<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="State"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="PlaceName"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="PlaceType"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="City"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="country-region"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;}
pre
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
p.ecxmsonormal, li.ecxmsonormal, div.ecxmsonormal
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;}
p.ecxmsochpdefault, li.ecxmsochpdefault, div.ecxmsochpdefault
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;}
p.ecxmsonormal1, li.ecxmsonormal1, div.ecxmsonormal1
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;}
p.ecxmsochpdefault1, li.ecxmsochpdefault1, div.ecxmsochpdefault1
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;}
p.ecxecxmsonormal, li.ecxecxmsonormal, div.ecxecxmsonormal
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
color:black;}
span.ecxmsohyperlink1
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.ecxmsohyperlinkfollowed1
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.ecxemailstyle191
{font-family:Calibri;
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle27
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
span.EmailStyle29
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>John,<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Thanks for the response – seriously –
I know you put thought into your responses.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Your point on the rolling circles in F3A
is spot on – it is an excellent example of why AMA should never blindly
follow FAI. Circles are absolutely contrary to the reducing overflight
requirements and noise footprint. There are a number of people including
myself who have advocated against rolling circles – and apparently we are
in the minority or it has fallen on deaf ears at FAI.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Comparing current day turnaround 2M planes
to ballistic style 63” wingspan piped 2C 60s is not really a fair
comparison. When turnaround went into effect, the airspace used
definitely decreased. As the airplanes have gotten larger (another example
of unintended consequence of another short sighted FAI rule change), the
airspace requirements have gradually crept up to the current day.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>You are correct that noise could have been
addressed separately (to an extent) from the style of flying. However,
the noise footprint is the product of the volume of noise and the amount of
airspace used. I don’t find it coincidence that both were addressed
at the same time.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I think at the time that FAI showed us the
way to turnaround, it was embraced in the US/AMA to the degree it was because
it was clearly an aid to reducing noise footprint, which was a huge problem in
many areas of the country. If FAI were to introduce another “magnitude”
of change, I think you are correct, US/AMA would not follow unless the benefits
were revolutionary.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I understand your history of reduced
contests/contestants and the timing with turnaround in your area. I’ve
talked with Jeff Carrish many times (former D1 guy, in D5 for ~12 years now,
and hopefully getting back into pattern with encouragement from Dan). I
think the same story exists in many parts of the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">US</st1:place></st1:country-region>. In the <st1:place w:st="on">NE
US</st1:place>, I think the drop started before turnaround, and it started
because of the loss of flying fields that could handle the ballistic pattern
noise footprint and airspace needs. In the <st1:place w:st="on">NE US</st1:place>,
it was very apparent a change was needed, and turnaround looked to have obvious
benefits (and it did), and the net result may well have been short term losses
for long term sustainability.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>“For the entry level Sportsman class, I am
advocating the establishment of a skill progression relative to flying
pattern schedules. This is independent of the maneuver complexity.
Clearly there should be more maneuvers if only the center is judged. “<br>
***********Ok. If I understand your clarification, a full turnaround sequence
is more challenging than a non or partial turnaround sequence when both have
the same maneuvers, because simply flying in the box adds to the challenge. If
I got that right, we are in agreement. Whether or not the progression of
classes should start with flying in the box, or learning specific maneuvers,
that, to me, is a philosophical question/debate for which I think both sides
have merit. Almost a chicken and the egg kind of thing. I really
don’t think it is possible to completely separate the two, and based on
coaching beginner pattern pilots for 20+ years, I think the current Sportsman
class is pretty solid, albeit maybe a bit long.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> <br>
“For Masters, it has been argued that this is the destination AMA class.
If this is truly the case, then the maneuver difficulty should be increased to
support this class as an alternate goal to F3A . If it is a feeder class for
F3A, then it also should support some simple roll/loop combinations. My opinion
is that it is neither of these.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>***********I believe you are partially correct. The
current Masters class is a destination for some, and others are passing through
on their way to F3A. The current difficulty level of Masters is based on feedback
from Masters Pilots in prior NSRCA Surveys (and as I’ve noted previously,
integrated loop/roll combinations and roll/snap combinations were not desired
in this class). Pilots that think Masters is too difficult can stay in
Advanced (I sincerely doubt any Advanced pilot who is cleaning up in Advanced
won’t be able to handle Masters) and those that want more of a challenge
can take a look at F3A (which varies substantially depending on the year).
