_alt@hotmail.com"
href="mailto:ed_alt@hotmail.com">Ed Alt</a> </div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"><b>To:</b>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" title="nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA List</a> </div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"><b>Sent:</b>
Monday, October 19, 2009 9:33 PM</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"><b>Subject:</b>
Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question</div>
<div><br>
</div>
Re. the notion of robotically accepting whatever FAI P sequence comes
our way as our Masters sequence, let's keep it simple. What problem,
exactly, are we trying to solve? And what exactly is it about giving
up all autonomy with respect to creating our AMA Masters sequences in
this country that leads us to believe that this represents a solution?<br>
<br>
I think that you need to look no further than the P-11 and F-11 to
fully understand why this should not be done. On the one hand, you
have a prelim sequence that was done either with complete lack of
understanding of what the box boundaries are, or perhaps worse yet,
contemplates that it is best to fly at 220m in order to stay within
them while maintaining consistency with roll rates and maneuver size
throughout the sequence. And then you have snaposaurus F-11. I quit
IMAC in favor of Pattern after 2003 for some good reasons, and these
two 2001 FAI sequences harken back to that time for me. Let's not
start introducing the mindless application of snap rolls and lack of
thought for what the aerobatic box is there for, just to make it easier
to flit between Masters and FAI during the season. <br>
<br>
Joe Lachowski and Dave Lockhart put a great deal of of thought and
energy into creating sequence design criteria, which is a good tool to
help design better sequences. I think that we should continue to
refine this approach and use it to our advantage to make the best
sequences that we are capable of, rather than just adopt something that
we have essentially no control of.<br>
Ed<br>
<br>
<hr id="stopSpelling"> From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:jlachow@hotmail.com">jlachow@hotmail.com</a><br>
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 15:24:03 -0400<br>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question<br>
<br>
<style>
.ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P
{padding:0px;}
.ExternalClass body.ecxhmmessage
{font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana;}
</style> If we go this route, I for one will definitely quit.<br>
<br>
We already have new sequences designed for 2011 for all the classes.
And we have been adopting a maneuver here and there from the FAI
sequences. They will be presented in the K-factor sometime in the
future. There are even two different sequences put together for
Masters. One is the traditional length and the other is the same length
as FAI.<br>
<br>
The new FAI sequence for next year is a real good example not to flat
out adopt a P sequence as it is.<br>
<br>
<hr id="ecxstopSpelling"> From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:burtona@atmc.net">burtona@atmc.net</a><br>
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 11:56:40 -0400<br>
CC: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tom_babs@bellsouth.net">tom_babs@bellsouth.net</a><br>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question<br>
<br>
<style>
.ExternalClass p.ecxMsoNormal, .ExternalClass li.ecxMsoNormal, .ExternalClass div.ecxMsoNormal
{margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:'Times New Roman','serif';}
.ExternalClass a:link, .ExternalClass span.ecxMsoHyperlink
{color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}
.ExternalClass a:visited, .ExternalClass span.ecxMsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;text-decoration:underline;}
.ExternalClass p
{margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:'Times New Roman','serif';}
.ExternalClass span.ecxEmailStyle19
{font-family:'Calibri','sans-serif';color:#1F497D;}
.ExternalClass .ecxMsoChpDefault
{font-size:10.0pt;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;}
.ExternalClass div.ecxSection1
{page:Section1;}
</style>
<div class="ecxecxSection1">
<p class="ecxecxMsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); font-size: 11pt;">It
seems to me that adopting the FAI “P” schedule for the Masters class
with “changes” is not the way to go. A better alternative IMO is to
fly FAI P schedule under FAI rules as a separate class. Those of us
with some age remember when this was done years ago as “D” expert and
“D” Novice classes. As I remember AMA class “D” was the FAI event back
then. This would have the advantages of two classes flying under the
same rules and the benefits of more flyers/judges familiar with the
same rules and maneuvers. It would also eliminate the work involved in
coming up with a new Masters sequence every three or so years as a new
schedule would be automatically be invoked FAI changed. I’d like to see
a proposal for this change submitted to the Contest Board.</span></p>
<p class="ecxecxMsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); font-size: 11pt;">Dave
Burton </span></p>
<p class="ecxecxMsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); font-size: 11pt;"></span> </p>
<div>
<div
style="border-style: solid none none; border-color: rgb(181, 196, 223) -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color; border-width: 1pt medium medium; padding: 3pt 0in 0in;">
<p class="ecxecxMsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-family: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">From:</span></b><span
style="font-family: 'Tahoma','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Vicente
"Vince" Bortone<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, October 19, 2009 11:29 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> General pattern discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="ecxecxMsoNormal"> </p>
<div>
<div><span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;">Hi
Lance,</span><br>
<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;"> </span><br>
<p style="margin-bottom: 12pt;"><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;">Just to
clarify. I am not the only one making this proposal. Don Ramsey and
Charlie Rock helped me to put it together. I am going to try to
respond to your questions below. Please read below in <strong><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">bold. </span></strong>Thanks
for bringing this discussion to the list. <br>
<br>
Vicente "Vince" Bortone<br>
<br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:patterndude@tx.rr.com"><patterndude@tx.rr.com></a><br>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"><nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org></a><br>
Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 11:51:30 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central<br>
Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question</span></p>
<div>
<p class="ecxecxMsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;">I
know official discussion hasn't started but this list is one of the
good vetting forums. Vince proposed Masters flying FAI P, which is
clear <strong><span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">(this
is for sure the most important statement)</span></strong>, but if the
logic behind the proposal as written causes confusion it may make a
less convincing case. <strong><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">Good point. We assumed
that was easy for someone that is very familiar to pattern to digest
the intent of the proposal. Your conclusions are correct. We are
assuming that the current procedures we use to design the Master
schedule are not changed. We adopt the current FAI P schedule with the
appropriate changes to suit the Master class. This is the reason why
we didn't try to discuss other details. </span></strong>For example,
it says "there is an evident pile up f pilots in the Masters class" but
never clearly states how flying the same sequence would change that.