We can’t control F3A. We can control Masters. I personally
think Masters should be a little more difficult, so some of the pilots will
stay in Advanced longer and reduce the top heavy class structure (talking AMA
only) we currently have. As others have stated (and I agree), guys that
want to fly F3A will, with or without “official” feeder classes.
Even if Masters were a feeder class to F3A, I see nothing wrong with an absence
of integrated loop/roll maneuvers, just as I don’t see a problem with the
absence of spins in Intermediate. If new elements are not progressively introduced,
what do we end up with? Snaps and spins in Sportsman? Years ago we
had the problem of escalating difficulty within a class….and Novice was
inserted under Sportsman, and then Pre-Novice was inserted under Novice. Silliness.
That is a large driver in why the sequence design/criteria documents were
written (more on that later).<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> <br>
“Your last paragraph about armchair quarterbacking and comments based on
incomplete data is somewhat insulting. I'm operating in the dark with my
comments because the leadership of the NSRCA has kept me there. Where are the
"sequence guidelines" published? And why can't the general membership
see the current state of development of the new patterns now. If we don't see
them until next year, all we are going to get is an up or down vote.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>***********My intent was not to be insulting, but if
it came across that way I apologize. I freely admit to being frustrated
by the lack of support and interest in taking part in the Sequence Committee,
only to have (by comparison) voluminous commentary after the process has begun
(and is actually close to completion). Certainly anyone coming into the
game after it began is not guilty of armchair quarterbacking.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>The structure of the Sequence Committee and the
process to be completed was outlined at the onset, and there was buy-in from
the NSRCA Board, and no dissent from the Membership. The process did not
include oversight by the general membership, just as the NSRCA Board does not
include the general membership in every email and phone call. Development
of the sequences is a process, and putting it on hold, or going backwards to
include additional people is counter productive. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>The “sequence guidelines” – I don’t
think they are published anywhere, not that they are a secret. They are a
collection of word documents that are all related – basically an outline
for developing sequences as a related group, and then specific docs for each
class that include design criteria / class objectives, and a maneuver catalog
for each class. They are intended to be modified as needed based Survey
results, the inclusion of new maneuvers in a sequence, or changes in the rules
that would affect flying/judging criteria of specific maneuvers. I will
send a separate email to the Sequence Committee and Prez Derek to see about
posting them.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>Regards,<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'><br>
Dave<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:windowtext'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face=Tahoma><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma;color:windowtext;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font
size=2 color=black face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma;
color:windowtext'> nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org
[mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org] <b><span style='font-weight:
bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>John Gayer<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Tuesday, October 20, 2009
5:26 PM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> General pattern discussion<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Rules proposal 11-6 question</span></font><font color=black><span
style='color:windowtext'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>Dave,<br>
<br>
I do not believe the footprint is that much less than it used to be
pre-turnaround. We may have pulled in the ends somewhat but we have also pushed
out perpendicular to the flight line, particularly with F3A rolling circles. I
don't recall doing old-style turnarounds much further out than a 175 meter
turnaround that breaks the box a bit does. The sport flyers at any field are
pushing the limits of visibility and flying further out as well.<br>
The main issue was noise. That is an issue that could and should have been
addressed as a separate issue from a conversion to turnaround. <br>
My original point was that we would not have considered turnaround pattern in
this country if the FAI had not shown us the way and we were willing at that time
to follow. I also believe that if the FAI were to establish a new direction of
that magnitude today, that the pattern community/leadership would reject such a
change out of hand.<br>
It is arguable as to the cause for a drop in attendance but it does appear to
start about the same time as the conversion of pattern to turnaround. There are
a lot of ex-pattern flyers dating from that period. Our latest contest here in <st1:City
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Albuquerque</st1:place></st1:City> had eight
contestants. The spring contest had 15. If I want to attend another
contest, I have to travel at least 450 miles. That would gain me1-3 contests
next year. Any more and I'm up to 700-1000 miles travel one way. This part of
the country(pre-turnaround) was very active in pattern. <st1:State w:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on">Colorado</st1:place></st1:State> alone used to have at least 5
contests and now they are struggling to bring back just one of them. <st1:State
w:st="on">Utah</st1:State>, <st1:State w:st="on">Montana</st1:State> and <st1:State
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Nevada</st1:place></st1:State> used to have
contests- now nothing. <br>
<br>
For the entry level Sportsman class, I am advocating the establishment of a
skill progression relative to flying pattern schedules. This is
independent of the maneuver complexity. Clearly there should be more
maneuvers if only the center is judged. <br>
<br>
For Masters, it has been argued that this is the destination AMA class. If this
is truly the case, then the maneuver difficulty should be increased to support
this class as an alternate goal to F3A . If it is a feeder class for F3A, then
it also should support some simple roll/loop combinations. My opinion is that
it is neither of these.<br>
<br>
Your last paragraph about armchair quarterbacking and comments based on
incomplete data is somewhat insulting. I'm operating in the dark with my
comments because the leadership of the NSRCA has kept me there. Where are the
"sequence guidelines" published? And why can't the general membership
see the current state of development of the new patterns now. If we don't see
them until next year, all we are going to get is an up or down vote. <br>
<br>
John Gayer<br>
<br>
Dave wrote: <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><u1:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PlaceName"><u1:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PlaceType"><u1:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="City"><u1:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<u1:shapedefaults u2:ext="edit" spidmax="1026"/>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<u1:shapelayout u3:ext="edit">
<u1:idmap u3:ext="edit" data="1"/>
</u1:shapelayout>
</xml><![endif]--></u1:SmartTagType></u1:SmartTagType></u1:SmartTagType></u1:SmartTagType>The
ONLY REASON?<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Hmmm…..pattern would have all but
died in many parts of the country had it not been for reduced overflight
requirements of turnaround, the reduced noise, and the reduced noise
footprint. In the <st1:place u4:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Northeast US</st1:place></st1:place>,
pattern was dead in many areas because of noise and overflight problems, and 20
years later, some clubs are just now starting to understand that pattern is no
longer a field killer. I was part of the group in the late 80s that
penned the transition to turnaround, and I was a diehard AMA flyer at the
time. Yes, some dropped pattern because they did not want to change to turnaround
style, but many of those would not have been able to continue flying non
turnaround because of the noise and overflight issues.<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>To suggest that the AMA community is fully
rejecting FAI concepts is, I think, a gross overstatement. FAI has always
done some stupid things, and like any large bureaucracy, it will likely do so
in the future. On a regular basis, there is advocacy to do what FAI does,
and on a regular basis there is opposition to ABSOLUTE congruency with
FAI…..AMA can always CHOOSE to follow an FAI lead, but should never
establish legislation REQUIRING it to do so.<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I’m not clear whether you want to
increase or decrease the difficulty of Sportsman? Eliminating turnarounds
would make it easier. Adding back 3 roll and 3 loops would make it
harder? And if Sportsman were made less difficult, and Masters were made
more difficult, then the difficulty between classes would increase
…another always hot topic. My opinion, I would like to see the
Sportsman class simpler, and I’ve been involved with the Sequence
Committee for 20+ years, and 90% of the time I’ve been called an elitist
for trying to take away the “fun” and “challenging”
maneuvers from the Sportsman. I’d like to see pattern competitors
stay in a class until they have mastered the elements in that class, not simply
gotten to the point of being able to consistently fly the sequence with no
scores <5. I’d like to see competitors realize that they can
practice the next sequence BEFORE getting there, and there is some personal
responsibility in preparing for the next class. Everyone needs to
understand it is simply impossible to have difficulty gaps between classes that
everyone finds to be appropriate – it is continually adjusted by the
Sequence Committee based on feedback from the pilots that voice their opinion
during the design process.<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>For Masters, the biggest difference
between it and FAI, aside from 2 schedules, is the integrated loop/roll
(rolling loops, rolling circles) element. Masters pilots have repeatedly
in substantial majorities expressed the desire to NOT HAVE integrated loop/roll
elements in Masters. If you want integrated loop/roll elements, there is
a class for that – it is FAI. The other element in FAI that is not
in Masters is combination roll / snap maneuvers – again, because Masters
pilots have repeatedly expressed the desire to NOT HAVE this in Masters.<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I’m glad to see the prolific number
of posts on this (and similar topics) in the past month……I’m
sure it means many people will volunteer AND contribute to the next Sequence
Committee. There is a very good system in place (that is quite flexible
and accommodating to reflect progress and evolving ideas) for designing
sequences, but it does not work without participation, and as with many other
endeavors, it does not do very well accommodating armchair quarterbacking and
occasional comments from sidelines base on limited or incomplete data.