He may be implying that people will more freely move between classes to
balance the lines because they are flying a similar sequence but the
sequences may not be identical and the judging rules are not
identical. <strong><span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">Correct.
You actually saw what happened in Tulsa this year. There were 10
pilots in Masters and you decided to divide the group in two and five
flew Masters and five flew FAI. This also happened already in other
local contest around KC. It happens at Fort Scott contest also.
Pilots will be more willing to do this we fly the same schedule. </span></strong>At
another point it says "This will make judging of both classes very
accurate" but doesn't address the obvious differences in judging
criteria between AMA and FAI, which is the current burden that Masters
and FAI pilots currently bear when the fly one class and judge the
other.<strong><span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';"> I am
sure that we will agree that it will be a lot easier to deal with these
differences if we fly the same schedules. The proposal intent is not
to address the differences in judging criteria between AMA and FAI.
I believe that it will become natural as we start to fly the same
schedule and the differences will go away with time. </span></strong>Finally,
there is no exact wording proposed on the form where it is expected,
but later in the logic it refers to the idea of replacing some FAI
maneuvers where appropriate. <strong><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">We are assuming that the
current procedure to design the schedules is still in place. The
committee will check the current FAI P schedule and proposed a final
one with the changes to make it suitable for Masters. For example, P11
the only portion I will change is the integrated half loop on the
figure M. I will suggest something like 2 of 4 or 1/2 roll on bottom
to replace the integrated 1/2 roll. I believe that all other maneuvers
are suitable for Masters. </span></strong>Without exact wording, its
not clear how this is done, or if the maneuver descriptions will be
re-written in the AMA rules, or referenced to the FAI descriptions like
the sequence. <strong><span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">The
committee will decide whatever is appropriate. If they feel that the
FAI descriptions are appropiate we could use it as is.</span></strong>
Oh, and how does AMA deal with the fact that FAI changes schedules in
odd years?<strong><span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';"> We
will need to follow FAI schedule. I think that this is very possible
and should not be a problem. </span></strong></span><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ecxecxMsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;"></span> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ecxecxMsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;">My
intent is simply to point out aspects that detract from it's
thoroughness. I do not yet have a stance on the issue.<strong><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';"> We put this together just
taking at the 2008 Nats. I remember that I have to judge FAI and I
never had the chance to judge FAI before the Nats. I was trying to
study the FAI schedule at the same time that I was trying to fly my own
contest. This is clearly an additional pressure on the contestant. If
this proposal pass it will make our life easier at the local contest
and when we judging at the Nats or any other contest. Also, clearly
will make the judging level very high because Masters and FAI pilots
will be very familiar with the schedules we fly and the details
requires to judge each of the maneuvers. Finally, the balance in local
contest will be easier to fix since we will more willing to fly FAI
when required. </span></strong></span><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;"></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ecxecxMsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;"></span> </p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="ecxecxMsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black; font-size: 10pt;">--Lance</span><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;"></span></p>
</div>
<p class="ecxecxMsoNormal"><span
style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; color: black;"><br>
_______________________________________________ NSRCA-discussion
mailing list <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<hr> Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/">Get it now.</a>
<br>
<hr> Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/" target="_new">Get
it now.</a>
<p> </p>
<hr> _______________________________________________<br>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
<hr size="4" width="90%">
_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>