The length of time it takes to draft, propose, review, and implement
rules is always a hot topic, and it certainly doesn’t get any shorter
with late entries to the game or increasingly larger numbers of people
involved. I can assure you that the active core of the current Sequence
Committee is listening, and nothing is being done in a vacuum.<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Regards,<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Dave Lockhart<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><u1:p> </u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:windowtext'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face=Tahoma><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma;color:windowtext;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font
size=2 color=black face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma;
color:windowtext'> <a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>
[<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org">mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>]
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>John Gayer<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Tuesday, October 20, 2009
11:39 AM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> General pattern discussion<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Rules proposal 11-6 question</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<u1:p></u1:p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'><u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>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: <u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face=Arial><span style='font-size:
12.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Ed:</span></font><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face=Arial><span style='font-size:
12.0pt;font-family: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!</span></font><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face=Arial><span style='font-size:
12.0pt;font-family:Arial'>So there!</span></font><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face=Arial><span style='font-size:
12.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Bill</span></font><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt;
margin-left:4.2pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
border-color:-moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color black'>
<div style='font-size-adjust: none;font-stretch: normal'>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>----- Original Message ----- <u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div style='font-size-adjust: none;font-stretch: normal;-moz-background-clip: -moz-initial;
-moz-background-origin: -moz-initial;-moz-background-inline-policy: -moz-initial;
background-attachment:scroll'>
<p class=MsoNormal style='background:#E4E4E4'><b><font size=2 color=black
face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'> <a
href="mailto:ed_alt@hotmail.com" title="ed_alt@hotmail.com"
moz-do-not-send=true>Ed Alt</a> <u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div style='font-size-adjust: none;font-stretch: normal'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold'>To:</span></font></b><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'> <a
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org"
title="nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" moz-do-not-send=true>NSRCA List</a> <u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div style='font-size-adjust: none;font-stretch: normal'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></font></b><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'> Monday,
October 19, 2009 9:33 PM<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div style='font-size-adjust: none;font-stretch: normal'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></font></b><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'> Re:
[NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question<u1:p></u1:p></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'><u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>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>
<u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center id=stopSpelling>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>From: <a href="mailto:jlachow@hotmail.com"
moz-do-not-send=true>jlachow@hotmail.com</a><br>
To: <a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" moz-do-not-send=true>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>
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>
<u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center id=ecxstopSpelling>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><font size=3 color=black
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>From: <a
href="mailto:burtona@atmc.net" moz-do-not-send=true>burtona@atmc.net</a><br>
To: <a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" moz-do-not-send=true>nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 11:56:40 -0400<br>
CC: <a href="mailto:tom_babs@bellsouth.net" moz-do-not-send=true>tom_babs@bellsouth.net</a><br>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Rules proposal 11-6 question<u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=ecxecxmsonormal><font size=2 color="#1f497d" face=Calibri><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1F497D'>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></font><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=ecxecxmsonormal><font size=2 color="#1f497d" face=Calibri><span
style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri;color:#1F497D'>Dave Burton </span></font><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=ecxecxmsonormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> <u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in;
border-color:-moz-use-text-color'>
<p class=ecxecxmsonormal><b><font size=2 color=black face=Tahoma><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font
size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'> <a
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org" moz-do-not-send=true>nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>
[<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org"
moz-do-not-send=true>mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>] <b><span
style='font-weight:bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>Vicente "Vince"
Bortone<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Monday, October 19, 2009
11:29 AM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> General pattern discussion<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion]
Rules proposal 11-6 question</span></font><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=ecxecxmsonormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> <u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face=Arial><span style='font-size:
12.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Hi Lance,</span></font><br>
<font face=Arial><span style='font-family:Arial'> </span></font><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
<p style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><font size=3 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Arial'>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><b><font face=Arial><span
style='font-family:Arial'>bold. </span></font></b></strong>Thanks for bringing
this discussion to the list. <br>
<br>
Vicente "Vince" Bortone<br>
<br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
From: "Lance Van Nostrand" <a href="mailto:patterndude@tx.rr.com"
moz-do-not-send=true><patterndude@tx.rr.com></a><br>
To: "NSRCA Mailing List" <a
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" moz-do-not-send=true><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></font><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=ecxecxmsonormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>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><b><font face=Arial><span
style='font-family:Arial'>(this is for sure the most important statement)</span></font></b></strong>,
but if the logic behind the proposal as written causes confusion it may make a
less convincing case. <strong><b><font face=Arial><span style='font-family:
Arial'>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></font></b></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><b><font face=Arial><span
style='font-family:Arial'>Correct. You actually saw what happened in <st1:City u4:st="on"><st1:place u4:st="on"><st1:City
w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Tulsa</st1:place></st1:City></st1:place></st1:City>
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 <st1:place u4:st="on"><st1:PlaceType u4:st="on"><st1:place
w:st="on"><st1:PlaceType w:st="on">Fort</st1:PlaceType></st1:PlaceType> <st1:PlaceName u4:st="on"><st1:PlaceName
w:st="on">Scott</st1:PlaceName></st1:place></st1:PlaceName></st1:place>
contest also. Pilots will be more willing to do this we fly
the same schedule. </span></font></b></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><b><font face=Arial><span
style='font-family:Arial'> 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></font></b></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><b><font
face=Arial><span style='font-family:Arial'>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></font></b></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><b><font face=Arial><span style='font-family:Arial'>The
committee will decide whatever is appropriate. If they feel that the FAI
descriptions are appropiate we could use it as is.</span></font></b></strong>
Oh, and how does AMA deal with the fact that FAI changes schedules in odd
years?<strong><b><font face=Arial><span style='font-family:Arial'> We
will need to follow FAI schedule. I think that this is very
possible and should not be a problem. </span></font></b></strong></span></font><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=ecxecxmsonormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> <u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=ecxecxmsonormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>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><b><font face=Arial><span style='font-family:Arial'> 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></font></b></strong></span></font><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=ecxecxmsonormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> <u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=ecxecxmsonormal><font size=2 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>--Lance</span></font><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=ecxecxmsonormal><font size=3 color=black face=Arial><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Arial'><br>
_______________________________________________ NSRCA-discussion mailing list <a
href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" moz-do-not-send=true>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>
<a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion"
moz-do-not-send=true>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></span></font><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'><u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. <a
href="http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/" moz-do-not-send=true>Get
it now.</a> <u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. <a
href="http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/" target="_new"
moz-do-not-send=true>Get it now.</a> <u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>_______________________________________________<br>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" moz-do-not-send=true>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion"
moz-do-not-send=true>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><font size=2 color=black face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt'><u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></pre><pre
style='text-align:center'><font size=2 color=black face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></pre><pre
style='text-align:center'><font size=2 color=black face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></pre><pre
style='text-align:center'><font size=2 color=black face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt'>
<hr size=4 width="90%" align=center>
</span></font></pre><pre style='text-align:center'><font size=2 color=black
face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></pre><pre
style='text-align:center'><font size=2 color=black face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></pre><pre><font
size=2 color=black face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'><u1:p> </u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></pre><pre><font
size=2 color=black face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>_______________________________________________<u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></pre><pre><font
size=2 color=black face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></pre><pre><font
size=2 color=black face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'><a
href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" moz-do-not-send=true>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></pre><pre><font
size=2 color=black face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'><a
href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion"
moz-do-not-send=true>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><u1:p></u1:p><o:p></o:p></span></font></pre><pre
style='text-align:center' wrap=""><font size=2 color=black face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt'>
<hr size=4 width="90%" align=center>
</span></font></pre><pre><font size=2 color=black face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></pre><pre><font
size=2 color=black face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></font></pre><pre><font
size=2 color=black face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<o:p></o:p></span></font></pre><pre><font
size=2 color=black face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'><a
href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><o:p></o:p></span></font></pre><pre><font
size=2 color=black face="Courier New"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'><a
href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><o:p></o:p></span></font></pre></div>
</body>
</html>